Good news: Latest data shows you might get a bigger tax refund this year
The average tax return in 2025 is up $240 through the week ending February 21, meaning many Americans are getting more money back this year than they might've assumed.
More than 42 million returns have already been processed, with the average return coming back around $3,453, according to an analysis by MLive.
That's a 7.5 percent increase compared to the same period last year, according to the report. The average direct deposit return is $3,505, which represents an increase of 7.1 percent over 2024.
The news comes as a welcome update to a previous prediction that returns would be down this year. According to the analysis, those early reports did not include taxpayers who claimed the Earned Income Tax Credit or the Additional Child Tax Credit.
A federal law prohibits Americans claiming those credits from being issued their returns until the middle of February.
Now that those returns have been included in the IRS's data, the return amount has increased significantly.
According to the analysis, the IRS has issued $102.2 billion in tax returns thus far.
One number related to tax returns is down from 2024: the number of individuals who have already filed. So far this year, the IRS has received approximately 42.7 million returns, which is down 4.2 percent from this time last year.
Despite that, the total number of returns issued thus far — 29.6 million — is up versus this time last year by 2.3 percent.
The data comes at a time when government workers — including IRS workers — are wondering how long they'll have their jobs. The Department of Government Efficiency, under Elon Musk, has been gutting federal agencies and laying off thousands of federal workers. The IRS has not escaped its gaze; as many as 7,000 workers at the agency have been identified as potential targets of layoffs, according to The New York Times.
'There is no possible way there won't be a reduction in service, given the I.R.S. has been trying to hire employees and they haven't even filled all of their openings,' Tom O'Saben, director of tax content and government relations at the National Association of Tax Professionals, told The New York Times.
That said, tax experts have advised Americans to follow the same advice they give every year: the earlier you file, the better.
Thus far there have been no delays reported. Returns that are filed digitally and request direct deposits are typically processed faster than others.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Elon Musk phoned Donald Trump to try and fix their feud after 'regretting' his scathing posts about the President
The apparent end of the feud between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk came after the Tesla boss place a call to the politician. The tech tycoon had been seeking to claw his way back into Trump's good side with a series of surprisingly positive social media posts about the President. Trump, meanwhile, continued to wish him 'well' - apparently taking notice and easing his threats to try to shred the government contracts held by Musk's companies. Now, it has been revealed that Musk phoned Trump late on Monday before he offered his public admission of regret, The New York Times reported. The moment came after Musk spoke on Friday with Vice President JD Vance and White House Chief Of Staff Susie Wiles, according to the Times. 'I regret some of my posts about President Donald Trump last week. They went too far,' Musk posted on Wednesday. Trump said on Saturday that he thought his relationship with Musk was effectively over, and at the weekend he warned of 'serious consequences' if the Tesla boss were to start financially supporting Democrats. It came after Musk described Trump's tax bill as a 'disgusting abomination'. By Monday afternoon, the day of the call, Trump was taking a softer tone. He told a New York Post podcaster he had 'no hard feelings '. When asked if he could ever bury the hatchet, Trump said: 'I guess I could. He went after a bill that's phenomenal, it's the best thing we've ever signed in this country. And when he did that I was not a happy camper. So, it's too bad.' Last month, Trump had presented Musk with a golden key to the White House, only to see their relationship blow up over a series of escalating attacks and threats. During a podcast appearance with Theo Von that aired on Saturday, Vance hinted at a potential truce. He said: 'Elon, he's an incredible entrepreneur. And look, man, I'm always going to be loyal to the president, and I hope that eventually Elon kind of comes back into the fold.' On Wednesday afternoon, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt gave the first public reaction from Trump's side to Musk saying he went 'too far'. She said: 'The president acknowledged the statement that Elon put out this morning, and he is appreciative of it, and we are continuing to focus on the business of the American people.' She also didn't give any indication of a government-wide review of the multi-billion contracts for work Musk's companies do for the U.S. government. 'No efforts have been made on that front, as far as I'm aware,' Leavitt said. The rapprochement comes just days after Trump stashed his red Model S Tesla out of public view, in a tangible display of how the relationship had deteriorated. Hours after Trump introduced the idea that he may move his new car around 'a little bit,' the vehicle had vanished by Tuesday from the prime parking spot it had occupied on White House grounds since he purchased it. A White House official, pressed for details, refused to provide additional information to on its whereabouts, saying: 'We're not playing Where's Waldo. If you don't see it, you don't see it.' Trump was coy when a reporter asked him about the car on Monday after he spent the preceding days warring with Musk by threatening his government contracts. Musk had originally published and deleted a post saying the feds had additional information on Trump in the Jeffrey Epstein files and even suggested the President should be impeached. Trump said Musk would face 'serious consequences' if he backed Democrats, although the Tesla boss later appeared to be using his X account to try to claw himself back into Trump's good graces. Amid the threats and counter-threats, reporters wanted to know if Trump would keep the car and maintain the Starlink Internet service installed for the White House by Musk's DOGE aides, despite reported warnings by government security experts. The Tesla remains a fixation, and there were media reports Trump was considering selling it amid the astonishing breach with his former first buddy. 'No, I haven't heard that. I mean, I may move the Tesla around a little bit, but I don't think we'll be doing that with Starlink. It's a good service,' Trump responded. The car, which lists for about $80,000, has Florida tags, giving Trump more street parking options if he moves it back to Mar-a-Lago. He also could store the car at his nearby golf club just across the Potomac River in Sterling, Virginia. Trump says he paid for it with a check.
The Herald Scotland
4 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
GOP student loan overhaul is getting closer to becoming law
Read more: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants The Senate's version of the legislation is less aggressive than the bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced in late April. While it will likely be further watered down due to congressional budget rules, the scope of the legislation indicates big changes will be enacted soon to how Americans pay for college. Student loan caps proposed When President Donald Trump asked Republicans to find billions of dollars in federal spending cuts, GOP lawmakers in the House drew up measures to eliminate or dramatically curb many student loan programs. In April, they proposed cutting subsidized loans altogether for undergraduates. When students take out a federal direct subsidized loan, the government pays the interest while they're in school (and for a short grace period after the students complete their studies). That idea didn't survive in the Senate version of the bill, which was expected to be slightly more moderate than the House proposal. Read more: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Other elements of the House version remain, however. Like the House bill, the Senate measure proposes cutting the number of student loan repayment plans to just two. That change would kill President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, program, which former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona repeatedly called the "most affordable repayment plan ever." SAVE has been stalled in court for months, placing roughly 8 million people in forbearance. The Senate bill would also dramatically curb lending for graduate students and parents (though at lower caps than House Republicans wanted). Ben Cecil, a senior education policy advisor at Third Way, a center-left think tank, said he was pleased to see the bill appeared to make compromises. "These loan limits are much more reasonable," he said. Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said she was "relieved" some of the "most harmful" provisions of the House bill had been nixed. "Still, there are several concerning aspects of this bill that would ultimately make college less affordable for students," she said, including changes that "may drive borrowers to riskier private loans, which are not available to all borrowers." Less concern over Pell Grants One of college access groups' biggest criticisms of the initial bill was a significant change to Pell Grants, federal subsidies that help lower-income students pay for college. House Republicans wanted to increase the number of credits students would need to take each semester to be eligible for Pell Grants. The Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, estimated that two out of three Pell recipients could've lost their grants or received smaller ones if that requirement were enacted. The Senate version takes a softer approach, codifying a provision to more fully exclude higher-income students qualify for Pell funds. At the same time, the bill expands Pell Grants in ways that could waste money, according to critics such as Sameer Gadkaree, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, a college affordability group. "While the Senate nixed most of the House's proposed cuts to the Pell Grant program and averts a looming funding shortfall, it regrettably threatens the program's long-term stability by extending Pell eligibility to unaccredited programs that are unlikely to pay off for students," Gadkaree said in a statement. New accountability rules One of the biggest distinctions between the House and Senate versions of the bill is that they lay out two entirely different sets of new accountability rules for colleges. The House proposal would fine colleges for leaving students on the hook for unpaid student loan debt. The Senate's framework suggests taking federal financial aid away from college programs if they can't prove that students who graduate are earning more than they would have without a degree. Mike Itzkowitz, who served in the Education Department under President Barack Obama, said that concept has bipartisan support. "I don't know anyone who would be willing to fork over their time to take on loans to earn less than a high school graduate," he said. But it's possible that particular provision won't survive special Senate rules. To avoid needing the support of Democrats, Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" using the budget process. That strategy comes with challenges. However, the bill must only make changes that spend money or save money. Significant reforms to college oversight might go too far, said Jon Fansmith, the senior vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, the main association for colleges and universities. "This process isn't designed to do complicated policymaking," he said. "I really do worry about rushing something through without understanding what we're doing." Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
It would be catastrophic for America if Trump doesn't forgive Musk
It would have been hard to miss the news this month of the spat between President Trump and Elon Musk. It 'escalated quickly', as the kids say, with Elon accusing Trump of hiding his associations with Jeffrey Epstein and Trump floating the possibility of cutting off Musk's federal contracts. The dust-up ended with Musk returning, tail between his legs, to say that he was sorry. This is the second time that Musk has been reminded that the forces of Maga have more political heft than the Silicon Valley tech bros. The last time the Maga-hammer came down on Elon, it was to remind him that Trump supporters voted against increased immigration after the Tesla boss pushed for the issuance of more H1B visas to foreign workers in the technology sector. This new conflict has reignited the debates between Maga populism and Silicon Valley libertarianism. While the dispute around H1B visas may have been clear-cut – the Trump ticket does not support policies like this – the issues that led to the recent clash are far less so. Musk was raising concerns around government spending that are becoming more relevant by the day. At the centre of the dispute was the so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill', a large piece of tax and spending legislation making its way through Congress. Musk, who has spent the last few months hacking away at government spending through the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), called the bill a 'disgusting abomination'. Unlike the printing of more H1B visas, Musk and his Doge programme were certainly on the ballot when Americans voted for Trump as president. In a speech to the Economic Club of New York in September 2024, then-candidate Trump announced that he would create a government efficiency commission that would undertake a 'complete financial and performance audit of the entire federal government' and propose 'drastic reforms.' Beyond this, however, the issue of government borrowing is now an acute one. Just last month chief executive of JP Morgan Chase Jamie Dimon warned that mounting debts might 'crack' the US Treasury market, which prompted US treasury secretary Scott Bessent to insist that the United States is 'never going to default'. In April, The New York Times ran a shocking headline: 'Sell-off in US Bonds and Dollar Raises Questions About 'Safe Haven' Status'. In times past, major American newspapers would be cautious about playing politics with the American financial markets. But the pressures are becoming too obvious to ignore. To get a sense of how severe this is becoming, consider the fact that the interest rate on a 10-year Treasury bond is currently 4.47 per cent. Meanwhile, the yield on a German 10-year bund is 2.53 per cent. One of the reasons that US dollar assets are so popular with investors is that they are typically confident that borrowing rates in the United States will remain low and the dollar will remain strong. This is no longer the case. Interest rates are so high in the United States that American firms are now starting to borrow in Europe. These arrangements, which have become known in financial markets as 'reverse Yankee deals', are up 34 per cent in 2025 versus 2024 to a total of €83 billion. Corporate giants, like Pfizer and Alphabet, are dumping dollar loans and borrowing in euro instead. No wonder senior bankers at the European Central Bank are seeing this as an opportunity to boost the role of the euro. What we are witnessing are some of the most dangerous developments for the dollar-based financial system since Nixon ended the convertibility of the US dollar to gold in 1971. There are multiple trends feeding into this fragility – from the weaponisation of the currency when Russian reserves were seized in 2022 to the chaos unleashed by the Trump tariffs – but it seems unlikely that any of these factors would lead to a sharp increase in interest rates unless there was already such a large debt pile. Musk and Trump need each other. Elon needs his friend in the White House to ensure that his business model, which relies heavily on federal contracts, does not collapse. And Donald needs Elon to keep his administration's eye on the ball when it comes to economic reform. It seems unlikely that Musk will be able to reverse the Big Beautiful Bill. But he should continue to be a voice in the administration because he is performing a key role: highlighting what a dangerous place the country is in financially – before it is too late.
