It should be noted that the choice of the propagation models in the SHEL has highly debated [6, 7]. It is necessary for us to introduce the two polarization models, since op- tical Magnus effect shares the same physical mechanism with SHEL. Under the paraxial approximation of model [W], we can get the two different polarization models: Evidently, model [II] can be obtained from model [I] under the condition θ = π/ 2. In the context of wave optics, both model [I] and model [II] are exact solutions to the paraxial wave equation. However, the customary paraxial approximation has been shown to be incompatible with the exact Maxwell’s equations [17]. The practical light beams consist of electromagnetic fields and hence are governed by Maxwell’s equations. In recognition of this fact, it is sometimes suggested that the model [W] representing the Gaussian beam seems to be appropriate. From the experimental viewpoints, even an ideal polarizer will transmit part of a cross-polarized wave [18, 19], and thus cannot produce a pure linear polarization state. From the theoretical viewpoints, the linear polarization is a paraxial approximation solution of the Maxwell’s equations. When we go beyond the paraxial approximation and consider the lowest order corrections, the field is elliptical polarization in the cross section [20, 21]. Thus, it is desirable to consider the mode [W] in the optical Magnus effect. As shown in the following, we will compare the results given by the three polarization models. The changes in the transverse momentum currents can be used to explain the physics behind the rotation phenomenon of the wavepacket, which results in a intensity redistribu- tion over the wavepacket cross section [22, 23]. The time-averaged linear momentum density associated with the electromagnetic field can be shown [24] to be Here M = W , I , II denotes different polarization models. The magnetic field can be obtained by H [M] = − ik − $^{1}$∇ × E $^{[M]}$. The momentum currents can be regarded as the combined contributions of spin and orbital parts p [M] = p [M] O + p [M] S . (16) p $^{[M]}$( r ) = 1 2 c $_{2}$Re[ E $^{[M]}$( r ) × H [M] ∗ ( r )] , (15) ˜ E [II] ∝ ( α e$_{x}$ + β e$_{y}$ − αk$_{x}$ + βk$_{y}$ k e$_{z}$ ) ˜ f ( k$_{x}$, k$_{y}$ ) . (14) ˜ E [I] ∝ [( α + β k$_{y}$ k cot θ ) e$_{x}$ + ( β − α k$_{y}$ k cot θ ) e$_{y}$ − αk$_{x}$ + βk$_{y}$ k e$_{z}$ ] ˜ f ( k$_{x}$, k$_{y}$ ) , (13) 6