To: JohnM who wrote (102864 ) 2/2/2009 9:03:34 PM From: slacker711 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 542112 The devil is always in the details and I think it is actually worth looking at the source rather than 3rd party interpretations.cbo.gov Assuming enactment in mid-February, CBO estimates that H.R. 1, as amended, would increase outlays by $132 billion during the remaining several months of fiscal year 2009, by $242 billion in fiscal year 2010 (which begins on October 1), by $145 billion in 2011, and by a total of $632 billion over the 2009-2019 period. That spending includes outlays from discretionary appropriations in Division A and direct spending resulting from Division B. In addition, CBO and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimate that enacting the provisions in Division B would reduce revenues by $101 billion in fiscal year 2009, by $219 billion in fiscal year 2010, and by a net amount of $253 billion over the 2009-2019 period. Approximately $96 billion of the estimated revenue change is attributable to the proposed tax credit for workers and $70 billion to the proposed changes in the AMT. Combining the spending and revenue effects summarized above, CBO estimates that enacting the Inouye-Baucus substitute for H.R. 1 would increase federal budget deficits by $233 billion over the remaining months of fiscal year 2009, by $461 billion in 2010, by $142 billion in 2011, and by $884 billion over the 2009-2019 period. All kinds of interesting ways to look at these numbers, but here are two highlights. - The proportion of spending that will hit in 2009-10 is 59%. Not particularly surprisingly....the projects that actually have long-term value also happen to take a long time. - The proportion of the tax cuts that will hit in 2009-10 is 126%! I believe that the reason for this is some of the corporate tax changes simply cut taxes in the early years while raising them in the out years. Slacker