Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ad Tax Deduction


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was delete. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 16:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Ad Tax Deduction

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No references and my googling didn't turn up any evidence that this practice actually exists. It doesn't make sense that you would pay $50 less in taxes after getting a gift card from Macy's, and it seems bizarre that Macy's would give away gift cards just for the sake of you going to shop there. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, as I'm thinking scam/hoax. Does it surprise you that I've seen this mentioned on MySpace pages? Duncan1800 (talk) 13:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not at all, actually. :) Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. KurtRaschke (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I think this entry is very misunderstood because it is poorly written.

The point is- you work somewhere and you pay income taxes. now what happens is, an advertising company is teamed up with your employer or is just in understanding of the following - instead of 'for example' $50 being taken out for your income tax you get it back as earned money in the form of a gift card. You just pay that $50 less in that time period and get a gift card of the $50. Now, the ad company pays the IRS that $50 for you. So it's like the ad company is being taxed a part of your income tax. I guess the gift card can come from your employer who is participant with this ad tax deduction. So, the ad company just paid your $50 of income tax for you so now you get that $50 back in the form of a gift card. The ad company does this to advertise to you for other brands. The gift card is from a certain store for example. As the recepient of this gift card you must use it in a certain amount of time or you lose it. What this does is provide a physical ad to you in your hands and makes you shop at a store, probably a store trying to promote itself. So you shop there and you may spend extra dollars over the $50 amount and you might be a future customer. These stores, brands pay the ad company to advertise their brand. Hope this is understandable.

However, this tax deduction seems sort of flawed. It seems like the ad company can just give you the gift card without dealing with taxes. But, I think there is a certain advantage to doing this with taxes like making sure only working people receive this, people that earn a certain amount, the idea that you're paying less taxes. Some other stuff I'm sure.

Also, this technique of advertising may or may not be at all effective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lennytim (talk • contribs) 04:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The (well, one) problem with this scheme, however, is you are being double-paid... Macy's is giving you $50 and the IRS $50, so they have given away $50 in cash and $50 in merchandise, just in the hopes that you will be a customer later? This makes no sense so unless a reliable source exists that documents it, I am skeptical. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

no, you are not getting paid twice. you personally pay $50 less but the money is still owed, which the ad company will pay. (you owe $3,000 in income tax. you have a choice to get $50 back in the form of a gift card.  you get it somehow.  the money is still owed which the company will pay.  it's kind of just a cycle.  i'm no really sure who does what and how and the numbers aren't set.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.147.97 (talk) 06:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete due to a lack of notability and a complete lack of reliable sources (or any sources at all). The proposal would make sense only if giving out the gift cards inspires people to spend several hundred dollars at the retailer in question.  In other words, it might make sense if the gift card were really a $50 off coupon on a purchase of $1,000 or more (depending on the retailer's markup).  If customers use just the $50 or if they simply accept the $50 tax reduction, this proposal would result in a large loss for the retailer.  As it stands, it is most likely either a poorly thought out proposal or a hoax.--FreeKresge (talk) 17:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.