"Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?"
-
On April 9, Treasury will start doing direct deposits for those who provided bank account information with their tax returns, then to those who get Social Security benefits but did not file tax return. Paper checks to be sent out starting April 24, sending out checks for those with the lowest income and move upwards, reaching joint-filers with at the top of the phase out range in around August-September timeframe.
One can argue whether that’s “fast enough”, but leveraging direct deposit facilities and prioritizing the checks for the low income are the right things to do.
-
On April 9, Treasury will start doing direct deposits for those who provided bank account information with their tax returns, then to those who get Social Security benefits but did not file tax return. Paper checks to be sent out starting April 24, sending out checks for those with the lowest income and move upwards, reaching joint-filers with at the top of the phase out range in around August-September timeframe.
One can argue whether that’s “fast enough”, but leveraging direct deposit facilities and prioritizing the checks for the low income are the right things to do.
-
The whole thing is ridiculous.
Most people, including me, don't need the check, but I will get the maximum amount.
Idiots.
@Copper Speed > precision. That's my understanding of why they did it the way they did.
-
Coronavirus: Trump’s name to appear on US relief cheques
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52293910President Donald Trump’s name will be printed on paper cheques being sent to millions of Americans struggling financially because of coronavirus.
It is the first time a US president's name will appear on a federal government handout. ...
More than 80 million Americans are expected to receive payments of up to $1,200 in their bank accounts on Wednesday, according to the Treasury Department
But for those who did not provide banking details, they will receive a cheque with "President Donald J. Trump" printed on the left-hand side. ...
Critics are accusing the president of playing politics, using the financial aid to boost his reputation in an election year.
"You are getting your money late because the President thinks it is more important that his name be on the cheque than that you are able to pay your bills on time," tweeted Democatic Senator Brian Schatz.
And Senator Chris Murphy from Connecticut, which has around 3,500 COVID-19 cases, accused Mr Trump of putting himself “first” and “America second”. ... -
Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.
“I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill
-
Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.
@Mik said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":
Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.
The Treasury said the paper checks are rolling out on schedule and that adding his signature added no time to the check printing dates.
Figured as much. How much time does it take to sub one signature for another in a computer program? Payroll departments do it all the time.
H8ters gotta hate...
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
So we don't know for sure.
What we do know is it is a very bad idea, a huge unforced error.
But one thing I take exception with in an article in WaPo:
"But to critics and some IRS employees, many of whom started to learn of the decision on Tuesday, the presence of Trump’s name on the checks reeks of partisanship in a corner of the government that touches all Americans and has, since the Nixon era, steadfastly steered clear of politics. "
Steered clear of politics? Anyone remember the weaponization of the IRS against conservative groups in the Obama admin? What a short memory WaPo has.
-
@Mik said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":
Do we know they were delayed for that reason or are we just assuming and trotting out his signature as the reason? He certainly walked into right it if it was his idea.
The Treasury said the paper checks are rolling out on schedule and that adding his signature added no time to the check printing dates.
Figured as much. How much time does it take to sub one signature for another in a computer program? Payroll departments do it all the time.
H8ters gotta hate...
-
@Jolly It is a completely unnecessary change that (1) creates extra work for the IRS in a time of crisis and (2) confers no additional benefit to the nation. For that, it deserves criticism.
@Axtremus said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":
@Jolly It is a completely unnecessary change that (1) creates extra work for the IRS in a time of crisis and (2) confers no additional benefit to the nation. For that, it deserves criticism.
Horsefeathers.
The IRS has a due date of 7/15 for tax returns. I suspect they aren't near as busy this time of year as usual.
And if you judge the Federal government by the yardstick of unnecessary, let's have a talk about the Department of Education and their 68 billion dollar budget.
-
@Jolly you see federal work that is "unnecessary," so you criticize that.
Adding Trump's name to the checks is definitely unnecessary. So that, too, deserves criticism.@Axtremus said in "Mr. President, when are you going to sign the checks?":
@Jolly you see federal work that is "unnecessary," so you criticize that.
Adding Trump's name to the checks is definitely unnecessary. So that, too, deserves criticism.Excuse me, who is the President? Does it hurt to have his name on the check? How much was the supplemental appropriation to hire the army of programmers it took to effect this change?
Your position is so absurd, it's laughable. You have now equated a small signature change that cost nothing, to an unneeded federal department that costs billions of dollars.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!
