[anon291]

This analysis is fine. It indeed is not printing money (although we can and should question whether or not borrowing from the future is equivalent to money printing for states)

However, it's not equivalent to lowering taxes. This is wealth redistribution. The checks are not going out based on your total taxes. It's going out based on perceived needs.

As an example, Oregon also sent out checks this year. It's called the kicker. The state took in more than they could spend in 2021. This year, when I filed taxes, I took my total tax from last year. Then I went through a formula that allocated the portion of the excess to the total I contributed to the revenue of the state. I got that much back. Those who paid no tax or little tax because they have little income get less. Those who are wealthier and have higher incomes got back more. This is exactly equivalent to lowering taxes.

California's program is not. It's wealth redistribution. Which may or may not have an inflationary effect (richer people are more likely to save their refund, whereas poorer people are more likely to spend it, and spending does cause inflation).

[cronix]

> The state took in more than they could spend in 2021. This year, when I filed taxes

That's not quite accurate. They (government) can always find ways to spend the extra money. Oregon passed a ballot measure that constitutionally mandated them to send back any excess above what they budgeted. If they said they need $1.5 billion to run the state for the biennium (made up number) and they collect $2 billion, they have to return $500 million back, and in equal proportions to what the individuals (and corporations) paid. There was a long time where the gov't was overtaxing people (by keeping excess collected) and this was a fair remedy.