TurboTax Activation Fiasco

kurtinatlanta writes "Though the news broke in September, no one cares about tax return preparation software until January. Apparently Intuit's activation scheme for TurboTax will only allow you to print or file your returns from the computer on which you first installed it. The phrase "one computer" in their license literally means one computer. Moving the software (i.e. disk reformat, buy new computer) requires buying it again. There are all kinds of negative reviews on amazon.com as a result. Is this problem real or overhyped?" There's a more recent story about the flap. The Intuit PR rep is quoted as saying that people can install the software on multiple computers using the same activation code, but I don't think an unworking installation really counts.

Comments

My take

[Em Emalb]

"Is this problem real or overhyped?"

It's real. If I buy something, I damned well better be able to use it/reinstall it if my computer blows up.

Think about it.

Re:My take

[banzai51]

I completely agree. The more negative publicity this generates, the better. Better idea: write to your local newspaper "cyber" journalist and ask them to look into what a hassle this is.

Re:My take

[stinky wizzleteats]

I don't know. TurboTax is only good for one tax year, so the useage lifetime for the software is as long as it takes me to actually do my taxes, which is only a couple of days, if that. Not a very big window of opportunity for total system failure , IMHO. It's not like they're keying the O/S to your hardware via the Internet or anything.

Re:My take

[patbob]

If I buy something, I damned well better be able to use it/reinstall it if my computer blows up.

Mark me paranoid, but the info is my tax info. The program is as much a part of the archival data as the .tax file and the paper copies. If there's any question about how I came up with the answers on the paper form, I darn well better be able to install it on another computer so I can access the data and algorithms that went into the conclusion.

Guess my complaint to them last September went unheeded. :-)

Re:My take

[chimpo13]

Someone on the amazon site mentioned that you can only use TurboTax to check for that year. That's not making much sense.

You do your taxes in 1999, so you need the 1999 version to check them. And sometimes you need to know your back taxes.

And there's a program called C-Dilla that you can't shut off that checks your registration number. Complaints were even if you remove TurboTax you still have that working.

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

I jsut bought a house this year and for mortgage approval I was required to show my last 3 years worth of tax returns which I had saved and printed on a different computer than I originally printed from. I guess I'm glad I use TaxCut instead.

Re:My take

[fo0bar]

TurboTax is only good for one tax year, so the useage lifetime for the software is as long as it takes me to actually do my taxes, which is only a couple of days, if that.

Consider this situation. Last year I did my 2001 taxes with turbotax. In July I received a package from my (by then ex-)employer which basically said, "Our bad, we fucked up on your 2001 W-2. Sorry, you have to fill out an ammended tax return."

So I re-installed turbotax 2001, loaded my .tax file for that year, adjusted the numbers and it spit out an ammended 1040, with instructions on what to do with it.

Re:My take

[susano_otter]

Guess my complaint to them last September went unheeded. :-)

That's surprising. I'll bet that the number of complaints didn't outweigh the recommendations of the "industry experts", even with the extra weighting Intuit gives to customer feedback. Maybe if more people cared, Intuit would change their minds about this policy.

Intuit may care about revenue lost through bootleg installations, or they may simply wish to give their stockholders and the industry analysts the impression that the care about "piracy".

Either way, Intuit's products own 70 to 90% of the market share in their categories, and Intuit has always been devoted to customer satisfaction.

If you don't like the way the product works, tell them. They'll care, and they'll do whatever they can to make as many customers happy as possible. The bad news is, the industry pundits are all recommending the kinds of solutions that Intuit has implemented. The good news is, your own recommendations will carry more weight, if enough of you show that you care about the problem.

Slashdot them with complaints, and I expect you'll be pleasantly surprised with the results.

Conflict of Interest: I work for Intuit.

Re:My take

[JohnMunsch]

> so the useage lifetime for the software is as long as it takes me to actually do my taxes

That would be the usage lifetime of the software _for you_. I on the other hand, have for several years now, done taxes at my house, printed them, mailed them, uninstalled the software and given the software to my daughter and her husband to do their taxes. With anything other than this bizarre assed license this would be perfectly legal as my ownership of the software would allow me to either resell or give away what I own after I'm done using it (as long as I don't try to keep a copy).

I can do that with a book, DVD, magazine, CD, VHS tape, audio cassette, etc. but not TurboTax. Uh huh...

Secondly, I'll make another but different example. I gave my wife a new adventure game (Syberia) for Christmas. She started playing it shortly after Christmas, played it constantly and beat it within a few days. She then immediately turned around and put the game onto Half.com for sale and sold it for 2/3rds of the price I paid to buy it in the first place. Thus getting about 20 or so hours of enjoyment out of the game for approximately $10.

Had that game only been _licensed_ to her though, she wouldn't have been able to resell the game even though she was totally done with it.

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

This ability to transfer ownership of a DVD, book, CD, or VHS tape is because of the "principle of first sale." This is not a legal right, however, and only exists because it has been technologically impossible to prevent up to now, and because IP vendors were content with the revenue from the first sale.

The technology of perfect IP control is, however, either here now (in the case of software) or on the way (in the case of DVDs, CDs, and movies). It WILL be technologically possible to prevent recording, copying, or subsequent use. If you think you should be able to transfer without copying, then you had better get a bit more politically active. Consider joining/supporting the Electronic Frontier Foundation and write your congressional deleagation in opposition to the DMCA (which is already law) and several other proposed but not-yet-passed pieces of legislation designed to control even your presently legal use of your purchases.

Copyright infringement is, and should be illegal, but the principle of first sale, the right to archive, fair use, and the other consumer "rights" that came only from imprefect control technologies are in grave danger. If you think these should be rights of yours, by thunder, say so!

Re:My take

[stinky wizzleteats]

Wow, I've gotten quite a few responses to this post. Good points, all.

A little research also revealed that the company they are using for the registration piece is known to involve spyware in their software.

All of this is sufficient to make me start looking for another tax software solution.

Re:My take

[joshki]

This ability to transfer ownership of a DVD, book, CD, or VHS tape is because of the "principle of first sale." This is not a legal right, however, and only exists because it has been technologically impossible to prevent up to now, and because IP vendors were content with the revenue from the first sale.

Sorry, wrong answer. Section 109(a) of the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. 109(a)

Do some research before you start spouting about things you don't understand -- the right of first sale is codified in law, and has been affirmed by the supreme court in numerous cases. There may be debate about how it applies to some digital media by some corporations, but that doesn't change the fact that it certainly is a legal right.

Re:My take

[rw2]

Sorry Susano, but I shouldn't have to "slashdot them with complaints" to get good service.

I should be able to shut off the ads in quickbooks.
I shouldn't have to pay $75 for technical service that I never recieved.
I shouldn't have to pay $149 a year for tax tables when the gross margin must be 98%.
I shouldn't have to call and explain to them who I am to reinstall my 1999 tax software
If I have to call them, they should be open 24/7 not just when it's convenient for them.

Just the ads in quickbooks alone are reeediculous. I generate an invoice, intuit wants to sell me a service to check if the customer will pay. I write a check, they want to sell me checks. I quit quickbooks, they want to sell me back-up services.

I shouldn't have to get 200K of my closest /. friends to harass them to get this stuff fixed...

They aren't devoted to customer satisfaction, they are devoted to squeezing the absolute most they can out of their customers. I think just a few google searches will be enough to demonstrate that they have squeezed too hard and will therefore, like they have with me and many others in on this article, lose business due to an almost complete disinterest in customer satisfaction.

Oh, and I've written them about all of these issues. Not even the courtesy of a reply. They couldn't be bothered to lift a pen, much less fix the issue. Customer service indeed.

Re:My take

[geekee]

Yeah right. The programs only good for one tax year. That means, one day for the average user, where he inputs the data and prints out his tax return. I think Intuit has a right to impose the draconian licensing scheme given that the average person buys the software and then shares it with 5 friends. If you don't like their policy, go after the pirates, but don't blame the company for protecting their IP.

Re:My take

[elmegil]

Last time I did my taxes, I printed a goddamn copy which I can photocopy any time I need to show lenders my status

Why doesn't anyone here understand this? The only really serious problem I see is for people who need to re-file for some reason; that would suck.

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

However, read the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which makes it a crime to circumvent a copy protection device. Where is the principle of first sale then? It is NOT present. I was never saying the law didn't mention first sale, nor that fair use isn't mentioned in the law. But there is a new law in town. See HR2281, aka The Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which amends title 17. See the section starting on page 5 of the PDF file linked (Title 17, Chapter 12 [not in the Act of 1976, is it?] section 1201 - Circumvention of Copy Protection Systems, and 1203 - Civil remedies and 1204 - Criminal Offenses and Penalties).

The fact that the Act of 1976 codified some rights that came to exist through imperfect control does not grant those AS rights to the citizens. Read all of HR2281. It amends title 17 all over the place. I didn't just make this stuff up. Then go on and read the rest of it. Then come back and tell me you have those right enumerated in the Copyright Act of 1976.

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

Just to follow up: I was using "legal right" in a constitutional sense, pointing out that the privledge is one granted only in statute, which may be amedned by the legislature at any time. Many laws, including the Copyright Act of 1976, are the codification of the practical limits on enforcement. The DMCA is enabling legislation for a new set of technologies -- technologies that may be used to eliminate what was formerly meant by "first sale" and "fair use." Copyright law is complex, and the DMCA is itself pretty involved. A lot of its "goodness" or "badness" will depend on how it invoked and how its invocations proceed through the courts. The Elcomsoft and Johannsen cases give me some hope.

So, while I stand by my initial post, I will grant you that it was a bit shrill. Nonetheless, and recognizing that I am not a lawyer or legislator, the DMCA in the circumvention section appears to provide all the tools needed for a copyright holder to eliminate both second sale and fair use rights for any medium that has a copy protection technology. That will never happen with paper books, but it can with music, movies, and electronic books.

My argument is against complacency, and I don't think we can afford to be complacent if we beleieve that first sale and fair use are valuable priciples.

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

And, yes, I know the Johannsen case was under Norwegian law and the Berne convention and that the DMCA doesn't directly apply in that case.

Re:My take

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

Where is the principle of first sale then? It is NOT present. I was never saying the law didn't mention first sale, nor that fair use isn't mentioned in the law.

This of course is the evil genuis nature of the DMCA. As has been claimed, you have certain rights ... but you don't have the right to exercise those rights.

This is my scheme for copy protection: Either a product is released "in plaintext" -- that is, with no access control mechanisms -- and the copyright holder is allowed to pursue infringers through the power of the courts. Or a piece is released with technological protections in place -- but then the producer has no right to redress under the court system.

In other words, don't muck with First Sale or Fair Use -- or you're on your own. If your encryption/protection works, more power to you. But if some kiddie cracks your access control mechanism, then too bad... you have no right to sue.

I don't think there's a snowball's chance in a supernova of such a law passing, but I think it would be fair.

Re:My take

[joshki]

Okay, I get you. I honestly thought from your first comment that you were saying first sale has no basis in law! You're obviously correct that there's a major point of discord between the DMCA and the copyright act of 1976. Hopefully at some point our supreme court will step in and fix it.

Re:My take

[shaitand]

fair use, and the right to archive ARE rights protected by law. They ARE NOT constitutional rights considered god given or any such but they are certainly the law. Check copy.gov. These do not simply exist because of imperfect IP protection schemes, they exist because they are one of the few areas in the history of the US government it did something right. Those who don't want these rights to exist are buying their way into more or less voiding the law. Your message is well meaninged but inaccurate.

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

As in the Constitution specifically grants Congress the power to pass laws to "promote science and the useful arts" (which is where patent and copyright law get their Consitutional authority) and that "fair use" and "first sale" have no Constitutional language at all. They are specific provisions of the enabling legislation of copyright, given by Congress, not the Constitution, and thus they may be modified or revoked by Congress at will.

The recent Eldred v. Ashcroft case (oral arguments concluded, Supremes deliberating) is tresting the other part of the Consitutional language: "for limited terms"

That's a challenge not to the DMCA, but to the Sonnoy Bono Copyright Extension Act, aka "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act." Still, another important case...

Re:My take

[DrMaurer]

Uhh, not sure exactly what you're saying, but no, the bill of rights is not exhaustive.

Article [IX.]
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Article [X.]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Re:My take

[DrMaurer]

Yeah, that sucks, but you could have gotten a safety deposit box and put paper or PDF backups in it.

Off-site backups are a must for any person or buisiness.

Re:My take

[nolife]

I've had more then enough problems with older unsupported/uninstalled applications and printed web receipts laying around that I finally broke down and configured a PDF printer on my network. Using Samba, Ghostscript, and a PS print driver in Windows (all completely free), I can "print" any document to my Linux machine and have the output go directly to a PDF file. With the PDF, I have a very high quality permanent copy that I can backup and reprint at any time in the future. It is faster, looks better than, and much more efficient then printing to a regular printer and scanning it. There are many references on setting this up, searching for ps2pdf, ghostscript, samba will turn up a lot, a good start is an article in the Linux Gazzette. With some changes, you can also convert any PS file to jpg, tiff and others if PDF is not something you desire for the final output..

This does not justify what Intuit is trying to do to squeeze every last freaking dime out of you and taking away your first sale rights but it is a solution that will work for this and for many other issues with print only documents.

Re:My take

[geekee]

The point of turbotax is that it takes only a day because it simplifies things for you. Again, piracy is to blame for their licensing policy. Don't complain about companies protecting their IP when piracy is rampant. If you don't like the policy, discourage piracy. Slashdotters love to support policies that protect piracy, and then wonder why software companies start ewnforcing stricter licensing policies.

Re:My take

[will_die]

Switched to TaxCut a few years ago when intuit started cutting features in thier product. Taxcut is a whole lot nicer product and you don't have to mess with intuit and thier various schemes.

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

All I'm going to say is:
Flood
Fire
Backup Media for financial records is very simple to keep offsite...

your argument bores me, I'm going back to work

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

can't muster enough motivation to respond to your paper 'solutions' TurboTax Licensing Activation is crap, I buy it I better be able to use it when and on whatever comp I damn well please. End of Story....go archive your tax returns or something

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

notice that they we're actually spent address your point. since your not intuitive enough I'll help you out by stating the obvious...that the obvious refutation to your 'paper point' need not be stated due to it's obvious nature....
I'm off to calculate quarterly earnings of my companies clients now.

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

your a bigger person than I thought resorting to typo slamming, kudos.

Re:My take

[Nevermore-Spoon]

oh and bring one more round, I'll let you have the last word so it will make you feel better after me calling you out for resorting to typo bashing

Re:My take

[evilpenguin]

You miss my point. My point is that the law is this way not because copyright holders wanted it this way, but because there was no alternative way to do it.

First sale is covered because no method to control subsequent sales that did not require unacceptable state intrusion (like having to title books like one titles automobiles and real estate) could be conceived. The same is true for fair use, expecially with regard to making tapes of LPs or CDs. The law generally arises from the "natural condition" of commerce and society. Prior to digital media, how would you have controlled second sale? If you owned, say, "Star Wars," mightn't you want to get money from that second, third, or Nth sale? I'm saying we have the principle of "first sale" because only by having the police check each sale (or some other such bureaucratic nonsense) could you prevent it. Even our most freedom-hating members of congress didn't want to make garage sales into criminal offenses. But now we have technologies that don't require a title transfer for each book. The book can refuse to sell itself. Now controlling second sale doesn't seem so unreasonable because it doesn't require state intervention. In fact, I am arguing, the DMCA already permits it.

So, with the rise of digital media we have a new technological regime which permits control over both subsequent sale and fair use. The DMCA actually gives content providers permission to control or eliminate your subsequent sale and fair use "rights."

To me, what distinguishes "rights" from "laws" is that "rights" are either natural or Consitutional and thus they are immane. Laws are created and changed at the whim of the legislature. Something is clearly not a right if it can be created or removed by act of Congress. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that guarantees that you have subsequent sale or fair-use rights, and, I could argue, the DMCA has already substantially eroded these "privledges" and that proposed legislation like Holling's CBDTPA would eliminate them entirely.

So, again, I ask, where is the protection? It lies only in our own exercise of our right to participate in our own government. So again, I say, support the EFF and write your congressional delegation. Often.

Re:My take

[shaitand]

that "rights" are either natural or Consitutional

I don't disagree with you and it's ridiculous to argue petty technicalities with someone who is obviously on the same side of the fight ;) But just a thought... NATURALLY we have the right to do anything we physically and mentally are capable of doing. Nature gives me the right to walk up to a woman who is weaker and have my way or to kill my neighbor because his dog crapped in my yard. Our natural rights are very broad indeed, so perhaps we should stick with trying to get our constitutional rights straightened out, which fair use should be a part of. And then perhaps we can start working on expanding acceptance to our natural rights (perhaps minus a couple like those a I mentioned above, although I must confess to clubbing a couple over the head and taking them back to my cave a time or time two. it's how I met my wife after all.)

Read the submission!

[Dynedain]

The Intuit PR rep is quoted as saying that people can install the software on multiple computers using the same activation code - the very thing that the activation process is supposed to prevent - so he is misquoted, misinformed, or lying.

No, you can install on another machine, you just can't print or file your return from that machine. Installation and printing are completely different things last I checked.

Re:Read the submission!

[FortKnox]

Its always a conspiracy with michael, and you can't tell a conspiracy theorist there is no conspiracy.
Just be glad you have under 500 comments, or else michael will just pass you off as a 'person that lives on slashdot and has no life.'

Re:Read the submission!

[bellings]

I'm really confused. You claimed that micheal wrote:

The Intuit PR rep is quoted as saying that people can install the software on multiple computers using the same activation code - the very thing that the activation process is supposed to prevent - so he is misquoted, misinformed, or lying.

But the in the article, micheal currently says:

The Intuit PR rep is quoted as saying that people can install the software on multiple computers using the same activation code, but I don't think an unworking installation really counts.

Everyone knows that changing stories without notification is a very, very bad practice, and an ethical editor like micheal would never stoop to such a low level.

Re:Read the submission!

[MeNeXT]

So according to you I can install MS Office on Linux, I just can't run it? Please! as far as I care, if it does not work as advertised it is not installed....

Re:Read the submission!

[The Bungi]

Everyone knows that changing stories without notification is a very, very bad practice, and an ethical editor like micheal would never stoop to such a low level.

Moderation rears its ugly head again, I see you got an offtopic slap.

Anyway, think of why this happens. Especially in a story like this, Slashdot (or the OSDN keiretsu) could be fully taken to court by Intuit because of misrepresentation of facts and loss of business related to that. Don't know the exact legal term, but I'd think it's somewhat akin to slander. Never mind that it doesn't really matter - TurboTax and the whole activation thing sucks. But it's different if it's plastered all over the front page for half a million people to see.

Ergo, the "editorial byline" is fixed with alacrity. Very convenient.

Hmmm. What's that I see in the distance? An offtopic bitchslap on this thread? Could it be? Yes!!

Re:Read the submission!

[John Harrison]

On CNN there is always a time and date that the story was last updated. /. has a history of posting updates as Update:, so the fact the /. is being inconsistent is bad.

Of course, from this particular editor this sort of thing has come to be expected. Michael-baiting has developed as a reaction to this. It is a mark of honor of sorts to be modded down while pointed out what a terrible editor he is.

Yes, I saw the story as it was originally posted and it did change. Of course in a situation like this where the change is because an editor shot his mouth off rather than an actual update to the story I can see why this happened. What would they post as an update? "Sorry, an editor went a little too far here, please ignore the previous sentence." That wouldn't work too well. What they need to do is be more careful in the first place. And fire someone in addition to Katz.

Use TaxAct.com

[Qrlx]

The simple solution is to not use TurboTax. TaxAct.com has always worked for me. And it's free.

Or, pay an actual human being to do your taxes. I've never done it but I understand they know all about the loopholes and stuff.

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[Dynedain]

My mother is a CPA...hence she does lots and lots and lots of returns. When it comes to filling out family returns and such (which she knows all the loopholes for) she finds it much easier and faster to fly through TurboTax's wizard, than to fill out the form. And she can jump to the form view (which is what I understand TaxAct shows) if she wants to make any additional changes.

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[anthony_dipierro]

Or, pay an actual human being to do your taxes. I've never done it but I understand they know all about the loopholes and stuff.

We may know about some of the loopholes (although I wouldn't call them loopholes, then you'd be evading taxes), but most of them can't really help you until the next year. Of course, going with a professional might help ensure that you get all the deductions that you deserve. I'd hardly call that a loophole.

Just don't go with H&R Block. They don't do very much more then act as typists into the software you can buy much more cheaply.

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[tibbetts]

Or, pay an actual human being to do your taxes. I've never done it but I understand they know all about the loopholes and stuff.

Amen to that! My wife and her family haven't filled out their own tax forms for many years. I used to laugh at their willingness to throw away Good Money, but after we got married and bought a house, I decided to do a bake-off between using TurboTax myself vs. their long-time wetware tax preparer. The result? TurboTax cost me $70 ($30 fed. + $20/each for two states), took about three hours to go through (and another couple of hours or so to print and proofread) and I got a refund of $x. The tax preparer cost $120, took 40 minutes, and got us a refund of $x + $400 via legit "loopholes" (things like moving costs, higher ed credits, etc.).

If you need to fill out only a 1040EZ form, you definitely don't need TurboTax or a preparer, but if you have dependents or itemize deductions, I highly recommend going to a live person. (And no, IANATP.)

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[nolife]

I have used this also. In fact I was just there today to see if they ready yet for this year. Last year I initially used the free version that you are referring too but broke down and bought the deluxe version that comes with one state and free electronic filing for both. Not bad for $19.99 and no damn rebates to wait for. www.taxslayer.com looks like a decent option also.

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[sasami]

Or, pay an actual human being to do your taxes. I've never done it but I understand they know all about the loopholes and stuff.

That's sometimes a nice bonus, but there is one overwhelmingly compelling reason to let a human handle your taxes: the IRS.

When the IRS screws up, you are the one who takes the fall -- unless you're willing to fight, and fight, and fight, to get the mistake corrected. It took me two years to settle a dispute, during which the IRS stalled, gave conflicting answers, stalled again, gave wrong answers, stalled some more for good measure...

They do expect you to give up, even if you're right.

My tax preparer was invaluable. He knew the procedures, the paperwork, and the relevant bits of the tax code. He could mostly tell when they were bluffing. I did make a couple dozen phone calls (they'll only talk to the taxpayer), but on important ones he'd listen in. At one point he and his boss drove down to the state IRS office to consult with a director.

Now, I'm not full of praise for the guy. He wasn't thrilled about it, but got the job done well. I doubt he would've been willing to dig into the mess if I had done the taxes myself, asking for help only after the problems started.

---
Dum de dum.

Re:Use TaxAct.com

[ryanvm]

(And no, IANATP.)

I hope that last part doesn't stand for 'tax payer'. ;)

One good review

[SoCalChris]

I bet G. Cooke from Texas would give it a positive review!

Re:One good review

[jonathanclark]

Why do I have the feeling that a lot of these negative comments are made by a competing company? Most of the dates are Jan 4. It would be interesting to see Amazon's IP logs for all the post. I know this wouldn't be the first case of posting fake reviews (both positive and negative). No doubt many of the comments are real, it's a legit issue - but I think it's been overhyped by competition. My guess is it's someone from TaxCut.

Look at this review:

------------------
Christopher R Chirdon from Pittsburgh, PA USA
I was reading reviews here when I really checked into the online activation stuff. But someone was concerned if you could import your 2001 "filename.tax" file from TurboTax 2001 into TaxCut 2002 and the answer is YES! I bought TaxCut because I want to prepare on my personal computer and then take it to work to print on my laser printer, but I don't want to have to buy 2 licenses. Also, it's just SUCH a hassle. The funny thing is, I don't think taxCut uses ANY type of authentication. I put the CD in and it never asked me for a serial or anything, just a box that said "Is this a legal copy? Y/N".
In a nutshell, if you are concerned about buying TaxCut 2002 and importing your TurboTax 2001 goo, don't be. It went right in for me, and the program seems to be every bit as good as TurboTax. It doesn't have that annoying "da dum dum, da dum da" musical intro that always bothered me either... ;)

Re:One good review

[cybercuzco]

Actually, there are 4 reviews that give the produect a 5. Two of them are top 500 reviewers and a third is in the top 1500. All of the good reviews are within the first few days of the products release and they all sound like they could have come from the back of the box.

Re:One good review

[Artifex]

All of the good reviews are within the first few days of the products release and they all sound like they could have come from the back of the box.

We've had fun discussions here about how silly the Amazon reviewer rating structure is, before (before Christmas, I think). It seems quite obvious that many of the top-rated reviewers don't actually have the products they are espousing (other than some of the ones who only review movies, etc.) If I want a "review" based on someone reading the ad copy or reading an article because I've suddenly gone blind or something, I'll ask a Best Buy or Fry's drone to do it.

(Obligatory whine: Amazon rejected my review of one of the Information Society's remix compilation albums, because they said I was demeaning to the artist's work. What I basically said was that this one CD is a really bad compilation, if you're new to them or are interested, go buy one of the real albums, which are good, etc. Typical stuff I wished I'd known before I bought the CD, and a redirect to their real work. I appealed, but a second customer service drone stuck to the verdict. Apparently, though I've done that before and I've seen several other reviews that are like that, they don't want "negative" reviews any more. I could resubmit the comment if I basically said "their other work is better," but that's about it.)

Re:One good review

[HiThere]

Beats me. I decided that they were an abusive company about a decade ago, and haven't purchased from them since. (They still send me spam.)

Their copy protection at that time struck me as draconian, and I recommended that we buy from nearly anyone else. Sounds like it's just been getting worse. (We haven't had cause to regret not buying from them.)

Alternative?

[swordboy]

OK -

I'm finally gonna switch because of this but my big question is, which competing product would be best to go with and why?

TIA

Re:Alternative?

[fobbman]

I've been checking out Kiplinger's Tax Cut from my local library for a few years now. Very thorough software, and it only costs me money when I return it late. ;)

Re:Alternative?

[argel]

I used the H&R Block TaxCut the last two years. The help is not as good as TurboTax, but the price is a lot nicer.

Re:Alternative?

[Col. Klink (retired)]

Last year I used H&R Block's Tax Cut under VMware.

Re:Alternative?

[rmohr02]

Your library has software? Cool!

Re:Alternative?

[anthony_dipierro]

Send me your information and I'll e-file for ya, or to locate other authorized e-file providers go to this page.

Re:Alternative?

[cafebabe]

Tax Cut is also much better than TurboTax if you are filing multiple state returns. I usually file about 3-4 state returns and Tax Cut does a good job of keeping the references correct between the Federal and state returns. I don't know if it's changed, but TurboTax didn't even allow for multiple state returns. The bad news -- Tax Cut makes you pay a premium for your 2nd and above state but I've found it to be worth it.

Re:Alternative?

[Lumpy]

kiplingers tax cut is at least 30 times better than any intuit product. I sucessfully ran it in wine last year on my linux box and it is usually much cheaper. End of march it is usually $9.95

I bailed on anything from intuit back when quickbooks was messing up my companies books and I switched to a real accounting package from the universally accepted as a childs-toy that is intuit software.

Re:Alternative?

[Wanker]

The Intuit software runs really nicely under VMware. In fact, I've had BETTER luck running Quicken under VMware than my normal Win2k system since many of the Microsoft security updates break the (probably undocumented) APIs that Quicken depends on. (I leave this VMware system unpatched and run it through an aggressive firewall/intrusion detector on the Linux host.)

I have a single Win2k VMware instance that has Turbo Tax for the last 8 years or so on it in addition to Quicken. When I upgrade my PC, I just take the virtual machine along and the Intuit software comes with it.

Although this scheme would also work to allow the same installation to work past upgrades, etc. I don't feel like rewarding Intuit's increasingly customer-hostile behavior and will be looking around for a different product to use this year.

Just do it online!

[HTMLSpinnr]

Save the hassle and do it online. No install, can do it from anywhere you have browser access.

Pencil

[Borf]

Then there's always an alternate use for your hand... that's right! Doing taxes manually. On paper. Think of doing taxes as learning a braindead API for interfacing with the goverment.

I rather like it.

Smell of cedar and graphite. A little calculator, a big rule book. Lots of nice little numbers.

Re:Pencil

[Lxy]

Doing taxes manually. On paper

I like doing it manually as well, but there's a major delay doing it by hand. You have to mail it in, then someone needs to physically open and work the forms and stuff. E-file is quick.. like receiving your return in a couple days quick.

To each his own.

Re:Pencil

[cheezedawg]

like receiving your return in a couple days quick

You do realize that if you get a refund when you file your taxes, that basically means you just gave the government an interest free loan, right? The trick is to withhold as little as possible during the year so you either break even or owe a little bit on April 15 (not enough to get an underpayment penalty, of course). Then your money is YOURS throughout the whole year, and you can save it and invest it anyway you like the whole time.

Re:Pencil

[Yunzil]

Why on earth we don't just have a simple flat tax is beyond me.

Because a flat tax screws the people with smaller incomes; whereas a graduated tax at least tries to spread the screwing more equitably.

Re:Pencil

[ncc74656]

Why on earth we don't just have a simple flat tax is beyond me.

Because a flat tax screws the people with smaller incomes; whereas a graduated tax at least tries to spread the screwing more equitably.

Every flat-tax proposal I've seen has a much larger standard deduction than the ~$7k (single, no dependents) you're currently getting. Please explain to everyone how lower-income people would be screwed by not paying any tax at all under the typical flat-tax proposal. (The number I've most frequently heard is $30k for a family of four...any income below that amount wouldn't be taxed.)

Hell, anything has to be better than the top 10% paying two-thirds and the top 50% paying 96.1% of all tax revenue...

Re:Pencil

[alannon]

Are you sure that's the way that it works in the US? I'm in Canada, and the way that tax returns work here is that if the government ends up owing you money, they give you a certain amount of interest on it as well (~5%, if I remember correctly). It works a bit differently the other way around, assuming you don't get deductions off of your paycheque (I'm a freelance consultant, for example). If you make under a certain amount and pay it with your tax return, they don't charge you extra. If you make OVER a certain amount, you're supposed to pay quarterly an estimated amount. If you don't, they charge you that same amount of interest at the end of the year, so it seems to work out. Now, if you know that you can make better than 5% return on that money, there's no good reason to ever pay quarterly.

Re:Pencil

[M-G]

Yes, the parent post is correct. Any refund you get is simply a refund of overpayment. You get no interest or benefit from letting the government use your money.

Re:Pencil

[cheezedawg]

Unfortunately, yes- thats how it works here south of your border. And somehow people are trained to think that they are getting some big bonus when the IRS sends their money back.

I did know somebody once that was horrible with saving money, so he had huge deductions taken from his paycheck so he would get a large refund every spring (kind of a forced savings program). In practice it didn't work, though, because he went crazy and spent the whole refund check anyway.

TurboTax sucks anyway

[Lxy]

Last year I needed to file a 1040 for the first time. Usually I just go for the 1040EZ, but I had a few items I needed to use the 1040 for. Ok, whatever.

I was looking for a good e-file solution, so I found Turbotax online. For $10 you can file your 1040, no software to install, it's a secure java applet. Cool. I spent a good 45 minutes filling everything out, triple checking my numbers, submitted it, life was good.

Three weeks later, I get an envelope from the IRS.

It seems that Turbotax f#@%ed up my taxable income, and stiffed me $320 on my federal return. The IRS fixed it and sent me a check for the difference, but I was still ticked. I printed off all the info and studied it carefully. All the data I put in was right. I ran the numbers manually, and what do you know, my taxable income was lower, and when I comp[uted the tax table I found the missing $320.

F@#% YOU, TURBOTAX.

Re:TurboTax sucks anyway

[LostCluster]

On the other hand... let's notice that the IRS sent that taxpayer $320 he didn't even realize he was entitled to.

Re:TurboTax sucks anyway

[Mr Guy]

And sent the bill to someone else, no doubt.

Re:TurboTax sucks anyway

[King_TJ]

For what it's worth, I filed my taxes using the online web-based version of TurboTax for the last 2 years in a row. Both times, I was pretty pleased with the outcome.

I'd certainly use it over installing the software on a computer. (It seems sort of pointless to load a program that you'll only use once, and then it's outdated and needs uninstalling again.)

If they're enforcing limitations on functionality based on which PC it is installed on first, that's all the more reason to do the web-based version instead. They can't stop you from signing on wherever, whenever - and printing your tax forms.

I do agree that I'd be pissed if Intuit Corp. lost $320 due to their own error.... but that can happen with any 3rd. party you let do your taxes. I'm not sure it'd be a "deal breaker" keeping me from using TurboTax ever again.

Re:TurboTax sucks anyway

[ocie]

Since the IRS is supossed to know the tax codes, why don't they have an online web site where you can file?

Possible Solution?

[saider]

Here's what I do for nazi software - Run it in a VMWare virtual machine. As far as the program is concerned it is running on the same computer.

The only trick is you need to have VMWare ($300).

Re:Possible Solution?

[hedley]

Not with Safecast2 you won't be. It detects VMware as a debugger. :(

Safecast2 is a product from our perennial /. favorite Macrovision.

Hedley

Re:Possible Solution?

[gl4ss]

how about bochs? does it detect it?

and what trickery it uses to detect it?

ok i understand bochs might not be up to the task speedwise(might be, i've not tested latest bochses and i got no idea how heavy the tax program is)..

e-mail to support dutifully ignored

[morningstar8]

I sent e-mails to Intuit and Macrovision this weekend, asking how to disable/remove their spyware after I was done with TurboTax this year. Surprise, surprise; I haven't received a response.

I'm using something else next year.

More than once ...

[HealYourChurchWebSit]

I've been using TurboTax since '86. Sometimes I miss the simplicity of the old DOS based program. I mean their first attempt at Windows was nearly as maddening as the tax code itself.

As for having to buy an install for each and every computer. Yeah, well, while it takes wild horses to refrain me from doing my taxes more than once on multiple machines, this policy sucks. Mostly because upgrades happen. Considering TurboTax can be purchased back in September for the purposes of tax planning, what happens to the poor schmuck who gets a new computer between then and April 15?

Another scenario. Offline storage. In the past, after I've done my taxes, I burn a backup onto CD and remove the product. Then when tax time comes around, I reinstall it so I can activate an upgrade. So much for doing that this year.

Good thing I'm going to wait till the night before. I don't even like the pig on one machine. Perhaps its time for this long time user to find a new tax package.

TurboTax 2001 cost me $500...!

[fudgefactor7]

It was coming up with that I would need to pay in $500 federal tax. I freaked, naturally. Went to H&R Block, they did my taxes correctly, and I ended up paying in (even after you add in the H&R Block costs) less than what TurboTax said I owed in!

Learn from me: go to a tax prep specialist and stay the hell away from do-it-yourself software solutions.

Re:TurboTax 2001 cost me $500...!

[DocStoner]

Careful with this advice. Some of the tax shops use this exact same or similiar software to do your taxes for you.

Perhaps rephrase it... "go to a reputable tax prep specialist and stay the hell away from do-it-yourself software solutions."

Re:TurboTax 2001 cost me $500...!

[fudgefactor7]

"You are the ones the Federales will hang by the thumbs, not the Blockhead."

Then it would be H&R Block who ends up being the defendant in a new court case. They (H&R) have a fiduciary responsibility to fill the paperwork out in a reasonably correct manner. Failure to do so not only makes them look bad but can come back to haunt them. Plus, I could malign them all over the Internet--and since it would be based on true performance (like my rant about TT 2001) they couldn't do anything about it.

Re:TurboTax 2001 cost me $500...!

[Col. Klink (retired)]

Went to H&R Block...

If I were you, I'd start checking my credit report.

Damn....

[dallask]

I guess this means that I cant download and rip a copy of TurboTax so that I can lie on my tax returns while burning it for family????

Crap.

Re:Damn....

[/dev/trash]

True. But if you get audited in 2 years and upgrade your PC. How will you print out the forms?

Re:Damn....

[ymgve]

I guess this means that I cant download and rip a copy of TurboTax so that I can lie on my tax returns while burning it for family????

Yes you can.

Other software

[IIRCAFAIKIANAL]

CrossTrainer (exercise software) has the same type of scheme. I have to email them to unlock the software whenever I install on a new pc (or os install, for that matter).

Pissed me off to no end - if I had realized this was the case before, I never would have bought it.

What I'd like to see

[salesgeek]

I don't care if it's character based, but it would be cool if the IRS did a tax application that was simply self-calculating and linked so the totals from worksheet forms carry over to the tax form.

I don't need FinanceChick and TaxDude giving me video advice. I just need the instructions, the forms, and a way to save while I go out back and beat up on the shed, woodpile or a bear when I get to the "Your income tax due (or your refund)" line...

$G

Re:What I'd like to see

[LostCluster]

The IRS has made rumblings that unless the tax software industry gets their act together, the IRS will start work on an "official" tax product that would likely be impossible to compete with.

The state of MA has already done this, with an easy-to-use web interface (over HTTPS, of course) that puts the state edition of TurboTax to shame. MA doesn't have that complex of a tax code anyway, so there really isn't much for software to do in the first place besides data entry and transmission.

Re:What I'd like to see

[ethereal]

I would love to see that. For instance, the state of Illinois provides free online filing. Up 'til now the IRS excuse has been that they didn't want to undercut the non-free tax software market, but if they want me to file electronically, they're going to have to make it cheaper than $.37. I'm not about to pay money just to make things easier on the IRS :)

Re:What I'd like to see

[Just Some Guy]

The only problem is that the software, necessarily, will not be creative when dealing with your unique tax situation. That's what a good CPA is for: knowing things such as if you're willing to forget about claiming a deduction for that $20 donation to the EFF, then you qualify for a $137.23 tax credit under the Diggle Act of 1965. A program will cheerfully let you claim a $20 deduction at the cost of missing a greater savings elsewhere.

Is it utterly ridiculous that our tax code is so difficult? Absolutely! However, we're pretty much stuck with it for the foreseeable future, so you may as well make the best of it.

Re:What I'd like to see

[ortholattice]

MA doesn't have that complex of a tax code anyway, so there really isn't much for software to do in the first place besides data entry and transmission.

Perhaps for simple returns, but if you have mutual funds and K-1's it can be a nightmare. You have to account for "MA differences" on your K-1's (usually due to breaking down in-state vs. out-of-state interest, but also due to different rules on allowable deductions). You have to separate out in-state and out-of-state interest from your bank accounts, CDs, etc. You have to divide your mutual fund capital gains into little pieces representing 1-year, 2-year, etc. holdings (the funds tell you the breakdown for MA but never the calculation, which you have to tediously compute from the itemized statements for each fund since the percentages vary by quarter). Capital gains on "collectibles" have different rules from capital gains on stocks. I won't even get into Schedule C differences. It goes on and on. Last year I literally spent more time on my MA than Federal (some of it screaming at Intuit support, see below). A big part of it has to do with special interest lobbying that gets tax special preferences on this or that. E.g. 5% tax on in-state bank interest vs. 12% on out-of-state, ironic when you consider in-state purchases are taxed and out-of-state not - MA vendors get screwed and MA banks are laughing all the way to the, well, bank.

TurboTax does not help you break out your mutual fund gains. TurboTax does not properly bring over K-1 info - it puts in-vs-out state interest in wrong fields and double-counts some "MA differences". If you blindly let it do it's thing you'll end up paying more tax than you owe. You have to know what you're doing and manually override a bunch of TurboTax fields. Each year I've complained to Intuit and the K-1 problems still weren't fixed for 2001.

Speaking of TurboTax, the .tax file many years ago used to be a semi-readable near-ASCII file that slowly evolved into the bloated, cryptic binary mess it is today (1993 = 12KB, 2001 = 300KB). I was beginning to feel my data is now captive to this program, but I'm glad to hear (from another poster) that TaxCut is able to read it and I'll probably switch. But what the world really needs is a standard, portable XML format for tax files, that multiple vendors support.

Can I move a data file?

[beanerspace]

Well isn't this going to be fun? What happens 2 years from now when I have a new machine and an audit which requires me to try and install and print my old taxes?

You know, I'll never understand why companies feel they need to "break something that works..." TurboTax has dominated the Tax Software market. Now what they're doing is encouraging us to look elsewhere. I know I will!

So What? Audits, that's what.

[asscroft]

I usually print and file from the same machine at which I installed anyway. This only has two impacts

1. You can no longer get the friends and family pack, so what, it's $20.00 and is super easy way to do your taxes. How many accountants charge $20.00 for you, and your friends, and your parents. Give it up, the free ride is over.

2. Audits from the IRS go back 7 years. If I have a new computer in 7 years I won't be able to reprint this years return. So much for the "store my tax info on CD". I'm stuck with Paper as my only record keeping. That removes one of the benefits of using a computer program in the first place.

Re:So What? Audits, that's what.

[syntap]

The audit issue is the first thing I thought of when I heard this. I guess the solution may be to print your final return out to an Acrobat PDF (electronic and reprintable), though I guess you have to own Adobe Acrobat for that solution unless there are any OSS PDF printers I'm not aware of.

I use TaxCut myself, but I feel for the TurboTax users who are going through this.

Re:So What? Audits, that's what.

[per unit analyzer]

Audits from the IRS go back 7 years. If I have a new computer in 7 years I won't be able to reprint this years return. So much for the "store my tax info on CD". I'm stuck with Paper as my only record keeping. That removes one of the benefits of using a computer program in the first place.

Ummm.. You're a little bit off on this. The IRS can only go back three years and audit you. That is unless they suspect you of comitting fraud, then they can go back as far as they damn well please. You're better off keeping copies of your returns indefinitely. The Motley Fool has a nice guide on how long to keep stuff.

Personally, I'd keep both the paper and electronic media.

--zawada

Re:So What? Audits, that's what.

[BdosError]

[Full Disclosure, I am an employee of Intuit, but in Canada, not the U.S., and I don't work on the Tax product of either country]

1. You can no longer get the friends and family pack, so what, it's $20.00 and is super easy way to do your taxes. How many accountants charge $20.00 for you, and your friends, and your parents. Give it up, the free ride is over.

I agree with this just on general principles. It's cheap and useful, so why not treat it like any other software? Surely it's worth $20 for a non-trivial return? You do pay for your other software, right?
I too used to "share" Intuit Tax software with friends, but when they instituted Activation here (we did it first) most people whined and then bought it anyway, because it's worth it.

2. Audits from the IRS go back 7 years. If I have a new computer in 7 years I won't be able to reprint this years return

I don't know the details of how it works, but the PR rep in the article claims:

In most cases, customers who need to reinstall TurboTax on a new PC or hard drive simply have to enter the original activation number they received,

Surely that is sufficient, if it works as claimed.

Re:So What? Audits, that's what.

[Lumpy]

Why would you want to be locked to their bizzare format anyways? i ALWAYS print inmportant things from a windows program as a Postscript file (generic postscript windows driver, print to file Voila!)

now I have the form electronically, it's not locked to someone's wierd and incompatable format and can be converted to PDF or viewed on any computer on the planet that ghostscript can run on.

ALWAYS convert important items like a computer generated tax form into a standard format for archival.

I guarentee that you can still get ghostscript 7 years from now while this closed source has a big chance of not being available.

easier to read...

[Eil]

Here is a printable version of the article that contains less spam and is easier to read.

Betcherass its "Real" for me

[R2.0]

Is this problem real or overhyped?"

I've used Turbo Tax since 1993. I do the work at home and then come to work and install the software for 1 whole day just to print it out on a laser printer.

Why? I don't trust the water soluble inks in my inkjet at home, and I don't want my personal info on my work computer for any length of time.

And I bet there are lots of people who do the exact same thing as I do.

Re:Betcherass its "Real" for me

[angle_slam]

Solution: since you can install it on any number of machines, but can only print from the first machine you install from: install first on office computer. Don't put any info on you office computer until ready to file. Install on home computer and enter all information. Bring that information to your office computer to print. Simple solution.

Re:Betcherass its "Real" for me

[ngoy]

just curious: why don't you print to file on your home PC and take the file to work and print that?

me, I use acrobat and print directly to a .pdf and then take that wherever.

Umm, these people are actually BUYING Turbotax. The retail price for Adobe Acrobat is $250. I do not think most people are willing to buy Adobe Acrobat Writer just to print their taxes.

On the flip side, you CAN go to Adobe's website and get files converted to .pdf for free (first 5 files). But it only supports a certain set of programs, and Turbotax is not one of them. Although you can print to a Postscript format and it may work.

If you're doing a 1040-EZ ...

[SuperDuG]

... ack offtopic a little bit, but not really ...

TurboTax for the Web will let you electronically file your taxes for free. The catch?? You have to file ONLY the 1040-EZ and make less than $25K, but since that's what I've filed the last 5 years, it's no real problem for me (yeah being a student!). If you want to file a 1040 or 1040A it's something like $10.00. But they will do your state and federal taxes online and submit them electronically.

Why would this matter to /.? Well because for the last 2 years I've used it with netscape on linux with no troubles at all. So now you can do your taxes for free with linux electronically and get a refund in around 2 days.

So don't sit there for hours and do it with the "easy to follow IRS workbook" or load windows up to use a windows only program, or go pay someone far too much money to do it for you, do them online cheaply.

Best way to get around the registration hassle of software is to not use the software that requires you to register it.

Re:If you're doing a 1040-EZ ...

[anthony_dipierro]

You have to file ONLY the 1040-EZ and make less than $25K, but since that's what I've filed the last 5 years, it's no real problem for me (yeah being a student!).

Last year I used them to file a 1040 for free (had capital gains so I couldn't use the EZ or A). I don't see where it says you have to use a 1040-EZ.

Re:If you're doing a 1040-EZ ...

[SuperDuG]

oops ... did they change that? It used to be only for the 1040-EZ ... obviously I'm wrong, still a hell of a good deal ... free

Re:If you're doing a 1040-EZ ...

[rainwalker]

I'd have to strongly advise against Turbo Tax's online service. My fiancee has been using their web service the last couple years (two, at least), and last year they apparantly never filed her return.

She completed her return electronically, made a printout, and returned returned the signature sheet, but then never got a check from the IRS. It was only a couple bucks, and we forgot about it. Then, her FAFSA application got audited in September. We submitted all the additional information the school & government requested, but kept getting requests for more info, until we actually requested a transcript of her 2001 tax return from the IRS, and they informed us that they did not have one on file. This has seriously screwed us financially, as we now have to find a way to cover $9,000 worth of tuition this year.

Spend $50 and file with a real, wetware tax preparer.

Re:If you're doing a 1040-EZ ...

[SuperDuG]

She completed her return electronically, made a printout, and returned returned the signature sheet, but then never got a check from the IRS.

You nailed it right there, is it really Turbo Tax Online's fault that you or your girlfriend never followed through? It's a very quick and simple call to the IRS to check the status of your tax procecssing ... and turbotax has an online status alert spot as well to tell you the status of your forms and where your refund is at.

Spend $50 and file with a real, wetware tax preparer.

What so they can lose it too? This is the first time I've ever heard of anyone using Turbo Tax for the web and having trouble at all. However most people I know who have been audited by ye old IRS are those that drop the $50 - $infinite on an "accountant".

Morale of the story, taxes are there whether you like them or not and if you choose to ignore them they will come back to haunt you. My advice would be very simple and go ahead and file your tax forms and make sure the IRS is happy with you, taxes can take anywhere from 3 days (my personal record) to 4 months to fully process.

Do it yourself if you have time, you will definantelly learn a thing or two. And if you make more than $30K a year it wouldn't hurt to jump to a local tax station and have them figure most everything out for you, as there are many ways to get a rebate or relief on taxes that very few people out of the loop will know about. So if you're dirt poor like me, use Turbo Tax for free ... if not ... unless you got an MBA under your belt, pop it to the tax station ...

Also ... if you owe money, do it by check and by snail mail (no reason to rush things ...) ... if you're getting a refund file electronically and have it directly deposited ... little personal SuperDuG advice for all ya'll.

Do your taxes by hand, yourself.

[wiredog]

Unless you have lots of investments, it's not that difficult. All I have is 2 bank accounts, so I just do the 1040 with no attachments. By next year I'll be itemizing deductions (what with the house payment) but that's not difficult either. Keep all your deductible receipts in a box and pull tham out in January.

Re:Do your taxes by hand, yourself.

[iggymanz]

A person might be in a big hurry to get their hands on a large refund, and thus use Turbo-Tax or similar software to get their refund in 2 weeks.....filing a paper return it's going to take MUCH longer.
Tax software also lets one easily compare itemization vs. standard deductions, alternative ways of accounting for things, etc.....for less than $50 I just find it's worth the small cost. I used to manually file when I had a full time job, plus 2 consulting side jobs, and money market accounts....so I do appreciate the time saved.

Re:Mac version

[dlelash]

I'll answer my own post: According to Intuit, the Mac version does not have product activation.

go with taxcut

[mlong]

I've used TurboTax I guess for the last 4 or 5 years. This year as I was getting ready to buy it I checked out amazon.com and saw all the negative reviews and decided not get it as I have 4 computers in my house. So I decided to get TaxCut. I bought it from Staples but you can get it from taxcut.com. It costs less than TurboTax and it can even import all the data from last year's TurboTax. Not only that but (at least at staples.com) there are tons of rebates on different products if you buy TurboTax ($30 off money, willpower free, home and business attorney free, mcafee free, norton personal firewall or antivirus free, checksoft express free, deduction pro free, etc.

I don't understand

[tyrani]

Why are tax software companies trying to make people pay like this? I don't understand what makes companies like quicken, intuit and Microsoft any different.

Tax laws change every year. I'd be more then happy to pay a small amount each year for the latest updates. It costs them money to integrate the changes and update the software that I've already bought for $30.

I think they're banking on people reasoning that they would be paying an accountant.

Re:I don't understand

[mesocyclone]

It's really very simple. Intuit has a huge market share in financial software. They are the Microsoft of personal and small business financial software (which is why Microsoft tried to buy them). If you run a small business, you raccountant will probably use QuickBooks or want you to. If you do electronic banking, there are usually only two choices of software: Intuit and Microsoft.

I would have dropped Intuit about a year ago when some of their behavior became disgusting, except they have me by the banking-relationship nads, for both Quicken and Quickbooks (unless I want to -ugh- go to Microsoft). It is still (barely) easier to go along with them than to fight.

Intuit has been acting nastier and nastier and sneakier and sneakier. They are trying their best to adopt a service business model - sucker you into all sorts of subscriptions and services - but in the process they are screwing up the lives of those of us who use their plain old software. When you ask Quickbooks to do a backup, the default (which it uses every time unless you override it) is to backup to their internet service. Ech! I have a much better internet service (connected.com - I have no relationship to them other than as a satisfied customer), and I don't WANT Quickbooks to do this. But just like Microsoft, they make the default something that ties you to yet another one of their products.

I am afraid that now that I have heard this latest, I will have to print out all my tax forms into PDF files to save, rather than just keeping the TurboTax files and programs like I have in the past.

And, of course, *next year* (too late for this year) I am seriously going to look into some competitor who is less arrogante and more friendly.

CommentAnticipator

[mumblestheclown]

CommentAnticipator predicts:

• "This is yet another example of evil corporate blah blah blah blah blah.."
• "Won't corporations ever learn blah blah blah..."
• In soviet russia, TurboTax activates you!
• Let's start a boycott / return campaign ....
• "this is an example of how free markets work. They clamp down too hard on their customers this time, they'll pay next time." (oh, wait, no, that's too enlightened).
• Turbotax sucks anyway, I always use {alternate product}.
• (generic Turbotax efiling horror story)
• general carping about various turbotax ("home", "small business") editions.
• Some handwaving / slippery slope argumentation that attempts to imply that since some DRM technology is faulty, it must all be doomed to fail / evil.
• Some immature claims that any DRM technology is hackable.
• Requests for turbotax crackZ. But, of course, they're not called that here, as this is gentile slashdot.
• A reasonable response or two that DRM technology need not be 100% foolproof to be effective. This is modded down to -2, troll.
• MS-bashing, Palladium flavour.

Best comment on Amazon regarding the matter

[Eagle7]

I love this comment:

Quality Control?, January 4, 2003
Reviewer: Ex-long time user from Hernando, MS United States
I purchased TurboTax Deluxe for the fourth year in a row this year. When I went to install the program from the CD it turned out to be an AUDIO CD OF MEXICAN MUSIC! Bizarre.
...

Re:Best comment on Amazon regarding the matter

[dr_dank]

So did he/she get a faster refund from El TurboTaxo© or what?

Re:More importantly....

[mumblestheclown]

Moderation Totals: Mind-Numbingly Naive, -2

Turbotax 2002 installs malware called C-Dilla

[tstoneman]

Don't buy Turbotax 2002. They install malware/"Copy protection" called C-Dilla but don't tell you about it. I don't even care about the product activation stuff, it's this spyware/malware shit that they secretly installed without telling me that really pissed me off.

Here is a link to a forum talking about C-dilla.

Don't make the same mistake I did and delete a directory called "C:\C_DILLA". I did, and my computer froze upon startup. Apparently C-dilla is a service that requires this directory to be there otherwise it barfs on you.

I didn't know what it was, and thought it might be related to Mozilla (Mozilla, Bugzilla, Chatzilla, etc). I deleted it, and upon reboot, my system froze during startup. After troubleshooting my frozen machine for around 1/2 an hour, the missing directory turned out to be the problem, along with these mysterious services that I didn't remember installing. I guess the service hung while looking for the directory and froze my entire system.

I went to uninstall Turbotax and it doesn't uninstall C-dilla. I asked Intuit Live Chat support how to remove C-dilla and they told me to delete the C_DILLA directory and reboot. I told them what would happen, but they said that's what to do. After I did it, and it froze again, they said there was nothing they could to and to contact my system administrator/vendor to fix the freeze. Thanks.

They have a 60-day return policy. USE IT. Tell all your friends and co-workers not to buy Turbotax. I was a loyal Turbotax purchaser since 1997 and I am now going to switch because I no longer trust them. Why did they install this shit on my computer without telling me, and fuck everything up?

They have completely lost my trust, and there is nothing they can do to get it back, that's for sure.

Thisis no big deal

[TerryAtWork]

This is just a corporate software screwup.

People are getting yelled at, people are busting their asses to fix this, meanwhile a C student flak is screwing up in the media. No big deal.

This will resolve itself realsoonnow and when it does the corp will make a big fuss to make everyone understand it's ok.

Re:The General Consumer has had Enough

[cant_get_a_good_nick]

but destroys the very concept of product ownership.
This has been gone for a lonnnnnnnnnnng time. Read the Lawyer-ist bits that come with your software. You don't own the software, just a license to use. One that's usually revokable at various discretions of the software publisher.

Weird workaround for printing on a second machine.

[Kelmenson]

I typically buy and use TurboTax, but do not have a laser printer at home, so I do all my taxes at home and e-file from home and then print out the paper forms at work with a quality laser printer. That method would no longer work with the new licensing scheme, despite it definitely falling under "reasonable use" in my opinion.

However, I did figure out a method that would be basically as good. With a non-activated version you can still fill in your taxes entirely, you just cannot file or print them. So, install the software at home BUT DO NOT ACTIVATE IT. Fill out your taxes entirely. Then when you are done, install and activate on your work machine, and e-file and print from there.

Not quite as convenient as before, but basically the same.

(And as an added bonus, if you want to piss off Intuit and show them the flaw of their ways, then make copies of the CD and give them to all of your coworkers and have them all file their taxes from your computer! I don't even think that could be illegal, since unlike most software, having the CD is not a "right to use", so making a copy of the CD is in essence just a shareware version of the software that a user who wanted to file on their own would still need to pay for, and the software provides them the method internally. Good method of civil disobedience... Let's see who can file the most returns on one bought copy of TurboTax!)

Sub-question - which can handle schedule C?

[SuperKendall]

Does anyone know what besides Turbotax might be good to use if you also need to file a schedule C?

since i have karma to burn....

[zephc]

First post from Safari!

We shouldn't have to pay extra to "e-file."

[timeOday]

It's a scam that the govt. doesn't set up its own website for electronic filing. It would save a whole lot of tax dollars, both in printing and mailing those thick filing booklets, and probably more importantly, it costs less to process electronic filings.

My county set up electronic renewal of vehicle licensing. It's just a simple web form, nothing fancy, and couldn't have cost much to set up. Yet it's highly effective and they encourage it because it saves them manpower and tax money, not to mention thousands of hours of people waiting in line at the DMV.

There was a movement for this a year or two ago, but Quicken et. al. lobbied against it and offered reduced-cost filing for poor people to appease lawmakers. As a result, we are stuck paying extra to private companies to file tax returns in a way that should save everybody time and money.

Re:We shouldn't have to pay extra to "e-file."

[jea6]

Having work in the "e-government" scene I can tell you that county vehicle registrations services have been setup by people with less knowledge than the average Slashdotter, with sites running on unpatched IIS4 boxes.

Setting up a universal e-filing service for the IRS is not only cost-prohibitive, it is also begging for trouble. The principal reason (given the current technology) that this service doesn't exist is because it is more intelligent for the IRS to have a handful of authorized e-filing agents than to allow anybody and their brother to spam the agency with data.

Given the current technology, it is safer for the IRS to take your paper filing than to ask you to e-file directly. It is cheapest for the IRS to have you e-file through an authorized agent.

Finally, last I checked, you weren't FORCED to use TurboTax, were you?

Re:We shouldn't have to pay extra to "e-file."

[alphaFlight]

According to the IRS website EFile will be free for about 60% of taxpayers. Strangly these 60% of taxpayers have not yet been identified. Here's the link...IRS Free EFile

Re:We shouldn't have to pay extra to "e-file."

[rizzo]

The State of Wisconsin will do just that this year. I'm not sure if it is only the state taxes, or if they'll allow you to do federal also, but somehow I'd think that a state agency would only be able (allowed?) to do state revenue.

Re:Turbotax/Quicken/Intuit troubles..

[LostCluster]

States have been stiff in cracking down on scanner-based systems, to the point now that where crackdowns have occured the scanner errors now are more often than not in the customer's favor.

The problem is, it'll take federal involvemnt to treat rebate errors as the small-scale frauds that they are, and seriously slap those who send false rejections with fines and penalites that make sure they become very sure about their rejections before they send them.

I once got rejected on a rebate for a compressed air blower product because I had sent in a hand written index card with the UPC number, as per the instructions, instead of sending the actual UPC which every other item on the rebate form required. Why was canned air the exception? Because the UPC was printed on the can itself, and cutting that can open is not a safe activity.

1-2-3

[nightsweat]

Anyone remember the flap over 1-2-3 key disks? No one ever learns anything.

Software headaches bad for industry

[release7]

Getting/installing/using software is becoming more and more of a headache for consumers every day. Once an average Joe loses an activiation key or has to go through the hassle trying to figure out how to use a new one, they'll just forget about using the software and come away with a bad experience. Who the hell has the time to wade through this BS just to figure out what your rights are for using the software? I just want to be able to pop the disk in my drive and have the thing run when I need it to run. Things get really maddening when you are dealing with a dozen applications, each with their own procedures and policies.

The most frustrating is the powerless feeling it gives a user. People will come to HATE software because of the frustration and agony of not being able to control something they feel they own. This will make consumer less reluctant to throw down $100 or $200 bucks for their next software purchase. Not good. Someone needs to find a better way.

Transcript of Online Support Helps With Questions

[Milican]

Below is a transcript of my chat with online support. They were very helpful in easing my fears of product activation. I have bought (and deducted) the tax software and I love how it makes my tax time less arduous. Hopefully, tech support will live up to their claims of transerability should I upgrade my computer... which I will. I still like H&R Block's approach better, but I am a little more at ease now. Please read on...

JOhn

You have been connected to G. Cylon.
G. Cylon: Hello John, how may I help you today?
John Peterson: hi, i read an article today on slashdot.org about intuit's product activation for turbo tax. i am a long time customer and i am worried about computer upgrades and my use of turbo tax.
John Peterson: I do not want to pay for the product twice and that is what I am worried about.
G. Cylon: You shouldn't have to pay for the product more than once after it's installed and activated okay on the first computer
John Peterson: ok, lets say I upgrade my computer, which I often do... how is product activation handled there?
John Peterson: I do plan on upgrading my computer within the next month or two, but I also want to start on my taxes ASAP
G. Cylon: Upgrading the computer shouldn't affect product activation unless the harddrive is changed
John Peterson: ok, if there is a dispute can i fax in a receipt of my purchase?
G. Cylon: Can you give me a moment to check it please
John Peterson: thank you
John Peterson: I hope you understand my concern. I am a hardcore computer user and I often change out components of my hardware. In addition, I own my own business and I love how your software makes it easier for me to file my taxes accurately. It used to be a nightmare to compute all the deductions. However, this new product activation has me very worried that my software is not really mine and that I will be forced a "double taxation" on my tax software. If this happens, I can guarantee I will no longer purchase your product. This will be a sad event for me because I love your product, and I have used it for over three years.
John Peterson: I understand the need to reduce piracy, but I'm worried I will be falsely targeted.
G. Cylon: Yeah i know what you mean, but the product shouldn't be affected
G. Cylon: unless for major hardware change
John Peterson: It would make me much more comfortable if I could speak with a product activation specialist to make sure there aren't any loop holes.
G. Cylon: Can you give me a moment please
John Peterson: ok
G. Cylon: only changing hard drives will cause you to be asked to reactivate.
John Peterson: ok, so if i upgrade my hard drive i cannot transfer the license?
G. Cylon: If that should happen,you should just contact us with the original date you installed on the old hard drive and we will be able to get you activated again.

John Peterson: hey, thats great!
John Peterson: now, i would also like the number for an activation specialist so i can confirm this.
John Peterson: the price of the software is usually around $75 so its not something I want to throw away
G. Cylon: I don't have a number for a PA specialist.
John Peterson: ok, i'll look around then
G. Cylon: But that is what our business rules say and you confirmed it with my supervisor
John Peterson: ok
G. Cylon: i've confirmed*
John Peterson: gotcha :)
John Peterson: Thank you for your time.
G. Cylon: but if there is any problem quote this case id *******
John Peterson: Thank you once again. Take care.
G. Cylon: I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for visiting our TurboTax Support Chat.

I'd call support on that one

[Wee]

I'd seriously call support, and have them walk me through an installation. In fact, I'd weedle my way to 2nd or 3rd tier if I could before I got to the actual inserting-the-cd bit. And I'd have to turn auto-run on too. That would be a key feature of the support session: "Ok, I inserted the CD and now there's like carnival music or something coming out of my speakers! Does TurboTax come with a soundtrack?"

Feh. The only kind of music I want to hear when doing taxes is the Muzak in the lobby of my CPA. Try taking the TurboTax software packaging to tax court with you and see how much it helps.

Dental work and accounting: two things you should never do by yourself, for yourself.

-B

Re:I'd call support on that one

[Just Some Guy]

Well spoken by someone filing a 1040EZ. Guess what, Bunky: if you buy a house, do any work from home, have an employed spouse that happens to own their own business, and regularly donate to charity, those tax forms (yes, plural!) become completely unnavigable by anyone who doesn't do it for a living.

I consider my self a pretty sharp guy, but I don't know the jargon of taxation (and if you believe that the terms used in a tax form are common English and not legal jargon, then you're returns are 100% guaranteed to be screwed up). My CPA, on the other hand, knows exactly what I need to do, and accepts legal responsibility for making sure that my stuff gets filed correctly. When he tells me to cut a check to the gov't, I feel safe in doing it. I wouldn't sleep well if it were my own calculations on those forms.

Re:I'd call support on that one

[Pxtl]

You took that gag from Byte Me. They want it back.

Re:I'd call support on that one

[Wee]

Huh? I did no such thing. You're awfully quick to scream thief. I don't even know what "Byte Me" is...

-B

Re:People are dumb....

[evilpenguin]

This is just dead wrong. I sniffed my network during the install. It opens an https session to a server at Intuit. About 30k of data is exchanged (being encrypted 128-bit I don't know what data). I can guarantee that if the reg key is included, they can cripple the next install. If you don't hook the machine to the internet, they don't let you pint or file. Don't make pronouncements out of ignorance.

Not entirely true...

[Fizzlewhiff]

Moving the software (i.e. disk reformat, buy new computer) requires buying it again.

This is not what the article said. The original installer only has to hang on to the key and activation code and they can reinstall it on a new PC. It may sound like a pain in the ass but you can just keep this info with your tax records that you have to keep anyway.

I guess people are just pissed they can't split the cost of one copy of the program with their friends and family anymore.

Re:Not entirely true...

[iggymanz]

I've always been able to read my old previous year's T-Tax file with the software for the new year....even to print it out. What's the beef, I'm wondering? Must be like you say, thieves pissed they can't pirate it around any more.
Also, unlike most helpdesks on planet earth, I found the T-Tax one to actually be USEFUL, FRIENDLY and HELPFUL when I had a problem getting the purchased package to recognize & integrate the state tax module I downloaded from the web.
This slashdot article reminds me it's time to go to Sam's Club and pick up this year's copy, and to load it on my Ultra-Secure High-Reliabilty Financial Supercomputer (old Dell GXA 300MHz running windows 98se....hahaha!)

Amended Returns

[IsThisNickTaken]

I have been a Turbo Tax user for the last 7 or 8 years. Several years ago I decided to change how I was handling depreciation on a rental property. I was able to reinstall my old copies of Turbo Tax and amend my tax returns. I had kept my .tax files around on my computer.

While it is of limited use, some people do need to access/change previous tax returns. With the new product activation it sounds like I may have been screwed.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[/dev/trash]

18% for 10k and above? My god the poor will get shafted in this deal.

Paper and Pencil and Phone

[nuggz]

Paper and Pencil work well for me.
It's free.

I learn to understand how the forms fit together, and how actions impact my tax bill.

I know my taxes are right, I know where and what and why I'm paying what I am paying.
Contrary to popular belief the system isn't that nonsensical, and the instruction booklets give you a nice step by step explanation of EVERYTHING.

I also telefile (Canadian phone thing), takes about 15 minutes to file, and it's free.

The direct deposit payment has been in the account within a few (1-3) weeks for everyone I know who used it.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[MaxwellStreet]

You don't think your flat tax would unfairly benefit the really well-off members of our society, who currently pay as much as 38% of their income?

Hell - if I made a lot of money, I'd be -begging- for a tax cut like that. Oh wait... Steve Forbes is already doing it for me.

Meanwhile, lower-income people would spend an even-larger percentage of their income on taxes - and these are the people for whom every last dollar counts.

A flat tax - while appealing - would have really perverse consequences. Perhaps leaving tax brackets in place - and dramatically simplifying deductions and loopholes - would be more in line with what you're trying to accomplish.

I was dumb enough to buy it

[Anonymous Coward]

After installing, it would not let me use the product until I had an internet connection up and running. Immediately when the internet was available, without asking for my permission, it went out to the internet and registered with Intuit. The product was activated.

Then I noticed more services running in the background, like CDAC11BA.exe. I didn't know what that was, so I disabled it in the Win 2000 services control panel where it was called C-DillaCdaC11BA. At this point, I rebooted. That was a mistake... My computer wouldn't boot anymore! I use grub from a Redhat 8.0 distribution, and grub would never get to run. The computer was useless, and my Redhat boot disks weren't with me, so I was stuck for the weekend without a functioning bootloader. Reinstalling grub (rewriting the MBR) fixed the computer so it was able to boot. When starting TurboTax at this point, it complained that TurboTax was already installed on another computer, and I couldn't use it unless I paid another $30 or $40 to register it. And the CDAC11BA.EXE service was started again! So I disabled the service once again and rebooted. Voila! Grub could not boot again. Turbotax corrupted my MBR so grub could not run anymore. Another reinstall of grub from the Redhat CD fixed things.

Next step was to contact customer support at Intuit and complain about my problems. I swear their technical support (via internet) is a computer. I got responses like "Please hold on while I search for the issue" and "Please hold on while I search for the cause". Then the tech said "You must go for uninstall and reinstall first". At this point, I knew it was a bunch of crap. I asked for the address of where I could return the product and I finally got it after about 10 minutes.

Bottom line: I will never buy another product from Intuit again.

My wife does 'em

[mekkab]

She's in law school and has taken Federal Taxation.
All she needs is a statutes book of current tax laws and she's "good to go."

Before that, my dad used to be a tax accountant. He uses turbotax (or something like it) just so it prints out pretty. For all my courses in advanced math I haven't had to file my own taxes once!

PEBKAC

[Keighvin]

I've used TurboTax online for several years without a problem (it's actually all in-browser, no Java). They allow you the say over what is or is not taxable depending on where you enter it and how you treat it; it sounds like this was more an error of inexperience (having only used 1040 EZ previously).

Stop the "e-file" Scam

[lildogie]

Pardon the off-topic comment, but if you object to the e-file fees, don't use e-file.

The IRS really, really wants e-file to take off, because it saves them loads of money.

The best protest for the fees is to keep sending them paper returns until e-file is free.

Re:Sucks for me

[Gerry Gleason]

Of course, you could just install first on the work machine, and everything would be fine still. That is beside the point, but it would work.

I started buying TaxCut (Kiplinger) a few years back, but last year it wouldn't install properly on the one ancient windows box that I still had running. I think it was Windows that was bolluxed, but didn't want to waste a lot of time with it; it had a missing DLL error when I tried to start it up after install (which went fine). I just punted and did it manually.

I really like using a program because the instructions are so complex that it is just about impossible to get it right without some help. Apparently, I did something wrong manually because the IRS fixed something and sent a check after their program corrected it. It would be nice if they gave you some detail about the error so I don't to the same again ... It was a nice surprise to get the check back, but alarming that such a large mistake was that easy to make.

It sure would be nice if the gov published an open source reference program, or standardized encoding of the rules, otherwise it isn't likely that we'll be able to do taxes under Linux. Perhaps Wine works well enough now (anyone do it this way?). Don't tell me to do it on-line, because I won't do it unless I have a way to trust they will protect my privacy.

Why the fsck do we have to pay for this anyways?

[joshamania]

1. You'd think that e-file would save the IRS money.

2. IRS provides the alternative, i.e. paper, for free.

3. Hell, nevermind the savings in filing costs...imagine how much the IRS would save in PRINTING costs if everyone (or a big portion) e-filed.

Why the fsck is a cottage industry built around something we should be getting for free even allowed to exist!!!

I saw http://www.taxact.com/ in another post. I'll pay the $8. It sucks, because it should be free, but it's prolly just about the best bet out there.

Stupid question here.

[Matey-O]

Why is this even an issue?

If the IRS gets all of this information, (and it does , it's used to doublecheck your return) why do we even HAVE the other half of this industry?

IMHO, you ought be able to log into the IRS website, it should say 'We have this and this and this in your records, you should owe X'

At which point _you_ could add: "But I have this and this extenuating circumstance."

The IRS would then recalculate and your income tax fileing would consist of ONLY those things that are different and unusual, with the assumption that since you didn't change any earnings info, you must agree with what the IRS has.

If my HR dude enters my W-2 info once. And his software sends it to the IRS, why do _I_ have to rekey it each time? Why do I need to rekey the numbers AT ALL?

Re:Stupid question here.

[base3]

I attended a presentation about e-government initatives at which an IRS representative spoke about this issue. This was three years ago, but the gentleman said that the IRS had no intention of offering its own electronic filing, primarily because of industry pressure.

This page from Intuit spells it out clearly

[release7]

Copied from http://www.turbotaxsupport.com/servicesupport/defa ult.asp?platform=1&formName=&pd=&fs=&ver=&sku=&Doc ID=

Do I need to activate TurboTax again if I reinstall the program? Whether or not you need to reactivate TurboTax (that is, purchase an additional product license) depends upon your particular situation:

If you reinstall TurboTax to the same hard disk that it was previously activated on, you do not need to activate it again.

If you install TurboTax on another computer, you need to activate it again only if you want to print or electronically file your tax return from that computer.

Example: You activated TurboTax on your home computer and attempt to electronically file your tax return, but for some reason you start to experience problems with your Internet connection. The next day, you install TurboTax on your computer at work, along with a copy of your tax file. In order to electronically file your tax return from your work computer, you must activate TurboTax on your work computer. Note: If you need to reinstall an activated copy of TurboTax on another computer because of a hard disk failure, or if you are reinstalling an activated copy of TurboTax on a newly purchased computer or hard disk, please contact a live agent to obtain a second activation code.

If you install TurboTax on another computer without activating it, you can make changes to your tax return using the EasyStep Interview, but you will not be able to print, electronically file, use the Forms Method, view tax forms, or save your tax file as a .pdf file from that computer.

Example: After activating TurboTax, you electronically file your tax return and print copies of the return for your records. Shortly thereafter, you replace your original computer with a new one. You install TurboTax on the new computer in case you need to refer to your 2002 tax file, but you do not intend to electronically file or print your return again. In this case, you do not need to activate TurboTax on your new computer. Product Activation lets you print or electronically file tax returns from any computer that TurboTax is activated on; it does not prevent installing the program on another computer.

Intuit-ive

[SheldonYoung]

Intuit also makes tax software for Canadians, QuickTax. I've bought it many years in a row, but last year was the last. The amount of advertising they force on the user is crazy, it's enough to question why you have to pay money for the software in the first place.

QuickTax, however, is second only to their accounting software QuickBooks. One quarter of the opening user interface is a list of links called "Company Solutions", which are nothing but advertisements. I have nothing against ads but it annoys me when good software is abused by bad marketting.

Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?

Fry: Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines. And movies. And at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts and written on the sky. But not in dreams. No siree!

Re:Welcome to a patented michael article.

[Tim C]

Hell I post stuff all the time, then later realize I was wrong. But I wouldn't go back and hide them even if I could, I'll admit my mistakes and let 'em stand. It's just part of being a man, I suppose.

Oh the irony of an anonymous coward saying something like that...

And by the way, whoever moderated that as "Overrated" - how is the default score for a comment "Overrated"?

But if you're audited ...

[Bowfinger]

I don't know. TurboTax is only good for one tax year, so the useage lifetime for the software is as long as it takes me to actually do my taxes, which is only a couple of days, if that.

But what if you get that audit letter from the IRS in two or three years? You may want to reinstall 2002 TurboTax so you can review your records, only to find that it won't work on your most recent PC.

What if you simply need to file an amended return later this year? What if you lost your paper copy of your return and want to print another? What if you have trouble exporting your 2002 data to 2003 TurboTax, or maybe to a competing product without such an obnoxious copy protection mechanism?

There are lots of scenarios where you might need to use this software long after your initial filing. It's too bad Intuit is adopting the same kind of customer-hostile philosophy pioneered by our beloved MPAA & RIAA.

Re:But if you're audited ...

[jdeking1]

I keep my hard copies, so I keep the software that I used to prepare the hard copies installed. TurboTax is a relatively small program (if you don't let it install Quicken).

The plus side to leaving it installed is, you can drag in the previous year's tax return info. Security risk? Maybe, if you consider leaving that kind of thing on your machine a risk. I have the luxury of a third PC that I don't normally boot up or have tied into my network.

OK. Now that I've explained that, let's get to the "one PC vs. many" issue. At first, when I read this year's license agreement, I kind of liked it; silly me. My first impression was this: I can install it on the machine where I'm going to do the "real job" first, then I can put it on another so I can jerk around with it without mucking up my actual tax return. Just to get an idea of how I want to approach this year's return, you know? Not a bad idea, actually. It wasn't until I read this Slashdot article that I realized that a crash on my "real job" machine might cause a problem. Now, we're only talking about $39.95, against a couple thou I'm getting back (well, the ex is getting it; I won't see it, that's another story) but it does seem like I might have some recourse through Customer Service at Intuit. Forty bucks is not a big deal to me, fortunately, but I'd rather not pay it if I don't have to. The point is that I would not just run down to CompUSA or Best Buy for a second copy (or a different program entirely) on the authority of a license agreement without first going up the chain of command at Intuit.

By the way, the impression I'm getting from some of the earlier posts is that people think you can't run TurboTax after the year it's designed for. I haven't had that problem, but I can only speak for myself.

Jay

No more Intuit Software for me

[Krieger]

It's rather sad. I used to buy the complete Quicken Deluxe and Turbotax Deluxe bundle each year, because Intuit made a good product and it was easy to use. Then in 2001 Quicken Deluxe started requiring a Quicken.com to logon to download stock prices, which you could accomplish with previous versions without a Quicken.com account. So I quit buying Quicken. Now they have product activation on Turbotax. Now I won't buy Quicken.

Product Activation is forced obsolesence. At some point they can quit activating the software, at which point you can no longer re-install said software. This is especially important with tax software due to the IRS 7 year audit period. So if in three years Intuit decides that it no longer needs to allow you to activate the software again so that you can... you know *print* your tax forms again... you're screwed and by Intuit and the IRS.

For those that love to break out their software is licensed arguments. Software is a product, just like many others. The right to re-use, re-install the software and use it as you see fit is a legal right. The fact that everyone buys these arguments simply because there is a *non-negotiable* EULA at installation, is proof that sufficient marketing can *prove* to people that they don't have fair-use and first sale rights.

But I digress, product activation is a bad thing... and until Intuit changes its business pratices it has lost my business, which BTW it previously had *every single* year for at least two of their products.

TaxAct.com

[JeffVolc]

I used to use Personal Tax Edge... which Turbo Tax bought up. They gave me a discount to use Turbo Tax and I did. I didn't like it at all compared to Personal Tax Edge. The next year I did some searching and found TaxAct.com. It was created by former Personal Tax Edge staff. I used the free federal that year and did the state by hand. The next year (and the last few since) I have been buying the TaxAct Deluxe (fed and state with one fed electronic submission) for $19.99.

I've been very happy with it and since it imports my data from the previous year it only takes about 30 min to do both fed and state.

Jeff

I used to be scared of the IRS...

[Sanity]

...until I got an unexpected check for $10,000 from them after filing my last tax return - along with a nice note explaining where my CPA fucked up! Now they are my favorite government TLA!

I have a better solution!

[moncyb]

Don't earn any money! No income, no taxes! No taxes, no tax forms! };-)

Doesn't work on Virtual PC

[dpbsmith]

There's been some discussion about this in MacFixit.

"Due to a lack of functionality in native Mac Intuit products, several users have purchased the Windows release, and now find themselves unable to complete 2002 tax forms."

Of course, TurboTax always worked fine with Virtual PC until this year. Of course, Intuit gave users no advance warning. Scott Gulbransen of Intuit is quoted as saying "It's not that we don't trust our customers." He then immediately contradicts that by saying "Still, we need to protect our business." He then contradicts THAT by observing "Also, our Mac products do not have product activation... only Windows."

Reminds me of the bad old days of copy protection when users of any computer configuration that was even slightly out of the mainstream would find that copy-protected diskettes wouldn't read properly...

Re:Doesn't work on Virtual PC

[base3]

Interesting. Could this the first instance of software intentionally disabling running under VirtualPC, VMware, or other virtual/emulated environment for digital restrctions purposes?

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[anthony_dipierro]

Depends. The poster wasn't clear on whether or not he intended to eliminate the regressive FICA tax.

Shouldnt that be

[Unknown Poltroon]

the irs returned 320 that they werent entitled to?
Lets remember, its YOUR money THEY are taking.

Re:Shouldnt that be

[sinnergy]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. I swear, some people...

Re:Shouldnt that be

[Danse]

Calm down Beavis. It's quite possible to love your country even if you don't like the fact that you pay more taxes than necessary because of some of the utterly fucking stupid ways that money gets spent. The founding fathers didn't want to pay more taxes than necessary and wanted to keep the government small too. Were they unpatriotic? Would you have wanted kick their asses out of the country too?

Re:Shouldnt that be

[StevenMaurer]

Actually, Butthead, no one likes to pay more taxes than necessary. It's just that, thanks to American plutocratic propaganda, the majority of Americans have a vastly inflated idea of the percentage of waste in U.S. government. It centers around 25%. They also don't want to cut defense, social security and medicare, and veterans benefits. Yet combined with interest on the debt, these all add up to more than 80% of the US government outlays.

Do the math.

Also, despite your fallacious assertions, the founding fathers were hardly a group of politicans who all saw eye to eye. The Constitution was a document forged of numerous compromises, and it is clear from reading the history, they had different interpretations of what its language meant even as it was being written. Certainly, the actual policies behind the GOP slogan of "keeping government small" (e.g. shifting the tax burden from the rich to the middle class and poor), is not something the majority would likely have supported.

Finally, I never said I wanted to kick anyone's "asses of the country". I only said if you hate the U.S. so much, including its elected government, you do have the option to leave. That isn't flamebait. It's fact.

Re:More importantly....

[Qrlx]

Maybe you haven't noticed but the trend over the 20th century was towards a more regressive tax system. For example, the tax cuts that Bush came up with two years ago do much more for the rich than the poor. The lowest tax rates were cut a half a percent, the highest by a few percent.

Another example is the social security tax. You can only pay about $65,000 into this in a year. So "little folks" making under $millions pay the same percentage of their salary to SSI. But if you are making $millions, you pay a lesser percent because if you were taxed at the same rate as the common prole, you would pay way more than your $65,000. So you pay less taxes when you're rich. The result of this ceiling on pay-in to SSI, coupled with increasing salaries for top execs, is that about 35% of the wages paid in this country doesn't have any SSI deductions. 20 years ago that number was only about 20%. So the treasury is running out of funds because the rich aren't paying as much as the poor.

Adding insult to injury, when you pull the rip-cord on your golden parachute and collect your $millions in bonuses and options (i.e. retire) you can start collecting social security even though you have absolutely no need for the money. I think Reagan made that change.

No loop-holes no-deductions is not going to work because there are lobbyists and special interest groups who actively get the loopholes their clients pay them to get.

Soon, though, the Federal Government won't have any money, since we have all these tax breaks for the wealthy. My belief is that then we will have to sell off public lands (incl. mineral and timber rights, water rights, etc.) and privatize public services in order to balance the budget. And guess who's going to benefit from that? It's the same people who benefitted from the regressive tax system in the first place!

Nice to see the system working!

Who cares...

[mekkab]

actually, that subj line is a bit harsh.

I think its important to document such gross misjudgements, but they should be expected. Slashdot sucks. I mean, its great and all, but it sucks.

I don't come here for journalistic integrity (however I have no idea where I would go to find such an elusive beast, it seems to have gone extinct) I come here for poor spelling, knee jerk responses (which the initial comment was), bad attempts to cover them up (which you are pointing out), duplicate articles and first posts.

Re:Who cares...

[Dynedain]

I wasn't pointing out the coverup....I was one of the first responses, the coverup is from Michael reading my comment.

Maybe the subject was a bit harsh, but he accused the PR rep of lying, so....

And then to go and change his snide editor's comment without making a note of it....well thats pretty misleading as well.

Re:Intuit's Crappy Rebate policy LIKE ALL OTHERS

[iggymanz]

oh come on now, MOST rebates (if not ALL) have a time limit, usually 30 days.......

Spyware

[The Bungi]

Here's a nice overview of spyware. Point your non-techie friends/co-workers/family/pets to articles like this one so they "get" what spyware is and what it's not, and explain to them why they should avoid it.

Gator for example claims millions of "satisfied customers" - in my experience they have millions of victims who don't know how the crap got into their computers in the first place and no clue as to how to remove it. But I guess that's a valid "installed base".

As for C-Dilla, I don't think it's spyware (not in the classic definition anyway), but regardless of that TurboTax is no longer welcome on my computer, and I happen to be a 5 year satisfied user. There's absolutely no fucking way I'm going to live with a resident executable living in my system hooking processes to see if they are "protected". Intuit can smooch my bootay. I'm going with TaxCut for 2002.

I hope the company rents a clue from this, and I hope their sales fall through the basement and they fix it for 2003. If they do, I'll buy it again.

*sigh*

[cgreuter]

Remember the 80's? Remember how all those software companies used to copy-protect their code? And how that managed to piss off their customers, so they'd switch to unprotected competing software? And how those companies went belly-up as a result?

Well, it's time for some 80's nostalgia.

--Chris ...Now, where'd I leave that Big Country CD?..

Re:More importantly....

[Zwack]

Taxation should be based upon ONE SINGLE CRITERIA. Citizenship.

Cool... I agree. I'm not a citizen, I shouldn't have to pay for a government that makes it harder for me to live here, doesn't care what I think, and threatens to throw me in gaol without telling me why, or anyone else where I've gone.

The question from Mr. Federal Taxman should be, "Are you a citizen? Well then, you owe this much of what you earned this year. Non-Citizen you say? Well then, you owe this much more!"

Oh, you mean that non citizens should be discouraged from coming to the US. Never mind that we may bring valuable skills with us, that we are not allowed to sponge off of welfare, that we may be here for reasons other than "America is the best country in the whole wide world." In my case it was easier for me to move to be with my wife than for her to uproot her three children by her previous marriage.

So, no. This is not a fair or sensible tax reform.

However, the way that US taxes work is not sensible. In the UK you pay your taxes based on how much you earn. If you earn a certain amount you pay, say 27% on that. If you earn more than that amount you pay 27% on the amount up to that level, and then maybe 40% on everything over it.

Unlike the US system it means that you should always accept a pay rise. The American system means that if you are just below the threshold you need to make sure your next raise jumps you far enough over the threshold to make sure you actually take more money home.

This is a stupid scheme. It doesn't even need to be a flat rate tax (as some people are proposing) but if it is... You get your first $10,000 without being taxed, then everything between $10,000 and $50,000 gets taxed at 15%, everything between $50,000 and $100,000 gets taxed at 20% and everything over $100,000 gets taxed at 35% then it is fair, everyone pays reasonable taxes, and it is easy to understand.

Then again, Bureaucracy rules over here.

Z.

It's not just activation. It contains spyware.

[Texodore]

Supposedly, TurboTax now contains C-DILLA, which is spyware. If you search around the net, such as the aforemention fatwallet forum or amazon reviews, there are reports that CD burners don't work as well as they used to. You can't just delete the C-DILLA directory - it gets recreated or will hose your system. Installing TurboTax doesn't warn you it will be installed And uninstalling TurboTax doesn't remove it.

Yeah, the activation is annoying, and I would live with that. But I'm not getting TurboTax for this reason.

From the article:

Customers are also complaining about Safecast, the Macrovision security software Intuit uses to verify activation numbers. Reports have surfaced in discussion groups and some news sites classifying Safecast--also known as C-Dilla for the company that provided the technology to Macrovision--as "spyware," programs surreptitiously installed on a PC that track and report how the PC is used. Spyware programs such as Gator and Brilliant Digital have prompted growing concern among PC users.

from the article

[stinky wizzleteats]

"We've heard from people who installed TurboTax right away and then got a new PC for Christmas. For most people, they can reactivate the product without even contacting us."

So these people who had no problems called you up out of the clear blue to tell you it worked?

My experience says Intuit dropped the ball.

[hklingon]

I am a college student and part time computer consultant. We all know how that goes. The thing is, I've helped many clients upgrade their QuickBooks, Quicken and other Intuit products over the past several months. Let me relate to you only one of them:

Client has Quickbooks 6.0. It must be about 4 years old, or so. It is cumbersome and annoying to update the Tax table/rate codes. They use it for payroll, accounts recievable, accounts payable. Though it is a family business, it is broken into several files for manage-ability. (Legally) They have several companies set up-- and some companies are seasonal. (e.g. Yard work). From what I understand, there are federal and state tax advantages, if you have several small companies that work together. Anyway, there are about 3 employees that manage the books for 15 or so company files.

Trouble: When we upgraded from QB6.0 to QB2003, the "upgrade" did not count QB6.0 as valid. We were on hold for over 90 minutes, and finally got through to a rep, that told us we had to fax them a recipt for the QB2003 as well as a recipt for the QB6.0 from 4 years ago. (We had QB6.0 serial numbers, correspondence, etc, no good. The client had been a quicken gold support (or whatever) member for the past 4 years, up until about 6 months prior to the upgrade. They could find no trace of us in the system, and only a recipt for QB6.0 would do. They claimed they couldn't find us even though they'd mailed tax table updates a few months prior as well as a "you must upgrade to QB2002 right now because we no longer support 6.0" -- with QB2003 due out soon we decided to wait the 4 (or so) months to get the newest version. They were told QB6.0 would count for the QB2003 upgrade when they explicitly asked (at my instruction). Anyway, about 4 days later they were able to activate qb2003 with a replacement keycode, but only after faxing them both the recipts, cover of the manual and serial numbers. Did I mention we bought directly from the intuit website? As if that wasn't enough, a few days later they went to do payroll. It wouldn't let them until it went online and updated-- which it could not do because it could not verify subscription status. When done manually, after being on hold for 108 minutes, the rep said it was good for only one company file. My client would have to pay per-company. I think the "accountant edition" might side step this somehow, but it was difficult getting straight answers. We chatted with a rep on the website as well as phoned in months prior and went over the situation in detail. We ordered what they recommended. We've also discovered some features they had in QB6.0, though rudimentary, are pay-for in QB2003. It has been an extremely painful upgrade.

Though this client only had 4 QB computers, this was probably the most painful upgrade ever. The other experiences I've had with intuit proably aren't this bad, but they're not exactly great either.

Re:My experience says Intuit dropped the ball.

[will_die]

This is about right, go to www.infoworld.com and they ran a bunch of stories similar to yours and worse.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[ChaosDiscord]

If only we went to a flat tax.

The flat tax is probably a mistake, and won't fix the core problem. You do hit the nail on the head when you list a very small list of deductions, then say "No other deductions." If you have to add up all of your income, looking up your taxes on a table isn't much harder than multiplying by 18% (or whatever the flat tax is set to). Heck, it's easier, since you just look up an entry in a table, you don't even need to do the multiplication or drag out a calculator. The nightmare is in tracking down exemptions, deductions, and other fiddly little bits to try and save move.

Arguing for a flat tax as a way to simplify things is silly. It's all the worse when you consider the damage that a flat tax would do. A flat tax is inherently regressive. If I'm living check to check, any taxes put me in serious financial danger. But if I'm well off, I can bear higher taxes while maintaining my standard of living and my long term savings. While I'm not wealthy, I certainly pay more than 18% right now. I don't mind. I can afford it and still live comfortably and put away money for retirement. Any of the flat tax proposals will decrease my tax burden. Where is the money going to come from? People less well off than me? That doesn't seem fair. Perhaps you'll argue that it will actually increase taxes on the more wealthy who currently enjoy large deductions and exemptions. If that's the case, you'll need to remove those deductions if you stick with the progressive tax system or move to a flat tax.

I'm sure that makes all the difference...

[Kjella]

No, you can install on another machine, you just can't print or file your return from that machine. ...for the people whose original PC has been stolen/FUBARed. (FUBAR = Fucked up beyond all repair).

Kjella

Re:I'm sure that makes all the difference...

[qengho]

FUBAR = Fucked up beyond all repair

I always heard it meant "beyond all recognition".

Your reaction means it is overhyped

[caldaan]

Intuit spokesman Scott Gulbransen said the vast majority of concerns are based on misunderstandings about Intuit's use of product activation. Unlike the product activation process that Microsoft uses for its Windows XP operating system, Intuit's software doesn't record any information about the PC that TurboTax is installed on.

The activation key is generated from the product key, if you loose the activation key then there becomes a problem. Printing, filing all of that is part of the activation process if you activate it you can do anything you want, and as long as you keep the activation key around your safe

Now this is of course a problem and an inconvience to the user and sucks, but its not as big as everyone is making it.

Re:More importantly....

[GeneralEmergency]

Oh, you mean that non citizens should be discouraged from coming to the US.

Quite to the contrary, the difference in the two rates should be large enough to encourage immigration and naturalization but small enough not to be harshly punitive. Somewhere between 2 and 5 percent I would imagine.

Re:More importantly....

[delphin42]

However, the way that US taxes work is not sensible. In the UK you pay your taxes based on how much you earn. If you earn a certain amount you pay, say 27% on that. If you earn more than that amount you pay 27% on the amount up to that level, and then maybe 40% on everything over it.

Unlike the US system it means that you should always accept a pay rise. The American system means that if you are just below the threshold you need to make sure your next raise jumps you far enough over the threshold to make sure you actually take more money home.

It works the SAME WAY in the US. I don't know where you are getting your info, but we have the same system here. You get taxed at 10% for the first $15,000, 15% for next $whatever, 27% for the next $whatever, etc. When you get a raise, you will make more money after taxes. The situation you are talking about doesn't exist here.

Perfect opportunity for Linux ...

[HealYourChurchWebSit]

If I were H&Rj, I'd get a Linux version of TaxCut out the door ASAP. Think about it. Many of us who are going to change are the same types who are/want to switch to Open Office and Linux because of similar tactics employed by Microsoft and ther XP O/S. It seem to me that there would be a very willing market that would be very difficult for TurboTax to pursue unless it drops it's own activation schems.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[Patrick]

some would benefit, some would not

Charities most surely would not, if you eliminate them as a source of individual and business deductions.

33% of gross income, -15% of non-executive payroll, -100% business expenses, -100% operating costs

The devil is, as they say, in the details. What does and doesn't qualify as a "business expense" or an "operating cost" is where much of the complexity in the tax code is hidden today. Is a $10 paperweight deductable? What about a $10,000 paperweight? Company cars? Is a self-employed person taxed at 18% or 33%? Can he deduct his home office?

A flat tax simplifies the wrong thing: the multiplication step. It leaves most of the complexity about what's deductable, deferrable, and so on. Its backers (Steve Forbes et al.) don't care at all about simplicity; it's a ruse to pass a tax that shifts most of the tax burden to the lower and middle classes.

As far as simplifying my tax preparation, I'd much rather pay $20/yr for tax software than pay extra $ thousands per year so that Steve Forbes gets a lower tax rate.

Re:don't go with H&R Block

[anthony_dipierro]

That said, I know because I asked that the preparers have to go through a several week course, and pass a final test with at least 80-85% competency or they wash out of the program.

I think my experience trumps yours here. I took the H&R Block course. There were quite a few incompetent people taking it with me. And not a single one of them failed.

Some are also trained as Financial Advisors or Loan Advisors for Block subsidiaries, so they can sometimes point out methods of saving additional tax $ based on good investments, mortgage refinancing, etc..

And the vast majority aren't, and are specifically informed that they "are not auditors" and therefore are not supposed to advise their clients on any tax issues. They are merely supposed to ask the proper questions (which appear on their computer screen) and type them into the computer.

As for their offer to check past returns, you should realize that the people doing that checking essentially aren't getting paid by H&R Block to do it. See there is a minimal hourly salary, but it is drawn against a commission structure. All but the most incompetent employees earn more off commissions, so they aren't paid anything when there aren't any customers, so Block gives them some busy work during the slow hours checking other people's returns.

Obviously if you double check a lot of returns, you're going to come up with a lot of mistakes. I've come up with thousand dollar mistakes checking H&R Block returns from previous years, so it's not like H&R Block is special there.

Those who can do. Those who can't work for H&R Block.

Main thing for me as a small consulting company owner is that you know you're not dealing with an Enron-esque company -- their ethics and credibility are top notch.

Ha! H&R Block has been sued over and over again by the IRS for ripping off their customers. And that's just things that the company itself was responsible for. The employees pull even bigger scams.

You forgot

[JediTrainer]

Charitable donations? What would you do about that? Keep them? Lose them?

What about companies making charitable donations? Note that companies like MS enjoy making 'donations' of software (essentially costing them nothing but the media it's on), but claiming retail cost on their returns. Yet other companies legitimately give their product away (at some cost) to charitable organizations.

How can we quantify that?

Incidentally, if you have complaints about taxes, take a look at Canada. We're feeling the pain. Higher rates, plus we don't get to claim mortgage interest as a deduction. Nadda. Fortunately we can put away for our retirement in our RRSPs (up to a fixed percentage of your income, or max $13,500) and have that deducted by 100%. But mortgage? No deduction for that.

Re:You forgot

[fudgefactor7]

"Charitable donations? What would you do about that? Keep them? Lose them?"

I forgot charities (stupid me).

Charitable deductions would be for cash or cash equiv. only. This way companies with really deep pockets (like Microsoft) won't "donate" copies of software, but rather give the money that the charities actually need. Give (for instance) $100 to someone and they can use it as they need at the time (whatever the pressing need is), but give them a $100 copy of Windows and that's all they have--plus they still have the problem that wasn't alleviated with the "donation."

Donations should be cash, it's the only way to really help without abusing the system.

Just save me a step....

[telstar]

...if the IRS knows how much I owe them, or how much they owe me, why don't they just send me a bill or a check. I mean, not that I really entirely trust them to send me a bill or a check ... but you've got to figure ... if they're really checking things ... and you file an amount that's not close to what they expect, they're going to send their agents after you. Save me the time ... send me a bill.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[fudgefactor7]

The working poor are already paying about that much (ie: 18%). As it now stands, nearly 40% of my gross pay is gone before I even get the check. Those taxes would be lower for me (and everyone in the same boat as me), the rich would pay probably more taxes as there wouldn't be any more loopholes, the really poor (anyone under $10K/yr) wouldn't pay a cent. I lived on ~$10K/yr. It can be done, just not easily. And as everyone ought to know, education is the best hedge against inflation and poverty, that why 100% of tuition should be deductable (and that's why I mentioned it). People get educated, pay less taxes while doing so, improve their "station in life," and make more money at a better job, this completes the cycle.

Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[Picass0]

You could take all of the confusion out of taxes (and get rid of the loopholes) by enacting a Flat Tax.

Everyone pays n%. Just pick a number, and Everyone is equal. Everyone.

At the end of the year, you just send the IRS your n%. There would be no 100,000 pages of tax law. No need for it. Tax law would fit on a single page.

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[SuiteSisterMary]

I've always believed that this is the only fair way to do it; a flat tax with ZERO exemptions, and there you go.

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[Yunzil]

I've always believed that this is the only fair way to do it; a flat tax with ZERO exemptions, and there you go.

Except that it's not fair. :)

Let's assume 20% flat tax after the first $10,000, no exemptions.

Person A:
---------
Income: $20,000
Tax: $2,000
Net: $18,000

Person B:
---------
Income: $100,000
Tax: $18,000
Net: $82,000

Now: who is going to feel that 18% more? To person making $20k, that loss of $2k might be more than they can bear. To the person making $100k, the loss of $18k means they have to wait a couple years to buy your beamer. :)

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[Radical Rad]

The wealthy who currently pay a tiny percentage in taxes (or nothing, remember Leona Helmsley's quote 'Only little people pay taxes') would never let this happen. If it did miraculously happen there would be loopholes somewhere and us little people would only find out about them years later by which time even more loopholes would be snuck through Congress.

Bush says he wants to do away with Capital gains tax so there could be a flat income tax but someone with a million dollars invested could make plenty from growth stocks and pay zero. And then there are literally thousands of tax breaks to businesses to "encourage investment". The special interests that benefit from them would never ever let them be taken away. The tax preparation industry would be killed off by a flat tax, so it would also fight tooth and nail against a flat tax.

Getting to a truly fair flat-tax would be a chicken or egg problem. It could only be done if the whole system evolves toward it over a period of decades. I'm not against it. I'm just looking at it from a practical standpoint.

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[Picass0]

The person making 18,000 is likely getting at least $2k in government assistance to offset the tax burden, so it will even out.

Also, saying the person making 100k is going to waste money on a BMW is steriotypical and tells me you haven't really considered how a person makes 100k. Perhaps they person with the 100k is the employer of the person who makes the 20k. By making the tax burden harder for the "rich", the first man may need to lay off the second. Then he won't even have 20k.

What if the person who makes 100k is able to invest his tax dividend back into the business? To cut costs that are passed onto the consumer? To make his business more competitive? To hire another employee?

Or, you could leave the current tax system in place, and the man with 100k hires a personal investor who shows him how to shelter his entire income, while the man who makes 18k cannot afford to move his money into the same shelters. Poor man pays, rich man doesn't.

No, what is fair is if everyone pays the same. No loopholes.

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax.

[Radical Rad]

There was very little useful information in the article you cited. Much was hidden by using phrases like 'had incomes above' and 'earned, on average, less than'. It was obviously from a very conservative paper and designed to prevent anyone from reverse calculating the important ratios.

What would be important would be the ratio of total compensation for the 45% of middle class working stiffs who pay almost as large an amount of total federal taxes compared to the total compensation of the 5% highest compensated.

In other words, if the 6.3 million people together collected 5.4 Trillion in total compensation and paid 54% of the taxes, but the 58 million people in the middle class who paid 42% of the taxes only earned 1.8 Trillion dollars collectively, then it would be obvious that those "middles" who earn more than $26,415 but less than $120,846 a year pay a much higher share.

Don't you believe that those who benefit most from this great society we live in should cover their share of its upkeep?

Re:macrovision safecast

[hedley]

Safecast2 is even more Draconian. You can't even use VMware with it. It indicates you are running the software with a debugger. How they find that VMware is a debugger I have yet to undestand. There are some special ports that VMware uses to ID itself, they could use this but more likely there is something obscure wrt some ring0/ring3 instruction behaviour.

Does TTax use the original Safecast or.... Safecast2?

Hedley

PS: c_dilla was a small UK security company that got swallowed up by Macrovision.

Reality check

[geekoid]

Lets say you have 2 families, 1 makes 10,000 a year, and another makes 20,000 a year.

after taxes the guy who makes 100,000 has 83,800 dollars.(taxed on 90,000 since the first 10,000 is tax free.)

the guy who make 20,000 has 18,200.

The family that makes 20,000 will feel the impact of that tax, far more then the family with 100,000.

Believe me, I would love to only pay 18%, but the ramification will be pretty great.

Unbeliveable!

[Thud457]

The fact that the average citizen needs to hire a guru or buy some fancy software every year in order to determine their responsibility to society is a TRAVESTY.

Let the corps have their 8,000 page tax code, with their carefully lobbied for loopholes -- they can afford to hire professional accountants. And lobbiests. And lawyers.

Simplfy the tax code for normal, flesh-and-blood, breathing, REAL PERSONS.

Intuit's activation scheme is a VERY serious issue

[Futurepower(R)]

Intuit's activation scheme for TurboTax is a VERY serious issue. It means that you cannot use the software to work with your return next year if next year you have another computer.

TurboTax software is NEVER backward compatible. That means that you have to re-install last year's software to look at last year's tax return.

Does anyone know if TaxCut has an activation scheme? I saw TaxCut Platinum on sale yesterday at Office Depot for $29.95.

I've used TurboTax for as long as it has been available, but not this year, and not ever again. I will never buy any Intuit software now that the company has been shown to be adversarial to its customers.

from the FAQ

[stinky wizzleteats]

How does this benefit me?
With product activation, Intuit can provide faster, more efficient support for TurboTax customers. Without technology to ensure compliance with our License Agreement, TurboTax customers who legitimately purchase the product wait longer for support because of increased contacts from users seeking support for unlicensed software.

eh? Thousands of users calling support to deal with product activation issues are going to make it easier for me to get support?

Nice sound bite; no practical benefit.

[startled]

"If only we went to a flat tax."

Having a progressive income tax adds little if any complexity to paying your taxes. Let's look at the e-file interface for the two solutions. First, your regressive flat tax:

"How much did you make last year?"
Input: $40,000
"Okay, you pay 18% in taxes. That's $7,200. Have a nice day!"

or for someone else:

"How much did you make last year?"
Input: $20,000
"Okay, you pay 18% in taxes. That's $3,600. Have a nice day!"

Okay, now a progressive graduated income tax:

"How much did you make last year?"
Input: $40,000
"Okay, you pay 18% in taxes. That's $7,200. Have a nice day!"

or for someone else:

"How much did you make last year?"
Input: $20,000
"Okay, you pay 5% in taxes. That's $1,000. Have a nice day!"

I don't see that one system is harder for your average filer to figure out than another. The complexity of the tax code makes no case for a flat tax-- it's just a nice name for politicians to throw around, while giving something to the rich.

The complexity of the tax code could be lessened by eliminating deductions for charitable donations, or removing the ridiculous complexity involved in investing (oh, shit, AMT! Hey, it's been a year and a half, is this capital gains or income?), or axing tax-deferred IRAs, or any number of other oddities in the tax code. There are hundreds of little things that make your life difficult when trying to properly pay your taxes-- and none of them would be fixed by switching to a flat tax.

Re:Nice sound bite; no practical benefit.

[tkrotchko]

That's not how it works.

Lets take you example.

$20,100.

For first $20K tax is $2000
For amount over 20K, tax is $12 (.12 * $100)
TOTAL TAX is $2012
Total Take-Home is 17,988

Your other total is correct.

You make a mistake that a lot of people make...that earning one dollar more pushes your entire salary into a new bracket. It doesn't. it only affects the amount above the bracket.

Don't believe me? Ask a CPA!

Re:Nice sound bite; no practical benefit.

[startled]

I believe you; in fact, I knew it, but forgot it (or conveniently left it out :) ) when doing my example. Yes, so unfortunately the little interface I made up couldn't spit out the percentage. It could tell you how much money it was going to take away just as easily, and then explain it with lots of confusing numbers, which-- come to think of it-- might be better. :P

I'm already screwed, but...

[darnellmc]

I purchased a while back and did not know. So I'm already stuck and unable to return my copy but the Cnet article mentions the following:

" In most cases, customers who need to reinstall TurboTax on a new PC or hard drive simply have to enter the original activation number they received, Gulbransen said.

"Product activation does not prevent people who want to upgrade their equipment or have to deal with a hard drive crash from changing their hardware," he said. "We've heard from people who installed TurboTax right away and then got a new PC for Christmas. For most people, they can reactivate the product without even contacting us."

The same will hold true in future years if a customer needs to fire up an older version of TurboTax, he said. "The bottom line is, if you hold on to your activation key and product key, and you aren't going to have a problem," Gulbransen said. "That's why we're suggesting that people keep those numbers with the product disc in the same place they keep a copy of their printed tax return from that year." "

Seems that I should be able to reinstall years later even if Intuit is out of business if I still have my activation code handy.

Re:Paper and Pencil and Phone

[monkeydo]

I know my taxes are right, I know where and what and why I'm paying what I am paying.
Contrary to popular belief the system isn't that nonsensical, and the instruction booklets give you a nice step by step explanation of EVERYTHING.

If that is what makes you comfortable, great. You should know, however, that the instructions are based on the IRS's interpretation of the tax code, which is rarely the interpretation most favorable to the taxpayer. To a certain extent the software will do a better job of loking out for you, but because it intended for a wide audience it must toe the line fairly well. To get the most out of the tax code you really need to go to a person who understands the tax code and your particular situation.

The reality of paying taxes is that how much you pay is really dependant on your willingness to take risks. I'm not talking about breaking the law, but there are a lot of "defensable" ways to save money that the IRS wouldn't tell you about.

For people who just don't see the value in hiring someone to do something they can do themselves, the cost to use the software is really miniscule compare to the potential cost of royally screwing up.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[ChaosDiscord]

Get a clue the really rich don't pay taxes unless they want too.

I certainly agree than too many extremely wealthy people avoid paying fair shares of the tax burden. But simply replacing the progressive tax with a flat tax won't fix the problem. The problem is with the many, many exceptions, deductions, and special cases in our tax code. Yes, declaring, "the tax rate is 18%, no exceptions" will close those special cases, but so will "the tax rate is 10% on income below $6,000, 15% to $27,950, $25% to 67,700, 30% to $141,250, 35% to $307,050, and 38.6% beyond that, no exceptions." Sure, it's a tiny bit complex. But it's still simple and easy to enforce. There are no loopholes to escape through. The problems occur because we have books and books of laws giving weird special case exceptions. Yes, those loopholes can close with the flat tax, but we can close those loopholes while maintaining a progressive tax.

I agree that the system is too complex and needs to be pared down, but you can strip the system to a trivial to understand and enforce policy without moving to a flat tax.

A graduated tax system is making people poor or live check to check, not curing it. A flat tax would save many people from this fate. It would be simple and easy to predict. Predictability brings some comfort and allows us better control.

You offer a confusing argument for why a flat tax will benefit someone living check to check. Currently someone living on a restricted income will pay 10% to 15% of their income, max. By any math, a 17% or 18% flat tax will take more money from them, money they can't really afford to lose. Sure it's might be a little easier for them to estimate how much money they'll have, but ultimately they'll have less. How is that a win? How can having less money help someone cease to be poor?

I will agree that regional cost of living dramatically complicates the situation. But moving to a flat tax doesn't fix the problem. If the cost of living in insane somewhere having a flat tax

I can only assume that you work as a tax accountant or something in that area.

Ouch. I have a respectable job, thank you. (Well, as respectible as any software engineer... :-) I loathe our current tax system. It's too complex. I fear doing my own taxes each year because of the complexity. No one should have a job that exists simply to help deal with the complexities of government. If such a job appears (like an individual tax preparer), it means that the system is broken. But the one thing I don't worry about is the simple progressive taxation that is at the core of the system. Total up my income, look it up in a table, and viola, my tax total.

Macintosh exempt?

[MacAndrew]

FWIW, from omission from the company's FAQ, it appears only Windows versions are affected?

Nice to be trailing behind on some "features"... :)

Intuit tests in the Canadian market

[Malc]

Oh now you tell me! My wife installed it on our crappy old P133 last year, and a month later I wanted to work on our taxes on my high end desktop. I compromised and did it via pcAnywhere. I see Quicken XG has gone the same way (and they've removed the Canadian option from Quicken 2003. I won't be upgrading for this reason, plus I also suspect it will require an annual fee to fully utilise. I will stick it out with what I have until they cut off support, then see where products like GNU Cash stand. They've lost customers with this action.

Re:Intuit's activation scheme is a VERY serious is

[Amazing Quantum Man]

Does anyone know if TaxCut has an activation scheme? I saw TaxCut Platinum on sale yesterday at Office Depot for $29.95.

If you read the article, you'd see that it doesn't. For $29.95, I'd snag it. Accordign to the article, the Platinum edition is "single owner/multiple computer" licensed. I.e. You can install it on multiple computers you own. So grab it now.

Re:More importantly.... (wrong)

[someone247356]

Taxation should be simpler... but not so simple as to be moronic.

Ideal taxes (and I'm limiting myself to Federal Income taxes here);

Total all of your income (work, investments, savings, gifts, winnings, everything)

Subtract a minimum living amount. Say $20,000 USD (If you don't make this much stop, you don't make enough to pay taxes)

Count up your dependents (children, elderly parents, etc. You don't want to have to support them with Welfare now do you?) multiply that by a dependant stipend. How much more it takes to minimally care for someone else, say $10,000.

Subtract that from your total income. (See above about counting ALL of your sources of income) If the result is less than $0.00, you don't pay taxes.

For every dollar above that amount everyone pays a flat tax, say 10%.

Everyone, is assured a minimum amount to live on, families and caring for your relatives is encouraged. It wouldn't be fair to penalize people who have children to support even though they don't provide any income.

The best part, you can file your income taxes on a postcard.

Not as repressive as a flat tax, not as complicated as a progressive tax, and definitely not a regressive tax, such as our current system actually is in practice....

"60-day, Money-Back Guarantee"? Yeah, right

[Brett Glass]

Just took a look at my copy of TurboTax, which I have decided to return due to the copy protection mentioned in this article. And, guess what? There's no contact information on the box.... Not even a phone number. Nor any information about where to return the product. (Most stores won't take back software.)

So, I called Intuit's "Customer Service" line, at 800-446-8848. Unfortunately, recordings at this number simply refer all questions to the Web site, which likewise has no information on how to return the product under the "guarantee." This is a bit reminiscent of the problems experienced by those seeking promised refunds for Windows. So much for the guarantee written clearly on the box. Again, Intuit is starting to seem an awful lot like Microsoft.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[StevenMaurer]

Most of that 40% you pay isn't Income Tax. It's unemployment insurance, social security, and state sales taxes. They wouldn't go away under a flat tax, so your tax bill would get significantly higher.

The reason you hear so much whining about income tax, and little about the rest, is that most other forms of tax are regressive - meaning the more money you make, the less as a percentage you pay. For example, your social security taxes are locked at a maximum of around 20,000. A lot for you, but for a multimillionaire owner of a media cartel, it's nothing - hence you hear very little complaining about it in the news.

They did simplify- it's the 1040EZ

[mekkab]

There is- it's called the 1040EZ.

And really, the 1040 with add'l schedules isn't that hard.

Its when you buy a house and rent it back to the original owners for a few months that there are wierd tax implications. Also if you live in a house less than 2 calendar years out of 5 that you have to realize capital gains tax (however if you only do it once with less gain than 500,000 then its okay)

So its only when you get tricky that you need experts.

Re:More importantly....

[tweek]

And you do realize that the people who got the most back from the tax cuts were the people THAT ACTUALLY PAID TAXES?

Christ, the low income people who got checks back never actually paid taxes. Explain that to me!

This progressive tax bullshit is one step closer that America takes to moving from a Federal Republic to a Socialist state.

You want to talk about immoral taxation? Let's talk about the death tax. You get taxed on your earnings all your life. Then when you go to leave something to your children, it gets taxed again!

How is that proper?

And fuck social security. If SS were run by an insurance company, it would be shut down in a heartbeat because it's nothing more than a ponzi scheme.

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[smack_attack]

His description is horribly flawed... A true flat tax will never touch personal income. It taxes goods and services at time of sale, a true flat tax.

Here's the REAL example of a flat tax at work (15%):

Joe ($20,000): Joe takes home all $20K, but he rents his home for $100 a month, his service tax would be $15/mo paid to his landlord. Joe has a cellphone and his bill is $40 a month, his service tax would be $6/mo.

Starting to get the idea? The idea of the deduction goes away, after all you do not pay taxes based on how long you have had something. If your company bought a copier at $10K and resold it for $2K in five years, it is obviously not a good investment item.

At the higher end of the scale, this tax is just as fair as at the lowest common denominator... because wealthy people tend to spend money on high ticket items and services (ditto for business expenses). What is being taxed is not the income, but the service or good AT THE TIME OF THE TRANSACTION.

Naturally this type of tax creates more year-round paperwork for IRS people because transactions occur all the time. It is also treated with disdain because anyone can get around it simply by not paying the tax or re-introducing bartering to our economic system. That would not be healthy for the IRS and government services (even though centuries of history proclaim that is is perfectly acceptable for economics).

more info on the FLAT TAX vs SALES TAX debate

Re:Paper and Pencil and Phone

[gpinzone]

My mom used to have the same experience. It wasn't until I started helping her enter the information that I discovered the problem. DO NO USE OVERRIDES! If something doesn't look correct, DON'T force a value in there yourself. Find out WHY the program is giving a different than expected result and fix THAT. For example, I found a checkbox got inadvertantly selected that made the program think she ran a business and caused a certain form to become active. It caused different values to be used in the internal calculations. It was only found by digging through the wizards and finding the mistake.

Re:Just give me a damn Flat Tax. YES! flattax.gov

[Brian Stretch]

Flattax.gov has the info. Yes, we definitely need to switch to this. It replaces the mortgage deduction with much higher personal and dependend deductions too, ending the tax discrimination against renters. That mortgage deduction artificially drives up real estate costs too (gotta maximize that deduction! Except you're paying the bank $3 to save $1 on your taxes... but real estate only appreciates in value, right? Right?). I wouldn't want to own a McMansion if this ever passes though :-).

If you multiboot -- beware!

[Whip]

I've been trying to post this "review" to Amazon for a couple of days, but there seems to be something wrong with their comment posting code. So here's MY experience with TurboTax 2002

[amazon posting starts here]
I won't reiterate many of the points made by other reviewers on amazon -- I'll just summarize the reviews as "good software, but the copy protection sucks".

I had the copy protection suck more than most. I dual boot WindowsXP and Linux, using the "GRUB" bootloader (which is currently used now by, among others, RedHat linux), and installing TurboTax 2002 made my entire computer unbootable! The activation code writes some information to the front of the harddrive (before the first partition), which overwrote my bootloader, which was already living there! (This may happen with other bootloaders as well... I've only tested with the one).

And fixing my system so it would boot again (by reinstalling the bootloader) produced a copy of TurboTax that a) thought it wasn't activated, and b) Thought that my productid had already been used "by another computer", so couldn't be re-activated.

Intuit did eventually give me another product ID that worked, after I spent several hours trying to explain the problem to tech support, and rebooting time and time again as the reps had me uninstall, reinstall, install in safe mode, install while standing on my head...

The software itself is OK (Though I still wish it could import from Quicken based on the "class" of the transactions), but I have the strong opinion that installing tax software should not render my computer unbootable!

Re:If you multiboot -- beware!

[M-G]

Since reading this story, I've been doing some thinking as well as some searching. Autodesk is apparently using C-dilla on their products now to handle licensing, so a lot of the information I came across was related to their products.

Interestingly, one of the things I found here:
http://autocad.cad.de/mfhdocs/autocadbasic/ autocad _2000i/cdilla_faq.pdf
says:

Don't do following actions when you have installed software locked products:
- Don't use boot managers which allow you to work with several primary hard disks
- Don't use tools like partition magic which can adjust your size of partition
- Don't move your C_DILLA folder to a other hard disk or other subdirectory
- Don't erase your C_DILLA directory manually.

Now, they don't give any indication that doing these things will prevent your system from booting, but it certainly appears that C-dilla at least uses certain boot sector info in creating the string it uses.

So even if C-dilla doesn't hose you, your use of common tools may cause the protected application to need activation again.

These sorts of hassles might be slightly more reasonable on expensive software from Autodesk (and may even be easier to deal with than hardware dongles). But to cause this kind of trouble for a $30 or less piece of software?

Thank you, Amazing Quantum Man.

[Futurepower(R)]

Thanks Amazing Quantum Man. You are, in fact, amazing. I was in a big hurry. My woman friend was asking me to be with her for some A. D. I quickly looked at all the comments, and couldn't see that the question was answered. You are right, I didn't read the article.

Re: C-Dilla

[The Bungi]

Any links as to how the thing works (from a tech standpoint)? I "heard" it hooks process creation in Windows and blocks attempts to launch "protected" executables but I'm not 100% sure of the underpinnings. Certainly that's difficult to pull off correctly if my experience with shell-level hooks is any indication.

MOD PARENT UP!

[Futurepower(R)]

MOD PARENT UP! Excellent explanation of the issues.

Then dont buy XP

[nurb432]

Same issue with that, or any future software from many companies.

Microsoft gracefully lets you install it a couple of times, but then good luck trying to get a new keycode out of them.

Or if its been a while .. i bet after 2 years, 'sorry we dont support that version, so we cannot give you a new code. '

It's very real to me.

[Artifex]

I used TurboTax last year, so I figured I'd use it again this year, and went and bought it (they mailed me a disc last month asking me to "renew," but they wanted more than I knew these January bundles would be). I want to go ahead and start pre-planning my return, and add stuff as 1099 forms come in the mail, etc. I figured that, like last year, I could just copy the new saved file off when I go to reformat and rebuild my comuter next month. Luckily, I read the disclaimer in the package, because I have to either put off reformatting or I have to put off installing TurboTax.

I can definitely say that next year, if they haven't stopped this stupid limitation, I'm switching back to TaxCut, which I used two years ago. I only switched over last year because the bundles (free-after-rebate Microsoft Money vs. free-after-rebate Quicken) seemed to be about the same, and I wanted to give Quicken a try.

(In fact, that reminds me, I will probably switch back next year, anyway, because this is the first year I actually had time to try Quicken, and it's one giant ad for other services, with "features" that don't seem to work well unless you subscribe to those services! Good lord, no wonder they "give it away" with rebates - who wants to pay for software with ads in it and that is less than it promises? I don't recall Microsoft Money being that bad?)

BZZZZZZZTTT WRONG, thanks for playing.

[geekoid]

"Unlike the US system it means that you should always accept a pay rise. The American system means that if you are just below the threshold you need to make sure your next raise jumps you far enough over the threshold to make sure you actually take more money home. "

You are TAXED per BRACKET. So you can never take home less from a raise, based on taxes. Read the damn tax book, hell just look at the chart.

so if you got over into a new bracket, that brackets tax is just on the amount you want over, NOT on you entire gross.

You right we should tax based on Citizenship, we should base a tax on stupidity. Either way, you'd still get taxed.

Re:BZZZZZZZTTT WRONG, thanks for playing.

[Zwack]

Well forgive me... Apparently the information I was given by several people was wrong. It just goes to show how complicated the american tax system really is.

I've looked at the Tax Chart, and at the Tax schedule, and I think the chart is a masterpiece. Given the choice I would rather pay taxes according to the schedule as the chart assumes that you are earning the exact top of that pay band.

You already have a tax based on stupidity, and it is very popular. It's called the lottery.

Despite being wrong on the specifics, I still believe that the American tax system is overly complicated and unnecessary. The British system puts the onus on the employer to deduct the correct amount of tax from that periods pay cheque and even if you are asked to fill in a tax return (you don't have to.) Usually it just confirms that you paid the correct amount of tax.

How progressive tax is calculated

[yerricde]

In your system a person who earns $67,700 takes home 50,775, while someone who earns $67,701(a single buck more) takes home $47,390.7. Oh, that seems fair. One lousy buck more and you lose $3,384.3.

In a progressive income tax system, a fellow doesn't lose money simply by going from one tax bracket to the next. Say you have a system with 10% on the first $20,000 and 20% on the rest. Somebody who earns $20,100 pays $2000 on the first $20,000 and $20 on the $100, for a total of $2020.

The flat income tax, as it is actually proposed, is actually quite progressive on the low end: x percent tax on everything earned above the poverty line. Say poverty in a given area is $10,000, and the flat tax is 20 percent. Then somebody who earns $40,000 pays nothing on the first $10,000 and 20 percent on the other $30,000, for a total tax of $6000, or a 15 percent effective tax.

Not acceptable...

[burnsy]

Intuit has crossed the line with this one.

C-DILLA, the license manager installed with TT, installs a Service on you NT/2000/XP box called C-DillaCdaC11BA. It also creates a hidden folders on your C: drive called C-Dilla. To me installing a service is not acceptable unless the program needs to be doing a continous task.

So this services sits there running all the time sucking up your CPU and using memory whether you are using TT or not. And here is the kicker, C-Dilla remains after uninstalling TT. Here is a good article on C-DILLA. C-Dilla! "Copy Protection or Spyware?"

Completely off-topic...

[ryanvm]

Well, the real crime here is that United States tax law is so fucked up that you've got to buy a goddamn software program (or a professional's services) to even pay your dues. That is the problem.

Re: C-Dilla

[The Bungi]

This is pretty much the best thing I could find.

Looks like it'll be an interesting read. Thanks.

Trollificus, who can only post twice every 24 hours.

I know, that sucks.

The way you "tell them"

[tkrotchko]

Don't buy the software.

The guys who run Intuit aren't stupid; they know they'll achieve a certain amount of dissatisfaction from some customers and lose some business, but they're betting the increase in revenue from a curtailment in copyright violations outweighs the loss of customer satisfaction and any subsequent loss of sales.

Buy something else, then write them a letter letting them know they lost a sale.

Intuit is smart enough to know that they may have 90% of the market this year, but they've got to sell you again every year. Its the nature of the market for this kind of software.

If they can't count on that annuity, they'll get the message.

Fight the Power

[GMontag]

Sounds like you might want to join in this protest and get even with the system.

Re:Fight the Power

[Qrlx]

See, here's the thing: I would rather pay more taxes and have more social services.

The thing that cheeses me off the most is: Look at what our tax dollars actually go to. Taxes basically pay for our government to create a society in which big corporations are fucking me up the * daily.

But wait, I'm not done: Western Civilization seems in danger of the point. Let me try to explain: We have amasssed incredible amounts of technology and raw power at our disposal over the centuries. We are so good at simply making shit that the major cost of just about anything you buy is the cost of getting it to you. Example: A good PC case costs as much as a good CPU because, while the CPU is probably about a bajillion man-hours ahead technology-wise, they both had to be loaded onto a ship and pushed across the ocean, adding lots to the price of the case but practically nothing to the CPU.

Now, All this wealth we "create" has the ability to create more wealth. So you get a kind of snowball effect. In order to keep the cycle spinning, you have to create more, faster, and cheaper. Which places some inappropriate constraints (and fails to place some needed constraints) on the system.

I think probably the best example of where the constraints are broken is that town in Arkansas or whever that Monsanto poisoned. In an effort to be more profitable, they deliberately violated the law, based on calculations that it would be more costly to comply with the law than to break it and pay the fines.

From a shareholder perspecitve, the only thing they did wrong was to get caught. But shouldn't someone who dumps poison into a river for years on end spend the rest of their life in jail?

Meanwhile, our President transmutes business leaders into government officials, a whole bunch from a little company called Enron that you may have heard about. Hmmm I wonder..Which is greater: the average Californian's rebate, or the amount they overpaid for electricity in 2001?

So no, I'm not very excited about a tax cut. Someone needs to shine a big light on America and get the fucking cockroaches off of her.

Re:Fight the Power

[Qrlx]

Well, we mostly agree. FDR's big government was definitely a mistake, though an understandable one considering the circumstances. I think the statistic is that when FDR came in to office, only about 25% of Americans had electricity in their homes. And that was only seventy years ago.

The FCC has obviously been subverted by media cartels.

The only detail that you seem to gloss over is that: Just because the economy is doing great, doesn't mean that Joe Average is any better off. Look at how CEO salaries have ballooned in the past two decades. Why hasn't that extra wealth been passed on to the workers? (And no, I'm not saying that the Government should enforce that. But whatever happened to Henry Ford's idealism?0

Large corporations skim the cream of the rest of the world and issue them HI-B visas, then move manufacturing jobs to Mexico. That is good for the economy, but it is not good for America. Too much I think we use the health of the economy as the sole measure of success. (Which gets back to my original point about how the endless cycle of industry isn't the only reason God (who I don't believe in) gave us thumbs.)

New housing starts, for example. Every time I hear that statistic, my stomach turns. The suburbs are a social and logistics nightmare -- designed in such a way as to necessitate ownership of an expensive, polluting car. But where I live, in the city, I can walk to work and ride my bike most places I want to go.

But there's more money to be made by building houses in the suburbs and making people buy cars than expanding cities. Since the almighty dollar rules, we go with the one that yields a higher initial return.

Yeah, we could go on about this for hours :)

Re:The US tax code could be fixed...

[DmitriA]

No, that's because social security and medicare aren't really taxes - they are government-run insurance programs (that government, at gunpoint, forces you to enroll in, regardless of whether you want it or not). You pay in a premium and you get some benefits when you retire (hopefully if they don't go broke by then) and need some money to cover medical expenses.

Now, since these programs are already going broke, reducing the premiums paid by everyone and, thus, the money paid into the system is a stupid idea - unless want you really want is to close these programs altogether and give people a choice about what they want to do (which is a good idea, but probably very unpopular among most voters - especially those seniors that vote by the truckloads)

First sale doctrine - not for installable software

[Animats]

Unfortunately, no. The problem is that the process of installing the software makes a copy. This has been held to be a copy that mere ownership of the media does not give you the right to make. Only if the holder of the copyright grants you a license do you have the right to install the software at all. The purchaser is thus "at the mercy of the copyright holder" with regard to licensing. This was an unintended consequence of copyright law, but the software industry loves it.

This doesn't apply to music or video, where the copies are "ephemeral", and only a tiny portion of the work exists inside the box during play.

As a result, you can rent out audio or video recordings, whether the copyright holder likes it or not. Software rental, though, is permissible only if the copyright holder approves.

The treatment of console game rentals is still being litigated.

Additionally...

[Reziac]

... I shouldn't have my computer fucked up by Intuit's assumption that I'll use THEIR filing service willy-nilly, using the browser of THEIR choice.

IOW, TurboTax shouldn't *forcibly* install IE5.5 and hose my computer, like the 2001 edition did. Even after a thorough uninstall, registry scrub, IErad'ing, and a great deal of work (and knowing exactly what I'm doing) Windows still isn't "right" (some system file must have got clobbered).

Furthermore, when I complained via email, I got no response.

Intuit lost a good customer that day, and I will never, ever again buy another Intuit product. And it'll probably be several years before I tire of ranting about it to anyone I can corner.

A marketing stat (I don't recall where I read this) of interest to business: every satisfied customer tells up to 7 people about your product. Every pissed-off ex-customer rants about it to at least 11 people. You do the math.

Re:Whatever

[Wavicle]

Does the federal tax amount include social security? Your social security tax stops after you've paid 80,000 taxed dollars into the pot. You're going to get an unweighted result with that comparison.

Additionally... $7,170,000 in capital gains... capital gains are taxed at a lower rate. In order to encourage long term investing, which stabilizes the economy, the government gives a favorable tax rate to capital gains. Since a considerable majority of Simon's money came from capital gains which are taxed at 20%, your numbers come out skewed (if simon made a billion dollars in capital gains, his tax rate would be even lower, but would never dip under 20%). Also capital gains are a return on a long term risk, salary is not.

mentioned some various ways he reduced his taxable income down to $6.29million

Probably through capital loss. The risks he took that lost money.

Re:Piracy

[base3]

But if they got the money for electronic filing, they got something. By forcing non-licensed users to their competition, they will not only lose the sale they wouldn't have gotten anyway, but the electronic filing fee as well.

Ack - Got an exact link?

[nurb432]

I believe you, but id love to print that out to use as documentation of reasons to avoid future Microsoft products to clients.

Re:Intuit's activation scheme is a VERY serious is

[OrbNobz]

Unfortunately, TaxCut has some very serious problems internally, and their tech support is completely incompetent.

Case in point:

Last tax year, I had some pre-tax income set aside for dependant care (flex plan) not fully realizing what it was. Well, box 10 was showing a number on my W2, and I filled in the amount in TaxCut. TaxCut then forces you to fill out form 2441 listing what institutions you payed for dependent care. In my case, I didn't. So in reality, I would not file that form. However, TaxCut will not allow you to delete form 2441.

TaxCut's answer? Start a new tax return... from scratch. I asked them to send me a patch that would allow me to delete the form since I had already spent over 20 hours working on the return. "We'll consider that for future versions". In other words..."Take a hike, sir."

My response? "I won't be using TaxCut again. Thanks for wasting my time."
YMMV - Maybe try TaxAct, although my bottom line varied with the more mainstream programs.

- OrbNobz
Filling up 60 minutes of your time... in about an hour.

Re:First sale doctrine - not for installable softw

[Rakarra]

Unfortunately, no. The problem is that the process of installing the software makes a copy. This has been held to be a copy that mere ownership of the media does not give you the right to make.

I believe that the courts (at least here in Calif) have decided differently - that if "copying" (into memory, onto disk) is required to make the product you purchased work, then you have a legal right to make that copy.