Child Tax Credit Checks Start To Go Out

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his food writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

27 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    Do you have to have kids to get this? Like, can you have cats?Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird says:

      Blogging about video games may qualify you for the man-child tax credit, but those clowns in Congress still haven’t fixed the marriage penalty, so that’s going to cost you. It could help to invest in some action figures based on comics or 80s media franchises. I’m not sure what the relevant tax law on anime paraphernalia is. You really ought to consult a tax accountant.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Brandon Berg says:

        I do wonder if there will be any Unintended Consequences from this but I’m one of the pro-natalists (despite my personal choices) and think that More People Are Good.

        But I say that knowing that there are going to be a handful of excesses that arise from this and those excesses will be difficult to defend well… to the point where “this only happened in a couple of places!” will be one of the best defenses given.Report

        • Brandon Berg in reply to Jaybird says:

          As someone who believes in evolution as an actual ongoing phenomenon and not just a cudgel to beat icky fundies with, I worry about the pro-natal effects being heavily tilted towards those whose children are least likely to have highly positive externalities and most likely to have negative externalities.Report

  2. InMD says:

    Recieved a check yesterday. Attempting to ‘opt-out’ later today. Will report back on ease of website. It looks like you have to go in through id.me so I assume my identity will soon be for sale to the highest bidder.Report

    • Brandon Berg in reply to InMD says:

      What does “opt out” mean here?

      Also, unrelated question: Are you in Maryland, an Indian doctor, or an Indian doctor in Maryland? Not to put too much pressure on you, but I’m really rooting for the latter, and will be terribly disappointed if InMD stands for only one thing.Report

      • InMD in reply to Brandon Berg says:

        Opt-out means we stop getting the checks and whatever we’re due (if anything) factors into our tax return. Writing checks to the government hurts my soul and I’m worried that’s what would happen if I take them. If I wanted to pretend to be taxed less I’d move across the river and pay all their asinine registration fees, assessments and $1400 tickets for breaking the speed limit by 2 mph.

        Regarding my handle, sadly I must disappoint.Report

    • Marchmaine in reply to InMD says:

      I kept getting letters telling me to get excited for my child pre-fund and my initial reaction was pure annoyance.

      Sure, at last count I have something like a million kids, but since this is a tax-code thing all the high-level info was that I wouldn’t qualify… which is fine if it’s an anti-poverty thing (not great if it’s pro-natalist thing)… so I was merely annoyed that they didn’t know that I obviously wouldn’t qualify.

      Then I went to the website and saw I should get a couple hundred bucks plus or minus… and yeah, now I have to go and Opt-Out. While my taxes are very simple (all my income comes primarly from one tracked/taxed source) it is highly variable. And, as a result, I claim 0 dependents and do everything possible to maximize my witholdings because even though every penny goes through IRS charts for tax witholding, IRS charts are really bad with highly variable income. And it is painful to pay retail for taxes (the 5% don’t get any breaks) *and* stroke a large check even though all your deductions are minimized.

      I get it, no one cares about the top-5% tax problems… but this is a 5% tax problem I don’t want to deal with.

      A better system would be to look a *last* year’s income… if I qualify based on that, I keep it – no matter what I make this year. If I don’t, I don’t get it. But I don’t want checks that I’m going to have to pay back at tax time.

      The regular IRS website, where I have an account, was useless… no obvious opt-out.Report

      • Marchmaine in reply to Marchmaine says:

        Belay the last sentence, the opt-out was way at the bottom and had to scroll past useless info to get to it… but it’s there at least… just offscreen.Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine says:

          Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait

          There is going to be a non-zero number of people who, at the end of the year, will have to send money back to the government because they got this particular money?Report

          • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

            Yes, it is a pre-fund of a new and expanded Child Tax Credit… you have to qualify for it and the checks are going out based upon various IRS assumptions. But until you have completed your Fiscal 2021 earnings, the assumptions may or may not align.

            If the assumptions are correct, and I expect they will be for most folks, it will be a wash.

            Directly from the IRS website:
            A1. You may want to unenroll from receiving advance Child Tax Credit payments for several reasons, including if you expect the amount of tax you owe to be greater than your expected refund when you file your 2021 tax return. The payments you receive are an advance of the Child Tax Credit that you would normally get when you file your 2021 tax return. Because these credits are paid in advance, every dollar you receive will reduce the amount of Child Tax Credit you will claim on your 2021 tax return. This means that by accepting advance child tax credit payments, the amount of your refund may be reduced or the amount of tax you owe may increase.Report

            • Marchmaine in reply to Marchmaine says:

              At a minimum, if I’m reading that correctly, many folks who might have typically received a $1-2k refund might see significantly less than that… since they already got it as a pre-fund.

              I haven’t studied the minutiae of how all the different brackets will experience this… but I’d say there will be a non-zero number who will have to write a check and a much larger non-zero number who will be surprised that their usual refund is so small.

              The biggest benefit… and I hasten to add, I’m in favor… is that folks who are outside of the Tax regime will get the funds. That’s the anti-poverty part.Report

            • Jaybird in reply to Marchmaine says:

              I am now beginning to suspect that this is a great idea that has been done the completely wrong way and it will be declared a bad idea because of its execution.Report

              • Marchmaine in reply to Jaybird says:

                It’s XX% stimulus … pulling forward funds from 2022 into 2021 and YY% anti-poverty by making people who didn’t earn enough to qualify for Tax Credit get funds.

                Because it is a Tax Code stimulus, I think it will poison some UBI thinking because it’s not a net-new expenditure, it’s re-jiggering your refunds (with some new expenditures added in)

                But yes, my suspicion is that we’re on track for an over-promise, under-deliver sort of thing… which we’ll experience in April as the mid-terms are warming up.Report

              • Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird says:

                The alternatives, try to decide ahead of time who should get the credit, or miss people because without the credit they’d have no reason to file income tax, are worse.Report

              • Jaybird in reply to Mike Schilling says:

                The 2nd most terrifying presidential candidate in living memory had a plan that didn’t do it from the angle of taxes at all, but, instead, from Social Security.

                It would cover the “miss people” angle (an angle that, from what I understand, is not quite covered at this very moment).Report

              • Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird says:

                I presume that’s Mitt. Yeah, that would be good too/Report

        • InMD in reply to Marchmaine says:

          We also were able to locate it and opt-out. Same deal with the ‘it’s coming!’ letters. We assumed our income was too high and everyone was getting them but then boom, got a check.

          And yea, we are in a similar boat to you guys on the tax situation. Very simple, two W2s and a few deductions for mass offerings/charitable giving, state taxes, and our dependent deductions. We both withhold at the higher single level, no deductions, then file jointly in an effort to avoid owing at the end of the year. Seems silly to take a bunch of small checks then pay most or all of it back.

          I am interested to see how the PR on this goes come tax time, especially if you get a lot of people on the margins that end up owing or getting little to no refund.Report

      • For maximum annoyance value, just pay it all back as estimated tax.Report

        • Marchmaine in reply to Mike Schilling says:

          Dear IRS,

          Enclosed please find endorsed Child Tax Credit Check, if you would be so kind as to apply to next year’s taxes, we would be very much obliged.

          Yours ever,
          MarchReport

  3. Jaybird says:

    The plan appears to be flawed.

    Mittler Romney suggested doing it through the Social Security office but he was a Mormon.Report