No, you weren't. It's just that what we were calling "refunds" are most like "non-refundable tax credits" and that's a little awkward verbally.

Thanks for explaining

I was using poor terminology, please accept my apology


Bell_curve

The terminology here is going to be unfortunately confusing. 

I think of vouchers as essentially being refundable tax credits; meaning you get them whether or not you paid the amount in taxes to cover the credit.

Refunds would just be reforming these into non-refundable tax credits, which would only pay out up to the amount of taxes owed.

The political sell would be that it actually costs less. The hurdle is that it is highly regressive.

Undisciplined

news

“All Men are Created Equal”:  University Loses Key Motion in Free Speech Case

siggy47

Wouldn’t vouchers negate refunds? You can have one or the other but not both. Politically both are difficult but refunds seem like a nonstarter. The state legislature giving money back? 
