Backward Tax question

Jaybird180

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
9,037
Location
Near DC
Display Name

Display name:
Jaybird180
This is backward because I'm trying to get an idea of how to get to a refund figure.

Scenario: Single W2 Wage earner. Feds return 1,123

I think I understand how if they're below the poverty line they could have 100% returned.

What are the 2 figures they possibly could have earned to have the feds return this amount (above and below poverty line)?

I hope this is enough information to work this "math" problem backward.
 
I think you are going to have to provide more information. I have no real idea what you are asking.
 
Not enough info. We don't know what they overpaid, we don't know what deductions they had, we don't know a lot of information.

You're asking us to solve for x in this equation:

x = 6y - 4z² + 3y³ - 16z + 4y²
 
you could go to the paper long form booklet and look up the tax table and see what the adjusted gross income for that tax would be. Problem is then you would only know their adjusted gross income. You don't know how they got there. Did they file long form or short form? take the standard deduction or itemize. Too many questions and not enough data for say.
 
There are several tax credits available (Treasury giveaways) that can do that.
 
No deductions or complicated situations. Simple return.
 
I don't know taxes. I am trying to get an estimated idea of the gross earnings for a typical taxpayer who overpays and nets that type of return (1,123) these days. Not looking for exact figures just an idea.

Can the math be worked backward?
 
Not really possible, given that if the income is low enough, the "taxpayer" may be eligible for a refundable tax credit, wherein he gets money that he never paid in in the first place.
 
Also, a taxpayer could have over with held on his taxes. There is no way to tell, given the information given. In fact, unless that refund is because of a credit, the only way to GET a refund is if you over withhold on your taxes.
 
I don't know taxes. I am trying to get an estimated idea of the gross earnings for a typical taxpayer who overpays and nets that type of return (1,123) these days. Not looking for exact figures just an idea.

Can the math be worked backward?

No. Because I could make 26,000 and get 1200 back, or I could make 260,000 and get that back. Tax refunds have nothing to do with how much you make.
 
Lets put it this way:

In my younger, more broke days (where, for some reason, I actually had more disposable income than I do now), I would routinely get tax refunds of approximately $4,000 because of credits and whatnot.

I made around $25,000 a year AGI. Being a full-time student rocks sometimes.
 
Yeah, I don't think there is any way to do this analytically that would mean anything.

It depends on what witholding the taxpayer had on their W-4 and then how much they made, minus whatever they have as deductions.
 
But Jay, what exactly are you asking?
Methinks Jay wrote "returned" when he meant "gave". IOW what scenarios would result in someone getting that amount from the IRS in addition to whatever (if anything) they'd paid in. Still unanswerable though.
 
On another note, why are people _happy_ when they get a refund? It generally means that you gave the IRS too much to begin with - and you lost the interest on that money in the meantime. That's a bad thing, not a good one.
 
Also, a taxpayer could have over with held on his taxes. There is no way to tell, given the information given. In fact, unless that refund is because of a credit, the only way to GET a refund is if you over withhold on your taxes.

Yup. You can figure out a way for any taxpayer to get whatever refund they want.
 
On another note, why are people _happy_ when they get a refund? It generally means that you gave the IRS too much to begin with - and you lost the interest on that money in the meantime. That's a bad thing, not a good one.

Because one year I had to pay out an additional 4 grand. I'd much rather get 2000 back than pay out another 4. Right now it's not a big deal to have the gov't hold on to the money because that 0.05% interest the banks are paying out doesn't really get you much.
 
On another note, why are people _happy_ when they get a refund? It generally means that you gave the IRS too much to begin with - and you lost the interest on that money in the meantime. That's a bad thing, not a good one.
So true I usually get annoyed if there is a big refund. I try to adjust my withholding so that I have to pay a bit or only get a small amount back.
 
Methinks Jay wrote "returned" when he meant "gave". IOW what scenarios would result in someone getting that amount from the IRS in addition to whatever (if anything) they'd paid in.

Maybe so, but I want to here what Jay has to say about it.
 
This is backward because I'm trying to get an idea of how to get to a refund figure.

Scenario: Single W2 Wage earner. Feds return 1,123

I think I understand how if they're below the poverty line they could have 100% returned.

What are the 2 figures they possibly could have earned to have the feds return this amount (above and below poverty line)?

I hope this is enough information to work this "math" problem backward.


Jay,

Someone linked the answer above.

There is a rare breed of beast called a refundable tax credit. Most people in the flying community have never seen one. We make too much money.

With most tax credits you get to deduct the credit from the tax due. If you can't use all of the credit then it stops at $0. This is the case with the standard deduction, home insulation credit, etc.

With a refundable credit the taxpayer actually gets the excess money from the credit. This means it is possible to get more money as a tax refund than is paid into the system. The most popular refundable credit is the Earned Income Credit. It's purpose is to give people incentive to work.

The IRS recently discovered that between 1/4 and 1/3 of all EIC credits are fraudulent. The most common avenue for fraud is claiming children that don't exist. With the child adjustments maxed out the EIC can be over $5,000. It's lucrative to people with little money.

In an effort to stem fraud the IRS stepped up auditing and changed some rules. People caught committing fraud are locked out of EIC for ten years. People that get caught with sloppy accounting but not egregious enough to rise to the level of fraud are locked out of EIC for two years.

Another avenue for abuse is scammers will work above the table until their EIC credit peaks. Then they work under the table or in an illegal market for the remainder of the year.

Additional research also shows that EIC credits are not used as intended such as helping pay for food and/or shelter. Instead they tend to be used for purchasing durable goods such as entertainment electronics, rims, etc. Some economists argue that despite the EIC money being spent in ways other than intended the EIC still effects a net positive gain to GDP. Their estimates vary between about a penny and twenty five cents net GDP gain per EIC dollar.
 
Last edited:
Because one year I had to pay out an additional 4 grand. I'd much rather get 2000 back than pay out another 4. Right now it's not a big deal to have the gov't hold on to the money because that 0.05% interest the banks are paying out doesn't really get you much.
I would rather pay $2k than get $4k back. You're losing both bc you don't have those 4k in the bank and therefore unavailable, and because you're giving the government a free loan. Interest can be 0.5%, but it can also be 12% right now. I'm not talking about putting money in a savings account. That's a poor investment strategy unless you need that money not to be tied up at all.
 
I would rather pay $2k than get $4k back. You're losing both bc you don't have those 4k in the bank and therefore unavailable, and because you're giving the government a free loan. Interest can be 0.5%, but it can also be 12% right now. I'm not talking about putting money in a savings account. That's a poor investment strategy unless you need that money not to be tied up at all.

Apparently you've never heard of the EITC or the Hope credits, in which getting 4k back might be a REALLY good thing (because you're being given money in excess of what you've paid in).
 
I would rather pay $2k than get $4k back. You're losing both bc you don't have those 4k in the bank and therefore unavailable, and because you're giving the government a free loan. Interest can be 0.5%, but it can also be 12% right now. I'm not talking about putting money in a savings account. That's a poor investment strategy unless you need that money not to be tied up at all.

Where the *%&*# are you getting 12% right now on anything less than 7 figures?
 
Where the *%&*# are you getting 12% right now on anything less than 7 figures?

The answer to this question is lots of places. To know if the answer is meaningful to you, you have to have decided where you want your investment on the "efficient frontier" curve of risk vs reward. My net growth last year over all investments on a conservative income producing portfolio was 14%.

And I agree with the sentiment that I'd rather pay than get back. That means I got to use my money instead of loaning it to Uncle Same for free.

The answer to Jay's question is no.
 
The answer to this question is lots of places. To know if the answer is meaningful to you, you have to have decided where you want your investment on the "efficient frontier" curve of risk vs reward. My net growth last year over all investments on a conservative income producing portfolio was 14%.

And I agree with the sentiment that I'd rather pay than get back. That means I got to use my money instead of loaning it to Uncle Same for free.

The answer to Jay's question is no.

Oh, I made better than 12% in 2010, but it wasn't guaranteed. When someone tells me they are getting 12% INTEREST, I expect that to be a guaranteed number.
 
Oh, I made better than 12% in 2010, but it wasn't guaranteed. When someone tells me they are getting 12% INTEREST, I expect that to be a guaranteed number.
Return on investment. Call it whatever you want.

Apparently you've never heard of the EITC or the Hope credits, in which getting 4k back might be a REALLY good thing (because you're being given money in excess of what you've paid in).
No. If you're getting money back with those credits, it means you're over withholding to begin with. If you know that you're going to get those credits, adjust your withholding ahead of time. That way, you won't overpay.

The answer to this question is lots of places. To know if the answer is meaningful to you, you have to have decided where you want your investment on the "efficient frontier" curve of risk vs reward. My net growth last year over all investments on a conservative income producing portfolio was 14%.
Thanks. The voice of reason!

-Felix
 
Return on investment. Call it whatever you want.

Call it what it is. Different terms for different "investments".

No. If you're getting money back with those credits, it means you're over withholding to begin with. If you know that you're going to get those credits, adjust your withholding ahead of time. That way, you won't overpay.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: If you are getting money back that you didn't pay in, there is no way to adjust withholding to avoid that.
 
So was this whole thread another April Fool's Day joke to highlight one of my favorite quotes: "Lottery, a tax for people bad at math." ? Same psychology with paying in from paychecks, and having strange rebates, really...

"Send your money, we'll decide what to do with it. We'll set up a little lottery system via strange refund laws that change regularly to make you feel like you might get a 'refund' once in a while to keep you running on the treadmill."

"Oh! You bought a house after X date and have PMI on your mortgage so you get that back as a tax credit. Anyone who purchased before that date, no. Anyone smart enough to save up for a down-payment and not have PMI, no credit for them. They played the game correctly and get indirectly penalized for it. Same with the people prior to the magic date."

LOL!
 
No. If you're getting money back with those credits, it means you're over withholding to begin with. If you know that you're going to get those credits, adjust your withholding ahead of time. That way, you won't overpay.

-Felix

Nope. A person with 0 tax liability could wind up getting money back at the end of the year with credits.
 
Back
Top