Rob,

Isn't this a function of the fact that the higher up the income bracket we go the greater a percentage of tax revenue each bracket contributes.

Therefore if you are returning tax to tax payers, even if you give the same rate back at each level, the actual amount going to the higher brackets will be much bigger than that going to the lower brackets.

That means the percentage of the tax rebate will thus seem out of kilter. This would be the case even if you simply cut the lower rate of tax or raised the tax free allowances. Its a function of a progressive tax system!

Eoin

Eoin, you're exactly right that that's where the ratios comes from. But who says that stimulating the economy must be done in proportion to tax paid? Personally, I wouldn't deploy the money via the tax system. But a rebate which increased the fairness (in the technical sense) of the tax system - even temporarily - would be much more of a stimulus than one which maintained its fairness.

I don't understand why stimulating the economy has to happen via a rebate of any proportion. It's awful that the poor are getting screwed again, but come on, is it surprising? This is America. The rich get richer and the poor get children.

Also...and the following might be ENTIRELY wrong as I am very sloppy on economist matters...it seems like the reason we are in this mess is that Americans stopped saving and spent like crazy instead, meaning that credit expanded to beyond the reasonable point of payback, meaning that people defaulted on their loans, meaning that all that imaginary money has now turned into real debt that has no locus. How on earth is more disposable income, even a tiny amount more, going to help??