Biden has agreed to narrow eligibility for the $1,400 stimulus payments. ($80,000)

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:
Jennifer Jacobs
@JenniferJJacobs
Biden has agreed to narrow eligibility for the $1,400 stimulus payments.

Individuals earning over $80,000 now wouldn’t qualify for the payments (lowered from $100k).

Ceiling for couples would now be $160,000, instead of $200,000, per @LauraLitvan

Biden Signs Off on Tighter Eligibility Rules for Stimulus Checks
President Joe Biden has agreed to moderate Democrats’ demands to narrow eligibility for the $1,400 stimulus payments included in the $1.9 trillion pandemic-relief bill, according to a Democratic aide.
bloomberg.com
9:05 AM · Mar 3, 2021

[liskddksil]

1. I get my promised stimulus but a lot won't, and this is going to be a big problem in 2022 and 2024

Capitol Switchboard
[phone]

Call your Senators and Representative and tell them these changes are unacceptable.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

2. Does that mean a faster phase out after 75K? Or phase-out starts lower?

I know one of the sticking points during the talks around Christmas that I kept hearing was that under the same math as the $600 payment, families making upwards of 300K would still get some stimulus.

[liskddksil]

3. Only those making up to $80,000 (single) get anything under this proposal nt

[dsc]

4. faster after 75k

not earlier phase out.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Phased out or zero?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

12. Sounds like phased from 75-80K

Then zero.

[dsc]

16. phased out from what I read

so a 28% tax added for that 5k. Stupid on steroids.

[leftstreet]

5. So some people will get $600 from Trump, nothing from Biden?

Way to head into the midterms!

[liskddksil]

6. Yes, could be disastrous for us nt

Capitol Switchboard
[phone]

[AZSkiffyGeek]

9. No

People making 75K got $600. They'll still get $1400. It's people making more than that who will get less.

[leftstreet]

11. What did they get from Trump?

Something or nothing?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

15. If they made more than 75K they got less than 600

I'm not sure what the cut-off was - I think it was set up that it decreased by a set amount per every $1000 over the 75K/150K.
I know that there were reports last year when the House tried to add the $1400 that families making up to $300K could still get small stimulus checks because of how the cut-off was set up.

[leftstreet]

19. Something from Trump, nothing from Biden

got it

[AZSkiffyGeek]

25. You said $600

Everyone who got $600 will get $1400.
Those who got less, will get less.

[leftstreet]

26. lol

okay well thanks for clearing that up

[dsc]

21. the reduction rate was 5% compared to 28% under this idiotic plan

So for the $1200 the phase out wasn't complete until 99,000 and for the $600 one it was 87,000. So someone who makes 80k got 950 the first check and 350 the 2nd check and will get 0 this time. This is stupid on steroids.

[liskddksil]

30. Only the Democrats can come up with something this dumb nt

[dsc]

32. this was just plain dumb

piss off relatively well of people, what could go wrong with that idea?

[bullwinkle428]

35. I received around $341 in December, based on an income in the $80k range. And this

time around, I'll get jack squat. This will absolutely piss off some people.

[sarcasmo]

54. Yep and when you screw people out of money they Never forget.

[bdamomma]

96. and the

repigs have done this to us for 40 years.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

40. Actually $1800 from trump.

Never mind the “give us The Senate and $2000 dollar checks will go out immediately” promise.

what do they think is happening with peoples’ bills while they dither? The amounts should be going up - not getting whittled down.

[leftstreet]

64. +1

[WhiskeyGrinder]

7. Omfg just give the people money.

[Baitball Blogger]

20. +1

This is enough to primary Joe Manchin. Not working for Democratic ideals.

[Elessar Zappa]

8. I think this is a mistake.

There will be tons of people who got money under Trump who won't get it under Biden. Makes for bad politics. Plus it disproportionately affects blue areas. If this is the only way the bill passes then so be it but I don't have to like it.

[qazplm135]

28. Tons?

I don't know about that. I don't think the difference between 80k and 100k is either sacred or particularly meaningful. If you are a single person making 80k a year, it's unlikely your life is fundamentally changed by 1400 dollars.

It's more about stimulus at that point.

Now, I think stimulus is important, and I'm for the original plan, but if you made 80k last year as a single person, this isn't going to be the reason why you don't vote in an election.

[Elessar Zappa]

31. I'm not sure about exactly how many will be affected

but I would think a fair amount. Remember, a lot of people vote only on wallet issues.

[qazplm135]

44. You are talking about

A 20k income slice. That ain't large and one less stimulus payment ain't turning them into Republicans or causing them to stay home in any great numbers.

I mean using this logic, why not increase it to 200k, you'd get five times the voters.

[Elessar Zappa]

68. Ok, I re-read the proposal

and realize that I misunderstood the plan. This compromise isn’t too bad.

[MoonlitKnight]

73. Those are 2019 numbers for most

People aren’t making the same now or in 2020.

[qazplm135]

85. that's why they need to file their taxes

if they are making less than 80K, and weren't before, they need to file either way.

[MoonlitKnight]

88. Many cannot file yet

Those on unemployment don’t have the tax forms.

IRS still has not finished Cares Act related tax forms.

Many who were on unemployment have to pay a big tax bill.

This would add at least a month before they get the money even if they filed right away.

[mcar]

13. I don't see why this is a problem

Let's get the $$ into the hands of the people of low and middle income who actually need it.

[Elessar Zappa]

17. Two reasons that I can see.

1. Some will have gotten money under Trump but none under Biden.
2. It will affect blue areas where cost of living is higher.

That said, I don't blame Biden, it's probably what's necessary to get Manchin onboard. But I do think it may hurt us in 2022.

[Bonn1997]

86. 3rd reason: 2019 income doesn't always indicate 2021 need

[Cuthbert Allgood]

23. Just because a couple makes $160,000 doesn't mean they don't need it.

1. that's basically nothing in blue areas (as noted above) and metro areas.
2. maybe they were making double that during not the pandemic. Their bill certainly didn't go down, so they might need the money, too.
3. It's a stimulus bill. People will spend the money and that's what we need.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

37. If they were making $3230K before the pandemic...

They didn't get the first stimulus. So if their income dropped that significantly, they're getting more than they did before.
I'm kinda shocked that after weeks of screams about keeping the money out of poor peoples' hands, we're now going after 6-figure incomes.

[Victor_c3]

24. I pretty much agree with you

I’d like to see it go to more people, but I’m happy to see the money is still going out to those most in need. I’ll happily accept the lower threshold if it means the bill will get signed into law as soon as possible.

Even as a person who makes much more than the threshold, a $1,400 check does make a difference in my pockets. I don’t need it to pay my rent or utilities, but I’d certainly put it to good use spending it in the local economy. That’s money that goes to my hobbies or other recreational activities.

[Tommymac]

79. It's not just about individuals

It's about the total BOTTOM UP STIMULUS to the economy.

That is what is important to small businesses and communities, and the overall health of the economy.

The less total $$ given out to bottom up stimulus, the slower the economy will rebound.

[dsc]

14. This is stupid on steroids

I will say, I never was the hugest fan of the checks in the first instance, I felt we would be better off hiking UI and expanding UI to cover lost income, and directly paying for expenses such as PPE, but that said, it is utterly stupid beyond belief to have people who would have gotten checks under Trump not get them under Biden and to have those people be vastly more likely to vote than not. A single person making 80k almost certainly is a likely voter. Oh and the marginal tax rate for these people is

22 (standard now) + 7.65 (Fica) + 28 (the rate of phase out of 1400 out of 5000) or a whopping 57.68 percent. For the love of everything holy how do we not expect people in that position not to be pissed off. And remember, these people vote.

[LaMouffette]

18. They should agree to this, then do ANOTHER stimulus in June, this time just direct payments

to individuals up to $100,000.

Since so many Republican governors are prematurely (and stupidly) doing away with mask mandates and opening up businesses without restriction, this all but guarantees another Covid surge in May, which would justify another round of stimulus payments.

[Celerity]

77. They cannot do another one, it will be filibustered and zero chance 10 Rethugs cross over

Plus, Manchin and Sinema likely won't support it anyway.

[ahoysrcsm]

83. Can we at least try? I think we should try. Trying seems to be a good idea.

Why start off on a losing position. We should at least try.

[Celerity]

84. Oh, we will try a lot of things, and there will be a lot of filibusters.

Large chunks of what Biden and Dems want to get done via legislation are dead in the water will never get a final vote. The filibuster hurts us FAR more that the Rethugs (when they have majority control). Manchin, Sinema and Feinstein (the 3 for sure who will not vote to bin the filibuster, and there may be others as well) are just knee-capping us. Large parts of Biden's legislative agenda are not going to happen due to this. Also due to Manchin and Sinema blocking things before they even are put into a bill.

2022 has real potential to be a shitshow for us, same as 2010 and 1994 were, the last 2 first Dem POTUS midterms. We easily could lose both the House and the Senate. It is so key we get things done now. But it looks unlikely we can avoid getting blocked on many things.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. This

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215180811

[mvd]

27. In theory, it isn't so bad.

A phase out at $50,000 would be far worse. The optics may not be the best, however. And some people may have lost income in 2020 yet didn’t do a 2020 tax return yet.

If anything, the state and local government spending could be reduced. That money could go towards helping the unemployed with their tax bills.

[dsc]

29. the people who lost income and haven't filed would have the money delayed not denied

when you file your taxes you can get the extra money then.

[mvd]

34. I can see that point

Still not ideal however as who knows how long it will take to be processed and sent out.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. A phase out seems fairer

I can see how the fact that if you make more than 80K you get nothing could rankle some people.

[OrlandoDem2]

33. So what happens if this passes the Senate. It still doesn't match the House proposal.

Does it go to a committee of both chambers to hammer out an identical bill?

[Sibelius Fan]

41. Yep. It goes to conference committee. More delays and more chances for RW BS.

[dsc]

42. it would have gone either way since the 15 min wage is gone

[OrlandoDem2]

46. Thanks! I wonder if they'll just split the baby at $87.5K/$175K

[Thrill]

38. Just Brilliant. Just gave Republicans a reason to say this is why they didn't vote for it

They'll bash Dems over the head with this in mid terms

They just NEVER FUCKING LEARN

[PatSeg]

43. Some kind of compromise with republicans

was inevitable. We were never going to get everything we wanted and at least now, that money will get out to people who desperately need it. The White House and Democrats in congress surely knew that republicans would not accept the bill as initially written and undoubtedly wrote it to allow for negotiations. If they'd asked for stimulus checks for people making under $80,000, republicans would have pushed for under $50,000.

That is how legislative negotiations work, always ask for more than you are willing to settle for.

[liskddksil]

45. This is not a Compromise with Republicans - not one will vote for this. It is a compromise

with our selves. We're going to have millions of people who got money under Trump not get money under Biden. A electoral disaster of epic proportions in the the making for us in 2022 and 2024. We'll have no-one to blame but ourselves.

[PatSeg]

49. So people who made over $80,000 or $160,000

will not vote for Democrats in 2022 or 2024 because they didn't get a check for $1400, but they WILL vote for republicans who didn't vote for any money at all? Sounds like the people who were going to vote for republicans anyway.

If some Democrats in the senate weren't going to vote for this bill without lowering the income qualifications, what do you propose they do? Let people who are really suffering, go without anything at all while they fight it out?

[dsc]

50. some might

remember these people did get money from Trump.

[PatSeg]

51. We can't please everyone all the time

and meanwhile it is republicans in congress who don't want to send out any stimulus checks at all. Donald Trump is not part of the scenario. I think a lot of people are getting bent out of shape needlessly. I just can't imagine what on earth they think Democrats could have done differently.

[dsc]

52. This isn't about not pleasing

we made an explicit promise which we are winding up breaking. That is the issue.

[Deminpenn]

57. Actually the income caps are higher,

but there is a segment of people between 80-100k and 150-160k who won't get a reduced check.

There's another segment of people between 75-80k and 150-160k who now will get a full stimulus check.

[PatSeg]

59. Thank you

You know in a few weeks, this issue will be forgotten and hopefully, the people who need the money will get it. Meanwhile, I looked out the window and the sky wasn't falling.

[Deminpenn]

61. Excerpt from the story in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

As part of Democrats’ legislative thrust on what is Mr. Biden’s top initial legislative priority, individuals earning up to $75,000 — and couples up to $150,000 — would get $1,400 checks per person.

The version the House approved last Saturday would gradually phase down those amounts and reach zero for individuals making $100,000 and couples earning $200,000.

But under Wednesday’s agreement, those checks would end for individuals making $80,000 and couples earning $160,000, the official said.

Link: https://www.post-gazette.com/business/money/2021/03/03/biden-Democrats-tighten-income-limits-stimulus-checks-covid-relief/stories/202103030120

[dsc]

62. Nope the start of the phase out remains the same as it was

the sole change is that the phase out is faster (28% now, 5% then). So literally no one is helped by this and anyone above 75k single, 150k couple is harmed.

[Deminpenn]

66. That is not what the story says

nt

[dsc]

69. I don't know what story you are referring to

but the ones listed in this thread both say what I said. The phase out begins at 75k now and did then. The difference is when it ends which went down.

[Ace Rothstein]

74. Or they'll just stay home.

[notinkansas]

71. After spending 8 years in the Obama administration

Biden has to be aware that he will get no cooperation from repubs.

[Deminpenn]

47. Not a terrible compromise

The caps are lifted from 75 to 80k for individuals and 150 to 160k for families, but eveyone above that gets 0 instead of a gradually decreasing amount up to 100k for individuals and 200k for families.

The people affected are those who made 80k+1 to 100k and families who made 160k+1 to 200k. They won't get a check at all. Those between 75k-80k and 150-160k will now get a full stimulus payment rather than a reduced one.

Honestly, if your AGI was over 80k or 160k last year or this year, you are probably doing ok. Don't expect to qualify for a payment and that is ok, too.

[tritsofme]

48. That's actually not as bad as it could have been.

Still has the potential to hurt us in the more tony suburban districts Democrats had so much success in 2018 and 2020.

[Deminpenn]

53. Getting the schools re-opened is a bigger deal for suburban parents

at least judging by the protests for in-person learning at the more affluent school district around Pittsburgh.

[mvd]

56. Yes it seems silly for $75,000 to get the full amount and $80,000 to get zero

Also, following up on my above point, it looks like you have to have filed your 2020 taxes before the checks come out (if your income changed to the point it affects eligibility.) So some may have to wait to get the recovery rebate credit.

I would put a lot more blame on the conservative Democrats than President Biden. Maybe Biden signaled a willingness because of what they told him.

And as said before, at least it is not a $50,000 cutoff.

[Deminpenn]

58. As someone who likely would have qualified for a reduced check

under the original plan, I am fine with not getting one at all.

[Celerity]

82. Agree.

50K to start the cutoff (what Manchin and Sinema wanted) was madness. I stll do not like this, as millions (people making 80K to 100K are around 5-6% of the workforce) who got 2 cheques (granted not full amounts) under shitbox Rump will get zero under us.

[OrlandoDem2]

55. Thank you for that clarification. I agree it's not so bad.

[wellst0nev0ter]

60. This is NOT going to win any goops

If this is to placate Manchin, then it's time to call him on the carpet. This is getting ridiculous.

[dawg]

63. This is stupid.

No point to making this "compromise" at all.

[Deminpenn]

65. Well, the $400/wk extra unemployment was kept

rather than being reduced to $300/wk like Manchin was making noise about.

That is going help plenty of people. That's $1600 extra a month. If that was the trade-off, I'd have made it, too.

[MoonlitKnight]

76. The difference between 400 and 300 is 100

So it’s an extra 400 a month not 1600 for unemployed.

$400 a month is still better.

[Deminpenn]

93. It's 400/wk, which is down from the 600/wk

in the CARES Act.

[budkin]

67. Totally unforced error

WHY??

[helpisontheway]

70. All because of Manchin. Nt

[bdamomma]

98. I would place blame on him

and Sinema, not on Democrats.

[MoonlitKnight]

72. In exchange for what?

Bet it adds zero votes to the total.

This was a central campaign promise, especially in Georgia.

[Ace Rothstein]

75. Can Breyer retire already so we can replace him then kick Manchin from the party?

Manchin is one small sliver above useless.

[MVP Kamala]

78. They need to stop giving working people money. I have

been working this whole time and I got both checks. I didn’t get the full amount, but I saved the first one and used the second check to buy a new phone.

[marie999]

81. My husband and I are both service-connected disabled.

We get $120,000 a year tax-free plus full medical and perks from the state. We definitely don't need the money, but we have 5 children, 9 grandchildren, and 13 great-grandchildren who along with the food banks can definitely use the money. If you don't need it give it to people who do.

[obamanut2012]

87. It is a STIMULUS check, not aid

People can use it for aid and to pay bills, but people who work who "don't need the money" then need to go and buy a bike, a new laptop, eat takeout from local places, get $1,400 of products at the cannabis place, donate to local animal shelters and food banks, buy new golf clubs, whatever.

I don't get why people do not get it is called a stimulus check for a reason, and don't get that financial folks, including head of the Fed, say we have to spend money to boost the economy.

[MichMan]

89. Than why is there an arbitrarily income limit at all?

[liskddksil]

91. There shouldn't be. But out of touch Senators, including on our side, seem to have a problem

with giving money to people.

[MVP Kamala]

94. But I don't need that extra $341 to spend, I have it already

Someone could’ve used that to buy food for their kids. The only thing that I don’t spend on anymore is gas. I got gas for the first time yesterday since January. It should be targeted to unemployed people who need to pay for the basics. I realize it’s tough to filter it down though...

[Wounded Bear]

80. I really fucking hate this...

[msfiddlestix]

90. Tell ya the truth, I'm shocked we're getting anything at all.

I was shocked with the first stim last spring. $1,200 was a huge deal that felt like a windfall from heaven, that got me through months and the last stim at $600 is now tapping out.

I live on very very low income, under 1200 a month, These were huge to me. But I never expected to see another dime.

I try to imagine bringing in $75,000 - $80,000 a year It would feel beyond comfortable.

I'm on SSI and read that California will be sending stim $ to those on SSI come June. That's a shocker to me.

I have a feeling it won't happen but if it does, well I'll believe it when I see it in my account. And I'll be grateful. But I will not expect it to happen from California or Washington.

I'll be very pleased if it does for sure.

But ff it doesn't happen, I'll be a little disappointed but I'll get over it.

I'm still going to vote for Newsom come re-election and Biden in 2024.

But that's just me.

[Liberty Belle]

92. Why this isn't enough

We're probably close to that but it's deceptive- we have no savings left and Mom just went into a nursing home with 3 broken bones and dementia. To keep her safe after she fell again 3 times there, we're having to hire a sitter out of pocket (family can't be inside due to COVID, but a paid nursing aid can be.) It's the only way to keep her safe and we're rapidly going broke. The cost for round-the-clock sitter service is $666 a day or around $20,000 a month! Her insurance covers the nursing home for up to 90 days, but zero for the "sitter" service.

Not sustainable, but without it they'd kick her out and we can't care for her at home; a board and care that's cheaper does not provide physical therapy that she needs to walk again. Our healthcare system is a fucking nightmare.

We are in San Diego, which has one of the highest costs of living in the nation for housing, gasoline, gas and electricity. SDG&E was the very highest in the U.S. Groceries are also high here along with pretty much everything else, and water bills in SoCal have gone through the roof but we have to keep landscaping on slopes alive to avoid slope failure.

If we get stimulus money it will be used to help fund Mom's care, most likely. She is not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid or the veterans' widows benefit, but long term care runs anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000 a month depending where she winds up after rehab.

I used part of my last stimulus check to help others in greater need, but now with Mom's injury we really need this money ourselves. $2800 for us as a couple would pay for only about 4 days of the care mom needs. My income is reduced due to the pandemic, too, though thankfully my husband still has his job.

[mnhtnbb]

95. Thanks an effing lot, Biden and "moderate" Dems.

Seriously, WTF. I just spent most of the morning working on my taxes because 2020 was going to reduce my AGI significantly so that I'd be eligible for a much larger share of the $1400. stimulus. For the first one, I received $400+, nothing on the second one, and now based on this news, I will get nothing.

The last three years of my taxes have been all over the place due to the change in my filing status, the death of my husband, the change in my Social Security benefits/CSA survivor's pension, and the need to sell some investments in order to have money to live on and raise cash to buy my house rather than continue to rent because of COVID.

Dammit, I was looking forward to getting about 80% of that $1400. I did get some good news though, when working through my taxes on TurboTax. Because my 2020 AGI will be significantly less than the 2019 AGI (upon which the first stimulus payments were based), the Feds are basically reducing the amount of tax I owe for 2020 by the amount of additional stimulus payment I qualify for when the 2020 AGI is used. That, at least, was welcome news, since it reduced my tax bill for this April by about $1,000.

I'm the person who doesn't mind paying taxes, as long as everyone is paying a fair share. But it pisses me off no end that billionaires will pay nothing and those of us in the middle class pay thousands and that now, thanks to the "moderate" Dems, I will miss getting anything from this next stimulus payment because my AGI will be $881. over the cutoff. FU*K!!

[Drb2072]

97. IRA

If you can (i.e. you don't have a job with a retirement plan) put $6000 into an IRA. You'd get the full stimulus amount.

[mnhtnbb]

99. I'm retired and most of my income

that is taxed comes from Social Security and a survivor's benefit from my deceased husband's Federal pension.

I have no earned income.

[lostnfound]

100. More blue state bailouts of red states

And if you lost your job late last year due to pandemic, nothing now?

Stupid.

Single professional moms with kids paying for daycare?

All those experienced nurses and medical technicians at the end of their rope?

Stupid.