Returning Not = Not Taking

"In Defense of Harper's Budget" in the National Post of February 4, 2009 Ezra Levant uses some unfortunate phrasing. He refers to the reduction in the GST tax as "…back into consumers' pocket". It is unfortunate in that it subtly supports the view that governments are entitled to all my wealth and that when they are generous they give some of it back.
More precisely the government stopped taking as much as before out of consumer's pockets. Yes, this reduced GST tax did reduce overall taxation. Perhaps this can be called part of a "stimulus package". More correctly it is a reduction in the drag of the government on the economy.

This is not the first time I find this subtle phrasing. Here are 2 examples from the Vancouver Sun from some time ago.

Kane: "...spending more than a quarter of a billion dollars on the B.C. homeowner grant."

Cernetig: "...and hand out another $733 million in tax relief, much of it to homeowners."

Both use wording consistent with the general idea that the government is entitled to everything and sometimes give some of it back.

Telling it like it is would say "the government is reducing the tax burden on homeowners".