> And the question continues: is this really a loan? The only
> answer that I can
> give is that you will get some of your 2001 refund now and
> you will have to
> pay that portion back in the spring in the form of a lessened
> refund then. In
> effect, that's identical in process to the "anticipation
> loans" that H&R
> Block offers, but without the interest.
>
> Perhaps the proper phrase is an "anticipated partial refund payment".
>
> Wirt Atmar
>

I still do not understand how you see this as paying back.

If I make the same income this year as last I will receive a larger refund
due to the reduced tax rate and the fact that I have been, and by your
argument, will continue to pay tax at the previous rate through the end of
this year.

Now, when I file my return I am not paying back the $600 they sent me. I
will simply receive $600 less of the larger refund at that time because I
already received it. There is no payback involved no matter how the facts
are twisted.

And personally, I like having that money in my hand earning me interest or
paying off a bill instead of sitting idle on some goverment balance sheet.



Out of curiosity. I have heard similar arguments, along with some more
outrageous ones, in the last few months. Is there some kind of Democratic
party newsletter going around with suggested talking points?

Does anyone else think that the Democrat's and the liberal press have
reached that fine line between the first amendment protection and shouting
fire in a crowded theater?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *