Two of Nevada's legislative leaders say they have examined a proposal to return $300 million of this biennium’s estimated $600 million windfall tax surplus to Nevada taxpayers by rebating them up to $300 apiece of their auto registration fees and taxes -- and found it wanting.

Why? Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins, D-Henderson Police Department, and Majority Leader Barbara Buckley, D-Las Vegas, say recipients could end up owing income taxes on those tax rebate checks.

That’s a bit disingenuous. Federal income taxes are not owed on a refund of excess state taxes paid, any more than you must declare as “income” the extra ten bucks the store clerk hands you after he realizes he’s improperly counted your change.

After struggling mightily to come up with an objection to Gov. Guinn’s modest registration rebate plan, what the Democrats actually refer to is the fact that some people itemize the “government services tax” portion of their car registration fees as a deduction on their federal income tax forms.

They’d still be way ahead even if those few itemizers lost that above-the-line deduction, of course. But Mr. Perkins and Ms. Buckley contend their gas tax rebate plan avoids this concern, entirely. (It could also end up “refunding” money to folks who opt to use already heavily subsidized city buses instead of driving cars. But Democrats have never had a problem “refunding” money to people who never paid anything in, in the first place. What do you think the “Earned Income Tax Credit” is all about?)

The larger question is what on earth the likes of Mr. Perkins and Mr. Buckley -- leaders of the traditionally profligate “Democratic” branch of the incumbent Republicrat Party -- are doing, trying to come up with a way to give us back some of our own money.

Have they had a sudden conversion on the road to Summerlin?

So let’s start with a little straight talk about these lawmaker’s real motivations:

What has happened is that Gov. Kenny Guinn, who twice won election in the guise of a fiscally conservative Republican, but who has “come out” in his lame duck term as the anointed leader of the aforementioned big-spending wing of the incumbent Republicrat Party, and others savvy enough to sense a brewing taxpayer revolt when they see one, have taken Mr. Perkins and Ms. Buckley and other lawmakers aside with a word of warning.

I paraphrase, not having been in the room, but those in a position to know report the warning being issued in Carson City is, “If we don’t give them back anything, the voters are going to go to the polls and hit us with a Proposition 13-style property tax cap, and a Colorado style ‘TABOR’ with a ceiling on revenue growth and mandatory refunds of surplus taxes. We sure as heck don’t want that. So wise up, guys: throw them their one-time $300 ‘rebate,’ and they’ll never notice we’ve done nothing to reform a tax structure that’s going to keep generating billion-dollar surpluses from now till kingdom come.”

Thus it is that we enjoy the weird spectacle of big-spending Democrats arguing about the “best way” to hand us back approximately half their current tax surplus ... just this once.

In fact, the Democrats’ disingenuous objection to the auto registration refund could be easily solved by simply issuing it as a $300 credit against future auto registrations starting this autumn (or, better yet, by permanently eliminating the tax portion of the registration fee, entirely.)

Meantime, if the state can afford to hand us back what we’ve paid in state gasoline taxes (at 26 cents per gallon) this year, why not just repeal that tax, forever?

It will be interesting to see whether Gov. Guinn values his credibility enough to really veto any budget not including his auto registration rebate.

But at the bottom line, it doesn’t matter how taxpayers are sent back their surplus payments. Just increase any existing proposal by 50 to 100 percent (the estimated surplus is no longer $300 million, but already climbing past $600 million) and give it back.

Then, the Legislature must address the underlying problem of Nevada’s excessive tax rates, by enacting a Colorado-style Taxpayer Bill of Rights which limits future state revenue hikes to population growth plus inflation, mandating by constitutional amendment a refund of any and all future tax collections in excess of that limit.

Or else the taxpayers must get out their ballpoint pens, and do the job for them.