Swiss Tax Office distributes Mozilla and OpenOffice

And in the U.S. of A. by ArkiMage · 2003-02-15 03:40 · Score: 3, Funny

The US Post Office schills for Microsoft...

Re:And in the U.S. of A. by schmink182 · 2003-02-15 05:12 · Score: 1

For over 200 years, the United States Postal Service is the brand that has been built on trust and service.
Now we're selling our unique space. Think of us as your Multi-channel Communications Service. Marketers can get the visibility and reach through the Postal Ad Network.
Place your big message on our trucks, collection boxes and even in our postal facilities. Or small space ads on our stamp packages and banner ads on our website.

Terrific! by Azureflare · 2003-02-15 03:40 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is a step that should be made be more governments, to ease the tax process for people who don't want to spend money for a tax program. Jeez, we have to pay the taxes, why do we have to pay for a tax program to pay the taxes??

Tax office... Hrmm by slashhax0r · 2003-02-15 03:41 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'd rather see governments switching to open source and either using the saved dollars for something ie: education/heathcare, or just give us some tax rebates.. Neat idea though. P.s. fp?

For which platforms? by ciryon · 2003-02-15 03:44 · Score: 1

Windoze, Linux, Mac?

Ciryon

Re:For which platforms? by willll · 2003-02-15 03:50 · Score: 5, Informative

according to the babelfish translation: "OpenOffice.org 1,0,1 in French for Windows and Linux as well as the Webbrowser Mozilla 1,2,1 in French for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X."
Re:For which platforms? by maan · 2003-02-15 03:55 · Score: 2, Informative

I can't find the maillist post anymore, but I remember reading that it was for at least linux and windows. Not sure about Mac.

Also, the tax software itself is in java, and known to run in windows and linux. So I guess there's a possibility that it can run on mac too.

Maan
Re:For which platforms? by travail_jgd · 2003-02-15 03:56 · Score: 1

Assuming my (rusty) French is correct, GETax software isn't offered specifically for Linux, but there's a PDF version that's usable with Mandrake (and other distros with XPDF).

All three versions of OpenOffice and Mozilla will fit on one CD-R.
Re:For which platforms? by Max+von+H. · 2003-02-15 06:53 · Score: 1

Being a citizen of Geneva, I can tell you the tax software (GEtax) is a POS full of calculation errors. I filled my tax declaration with it and then by hand, and found errors that would have made me pay at least 15% more tax in the electronic version (doesn't let you fill in all the deducible items, among other bugs). The error is known by the tax office but they never informed anybody of it openly.

Furthermore, this system's purpose is only to make the input easier, there's no transmission of electronic documents since you end up printing the whole thing to send it. Still better than manual input (which field do I fill in?), but there's still work to do.

Otherwise, it's a nice change from the previous system that required you to have MS Excel and then sending the floppy containing your data - I guess having at least 40% of the floppies infected with some virus decided them to change the system (I did complain that I found weird that I had to buy an expensive piece of foreign and buggy software to fill my tax declaration...).

The sad thing is our dear Federal administration recently (about a year ago) signed a 5 years contract with MS for the renewal of the whole IT infrastructure. Scary!

Cheers,
max

--
-- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
Re:For which platforms? by prodok · 2003-02-15 22:30 · Score: 1

Your French is a little bit rusty ... as is mine. The tax software is available for Linux, Windows, MaxOS X and 9. The PDF viewer is Acrobat Reader for Windows and MacOS, and another utility is included for Linux (well, it is only very recent that Adobe released a Linux version of Reader 5.05).
Re:For which platforms? by prodok · 2003-02-15 22:39 · Score: 1

I was not aware of the quality issues. But I guess that they can be fixed. One thing to always keep in mind is that tax software can NOT replace a tax consultant. It can provide a good platform for entering, calculating and submitting. It can even have a checklist for completeness. But is can not tell you that you might find this and that loophole. The issue with electronic submission is that the legal background is not yet given. There is some legislation about digital signatures, but it is not complete (yet). As a consequence, it would not be sufficient to submit electronically, except informally, making data entry at the tax office easier, and then comparing your signed forms. As this system uses a 2D barcode, data entry should be reliable. There is a system used by some of the German Länder (Elster), which allows electronic submitting, and you will only have to print out and sign and send in a synopsis. However, that system does not allow you to print out the details for your records... There are developments, and I think that GETax is just one step on the way to the goal. The less scary thing is that there are also 26 cantons in Switzerland... And some of them are seriously looking away from MS... Another Max; another Swiss.

Not quite on topic, but... by Akardam · 2003-02-15 03:48 · Score: 4, Funny

... CowboyNeal is posting... ... is this right? I thought he was only a mythical figure featured prominently in Slashdot polls since the beginning of Slashtime?

Mommy, I'm scared...

Re:Not quite on topic, but... by Ryne · 2003-02-15 03:57 · Score: 2, Informative

ehm, where have you been?
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?op=stories&autho r=4
Re:Not quite on topic, but... by leomekenkamp · 2003-02-15 04:27 · Score: 3, Informative

Never visited his website?

--
Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
Re:Not quite on topic, but... by josh+crawley · 2003-02-15 04:29 · Score: 1

---... CowboyNeal is posting... ...

---Mommy, I'm scared...

Trust me, we all are.
Re:Not quite on topic, but... by Apiakun · 2003-02-15 04:38 · Score: 5, Funny

Notice also that this isn't a duplicate story, and that there are no spelling errors!
Re:Not quite on topic, but... by Poeir · 2003-02-15 06:23 · Score: 2, Funny

Hey, you're right. Here's a more Slashdotesque version:

Posted by CowboyNeal on Saturday February 15, @09:38AM
from the taxman-downloadeth dept.
David Gerard writes "From Heese (via Mozillazine: taxpayers in the Swiss canton of Geneva are being given a CD with a French version of Mozilla 1.2.1, OpenOffice.org 1.0.1 and tax program GEtax 2002. Rough English translation from Google." This strikes me as a really cool idea. I already get the cerds that tell me to file online rather than fill out paper forms, but it stll forces me to buy tax software every year.

--
Sigs are like bumper stickers.
Re:Not quite on topic, but... by Stephen+VanDahm · 2003-02-15 07:40 · Score: 1

"thought he was only a mythical figure featured prominently in Slashdot polls since the beginning of Slashtime?"

If it makes you feel better, remember that CowboyNeal doesn't need to post stories in order for them to appear on Slashdot. Instead, he uses his godlike mastery of time and space to directly control the cathode rays that paint Slashdot.org on your screen. To say that he posts stories in the traditional sense is to say that CowboyNeal has a job and therefore needs money to live -- a bad thing to say since CowboyNeal has been known to strike down with bolts of lightning the heretics that question his omnipotence.

tax program GEtax 2002 by SonOfSengaya · 2003-02-15 03:52 · Score: 5, Informative

It's nice to see that the tax program is also available for Linux and Mac OS 9 + X
http://www.getax.ch/dyn/ledossier.php?id_rubrique= 18

--
My spirit takes a journey through my mind...

headline by willll · 2003-02-15 03:52 · Score: 5, Funny

The headline of the babelfish translation: " OpenOffice and Mozilla distributes Swiss revenue office " They forgot to say In Soviet Russia.

Cool! by sepluv · 2003-02-15 03:54 · Score: 5, Informative

Giving out tax software is of course a very helpful and good thing and all governments should do it. It would be pretty cheap for governments to do (almost free when they have made the software). It also means that there is an offical, piece of software which uses the correct methods (and no arguments).

I am not sure what platforms the actual GETax program is available on and whether it is open source - IMO as offical software given out by the government it should be.

Mozilla and OpenOffice are, of course, really great additions, and should bring the wonders of good open source software to the public there (and a standards-compliant browser that actualy works and doesn't live in the Dark Ages)(although I guess people there are probably already quite open-minded).

If only the governments of other MEDC's would start doing this kind of thing (and werent in collusion with M$). It would be a start if they could start storing personal data we entrust them with in non-prorietary formats on open-source OS's - doing anything else seems crazy in a democratic society.

Kudos to the Swiss (who tend to be a more sensible European government). Also

--
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]

Re:Cool! by Bedouin+X · 2003-02-15 12:55 · Score: 1

Yeah it's too bad that companies like Intuit would scream bloody murder. I seriously doubt that the current incarnation of US government would make such an anti-business move.

--
Dissolve... Resolve... Evolve...
Re:Cool! by prodok · 2003-02-15 22:46 · Score: 1

Actually Intuit and other of those companies have been screaming bloody murder.

The consequence is that there is apparently an agreement between the USAn IRS and the "industry" that the tax CD the USAn IRS is distributing does not contain "smart" forms, even if it could done (the PDF technology allowed for that).

As stated elsewhere, it is pretty difficult to provide a tax form which does tax consulting.

IRS and corporate welfare by kkirk007 · 2003-02-15 04:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

The IRS this year was considering releasing its own tax software, available for free. Then the major tax software distributors (TurboTax, TaxCut, TaxAct, etc) cried foul..."if you release an electronic 1040 for free we'll go out of business!" and so instead the IRS struck an accord with them that they would give away their product to people with incomes under $30K /year.

Since when was the IRS responsible to the software companies to keep their revenue stream going, rather than providing a useful tax service to the public?

Re:IRS and corporate welfare by div_2n · 2003-02-15 04:18 · Score: 1, Insightful

As much as I wish that the US Govt would invest heavily in such free and possibly OSS, I can't really say I blame them.

If you think of the Govt as a business (which it really is) then producing software that puts patrons out of business (tax paying companies, taxes on purchased software) isn't smart for them in the short term.

Of course, in the long term, that money will likely get reinvested back to them anyway as people have more money to spend on other things.

On a sort of off topic note, it seems to me that we as (self-perceived) enlightened OSS advocates should lobby (send letters) law makers to require all agencies that produce software for any purpose to put it in the public domain. Of course if national security is at stake, they don't have to release it.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Gerry+Gleason · 2003-02-15 04:24 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yes, and the truely objectionable thing about this is as long as the "major tax software distributors" are in control, there is zero prospect that we will be able to do our taxes securly on our OS platforms. I don't even care whether they give away the actual tax software, but what the IRS should do for us is create an open tax platform so they can release all the rules, regulations, forms and proceedures in a form that can be used directly by "generic" tax software.
What I am imagining here is a system of XML files and XML document types that would have all the data that changes year to year as they update tax laws. This would make and OS tax program practical because you would just have to implement the generic software that uses this raw data, and you wouldn't need an army of tax lawyers and accountants to first digest the tax laws (and do this again each year). Most people would still use the commercial packages on the typical platforms, and this isn't even a guarantee that and OS version would emerge, but at least it would be possible.
A full OS reference platform might be nice too, but it isn't a requirement.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Hollins · 2003-02-15 04:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm a little more cynical. While I have no doubt Intuit et al. raised a fuss, I think the government also realized that they would lose money through more widespread distribution of tax prep software. With all the talk about tax fraud, it is seldom mentioned that most people overpay their taxes. Tax prep software always reduces how much I pay over what I would have computed by filling out the forms manually. The software's interview process this year helped me find an educational deduction I wasn't aware of, optimize our IRA contributions, run different scenarios for next year, etc. It's virtually impossible to figure all this stuff out with a 1040 and a pencil, which is how most people do their taxes. If prep software were free, officially sanctioned by the IRS and as full-featured as TurboTax, I suspect revenue from individual and joint returns would drop substantially.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by jaaron · 2003-02-15 04:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Actually, it's a tricky situation because you're talking about the line between the government and the market. Should the government compete or even enter areas of the private sector where firms are currently conducting activities? In some cases, it might make sense, but it's not something that should be happening often or you end up with a bloated government that runs and produces everything.

Taking this to extremes (forgive me for a moment), but if the government will provide free (or low cost) tax software, why not give me free or low cost online access so I can file online? And why not give me a computer too. And hey, I need an operating system for the darn thing. Oh, and throw in a printer while your at it. Perhaps this seems silly, but when you deal with public services, you have to consider the long term consequences these trends can begin. Bloated services often start lean and mean and well intentioned.

Generally, in any case that the private sector is offering a viable product, then the government shouldn't come in and replace them. Now the case of tax software is a little odd since that market is essentially feeding off of the tax service the government offers to begin with. One could also argue that the increased competition of the government might help the situation by forcing the current private firms to better their service. In some markets like education and mail/package delivery such competition works.

My point here is that just because some nation starts offering open source tax software doesn't mean it's a great idea for the US. There are pros and cons that should be weighed.

--
Who said Freedom was Fair?
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by dunkelfalke · 2003-02-15 05:16 · Score: 2, Interesting

it does not compete.
in germany, there is a free government tax software, too. the difference between this and commercial software is that commercial software helps the user to pay less tax. the government software is just the same as tax sheets on plain paper.

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-15 06:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

If you think of the Govt as a business (which it really is)
No.
Let businesses do business, and the government, govern. Sorry, but plenty of things (Education, Science, Law enforcement...) are not business, not to be decided by "business" criteria.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Zzootnik · 2003-02-15 06:08 · Score: 3, Interesting

Okay---You're not gonna believe this one, but for 2 years running now, I've studiously worked out my taxes, mailed it all in, gotten my refund back and then received another check in the mail for the corrected adjustments the IRS figured themselves. Yeah- that's right--they didn't LET me overpay...how's that for odd...

--
Sig currently under construction. Mind the gap....
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by slide-rule · 2003-02-15 06:16 · Score: 1

I don't want to be too much of a nay-sayer here; I just have one personal experience to speak from, and it may well be the exception to the rule. However, a few years ago, I gave a copy of a commercial tax program a try. (I don't remember which one, but it was one of the leading versions in any software store, or I (rather my mom) wouldn't have bothered.) Anyway, as opposed to doing it by hand, the computer version would have actually cost me about $200.00. I went through it a couple times to make sure I didn't miss a key question in some wizard, but never really figured it out. I filed the paper-and-pencil version that year, and every year since. (Granted, it isn't like my returns are *that hard* yet, so I'm willing to change as does my filing situation.) At any rate, don't just blindly trust the programs. Once you get it's best scenario, it may be worthwhile to pencil-and-paper the thing out with the instructions and worksheets just to double-check things yourself.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by sean23007 · 2003-02-15 06:47 · Score: 1

Of course if national security is at stake, they don't have to release it.

Better yet, they can just release it to me... ;)

--

Lack of eloquence does not denote lack of intelligence, though they often coincide.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by jck2000 · 2003-02-15 06:49 · Score: 1

I do not think that your argument that the IRS was motivated by a simple desire to boost tax revenues works, given that the cost of tax preparation software is tax deductable to individuals and that amount of tax that software companies would pay on their profits on such software would almost certainly be less than the value of the tax deduction to individual taxpayers.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by timeOday · 2003-02-15 06:58 · Score: 1

This may be a good sign that you could save money by having somebody prepare your taxes.
I'm not flaming you though, I had the same thing happen once, the first year after my first child was born, because I doubted I would qualify for the $500 tax child credit (most of those are for American Indians, farmers, handicapped, whatever). I had already counted him as a dependent, so it seemed like double-counting. Obviously I should head over to H&R Block myself :)
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by timeOday · 2003-02-15 07:06 · Score: 2, Insightful

What if I started a business selling custom-printed 4-color tax forms, could I sue the govt to stop mailing out the IRS-prepared tax packets so people would have to pay me money to prepare their taxes?
The current situation truly is corporate welfare because setting up a free, official website would increase the rate of e-filing, and that would save the govt. tons of money on tax processing, not to mention publishing all those tax forms and instruction books.
It's a simple matter of conduction govt. business in the most efficient and effective way. Purposely creating govt. inefficiencies so private companies can make money is dumb.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by jon_burgess · 2003-02-15 08:11 · Score: 1

The UK government already allow you to submit your tax return in an XML document. Some information about the schema and the like are on GovTalk Last year I used the free TaxCalc Lite to submit my tax return. If you take a look at the files installed by the application you'll see that it is composed almost entirely from XML & XSLT documents. A related example is the German Home Banking Computer Interface supported by GnuCash
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by i.r.id10t · 2003-02-15 08:25 · Score: 1

Don't forget that you can always go back and re-file your taxes for previous years (for a couple of years i think)... my brother recently did that, and got quite a bit more back because all he had used previously was the simple 1040.

--
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by An+Onerous+Coward · 2003-02-15 12:24 · Score: 3, Interesting

On the other hand, unlike other businesses, you don't have a choice to not "do business" with the government by not paying your taxes. It seems lame for them to create the burden on the public and then force us to rely on third parties to comply with them.

The IRS certainly has sufficient expertise to create and maintain income tax software. I really think it's something that they should be doing.

Also, there's an issue of accountability. Supposing a major error was found in a highly popular tax prep package, which caused people to file inaccurately. I don't know what sort of guarantees the vendors make, but one thing that they can't say is that the IRS would honor the inaccurate evaluation. With the IRS as the vendor, the taxpayers might have greater assurances.

I believe that the government has a duty to make it as easy to comply with tax laws as humanly possible, and I'm heavily in favor of anything that accomplishes that goal. Whether that means creating helpful software or simplifying the tax code itself, such simplifications make life easier on hundreds of millions of people.

--
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Lord+Flipper · 2003-02-15 19:05 · Score: 1

Very nice of them. But you should realize that if you get any refund at all, what you've actually done is extend Uncle Sam an interest-free 'loan' [the amount of which rose, incrementally, every week or two as your deductions went in], which you 'get back' and perceive as a bonus.
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by prodok · 2003-02-15 23:09 · Score: 1

It could actually be cheaper for the government to hand out a fully equipped computer if it were ensured that the complete communication with the government would run via this machine.

The reason for this is that it costs a lot of money to process paper forms. Depending on the complexity and workflow, it costs between $10 and $ 150 to process ONE SINGLE FORM.

So, if some government agencies would run like businesses, they would already have switched to such approaches. However, the government agencies are hindered by the legislators to be efficient. The legislators (in the US, it would be the Congress on a federal level) are apparently not even able to give the agencies the tools to operate (or for how long are the agencies working with no approved budget for now? And that forces them to work inefficiently.

It is indeed true that if something is good for the Etat de Genève, it is good for some nation ... remember the old saying that every nation has the government it deserves...
Re:IRS and corporate welfare by Zzootnik · 2003-02-16 07:06 · Score: 1

Oh yeah--I'm well aware of that part...I just got tired of having to pay IN every year at the start of the year...So I adjusted things slightly the opposite way...I get some back, but mot too much (I don't think...) Although if I could figure out a way to make everything a zero-sum transaction, I'd jump on it...

--
Sig currently under construction. Mind the gap....

Free Tax Program for US by nurb432 · 2003-02-15 04:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

While would be great, i dont see it happening, as we have 50 state tax rules and sets of forms to deal with. Then you have the thousands of pages of tax code for federal..

Its why places like HR-BLock can make so much $$ on what *should* be a simple process.

If they just would goto a "flat tax" the entire problem would go away.. Thousands of hours, millions of dollars wasted....

--
---- Booth was a patriot ----

Re:Free Tax Program for US by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-15 04:39 · Score: 2, Insightful

If they went to a flat tax system, then corporations and the top .5% of people would actually have to pay taxes. So no, we're never going to a flat tax system.
Re:Free Tax Program for US by sholden · 2003-02-15 05:09 · Score: 1, Insightful

A "flat tax" would not make the entire problem go away, it would just mean that the poor would pay even more tax (or the rich pay less, or both).

A flat tax is no simpler than a progressive tax. Both take a few seconds to work out on a calculator or with pen and paper for the brave (forgetting to carry that 1 could be an expensive exercise :).

The problem is tax credits, rebates, exemptions, etc, etc. Of course each little exemption or rebate looks simple on its own (and benefits someone), but taken together it's a pain.

Of course charities wouldn't like the idea of doing away with the tax deductions that go with donations.

The system in the middle ages was pretty simple too. The tax collector just looks at your stuff and tells you how much you owe and the big guys with swords take it from you...
Re:Free Tax Program for US by Spellbinder · 2003-02-15 05:17 · Score: 1

in switzerland it is not much better...
we have 26 cantons with different tax rules
and this program is just for about 400'000 citizens
it should not be so hard to make a application with rulesets for the different states and not to expensive if you think of millions of people using it

--

stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
Re:Free Tax Program for US by de+la+mettrie · 2003-02-15 08:44 · Score: 1

While would be great, i dont see it happening, as we have 50 state tax rules and sets of forms to deal with.

It is doable. As I mentioned in another post, if the comparatively poor Swiss canton of Berne (pop. 900'000) can afford to develop an entire tax software app and give it away, most US states (pop. some ten million) should too. (Unless you really do prefer tax cuts for the well-off)

If they just would goto a "flat tax" the entire problem would go away..

Yes, and I guess most people would go away too. Or maybe you can come up with a way for Joe Burgerflipper to pay $7'688'000'000/year? (U.S. '04 budget receipts, $1922 bio.; divided by U.S. population, 250 mio.)
Re:Free Tax Program for US by Daengbo · 2003-02-16 01:29 · Score: 1

Your math was incorrect. The correct answer is 1,922,000,000,000 / 250,000,000 = US$7688. I think that you introduced three zeroes by assuming that 1 Billion = 1 Million Million, when in the US (and most financial the world over) it is read as a thousand million. Where the other zeroes came from, I do not know

--
Put identity in the browser.

Ah ha! by ArmenTanzarian · 2003-02-15 04:04 · Score: 3, Funny

All you have to do is be a poor college student like myself, there are a myriad of free resources for filing for my meager return online.

Free Online Tax Filing by flyingV · 2003-02-15 04:13 · Score: 5, Informative

There is a list of places to file online for free (or a small fee) right from the IRS website.

http://www.irs.gov/app/freeFile/jsp/index.jsp?

I, for one, am trying out Free Tax USA.

Re:Free Online Tax Filing by Seclusion · 2003-02-15 06:17 · Score: 1

I don't k now about the free file but I imagine they also get this warning from the irs. "By linking to this private business, the IRS is not endorsing its products, services, or privacy or security policies. We recommend you review the business's information collection policy or terms and conditions to fully understand what information is collected by this private business."
Until the irs wants to take responcibility for who they link to for doing taxes online, I'll stick with paper.
BTW, I did look at some tax sites and one of them listed looked very shady. No contact info (phone numbers, mailing address, email) was available at the site. The site also didn't have any signs of belonging to the BBB or any online privacy groups like TRUST.
If someone gets screwed over by one of these companies, I think they'll blame, the IRS. Since they're making this push, I would agree with them.
Re:Free Online Tax Filing by Spunk · 2003-02-15 13:39 · Score: 1

They are all free for selected groups. I'm not eligible for any of them, for example.

Do you really believe by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-15 04:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

that if the government were to provide a free tax program, that it would find your best result or offer tax saving features?

Chances are, the software would include features advantageous to the irs only. It would include things you *don't* want the irs to necessarily know.

Re:Do you really believe by de+la+mettrie · 2003-02-15 08:59 · Score: 1

Chances are, the software would include features advantageous to the irs only.

Well, the Bernese version is in Java, you can check the source out. Plus, the Swiss tax system is a lot less complicated than (apparently) the U.S. system. I have only 8 pages to fill out, although we have parallel state/federal systems, too. Even on paper, it's difficult to mess it up. 'Course, this program is intended for the average household user, not for billionaires... those are much better off with the clever Zurich lawyers.

Thank God for the US government! by rayd75 · 2003-02-15 04:17 · Score: 1

"I already get the cards that tell me to file online rather than fill out paper forms, but it still forces me to buy tax software every year."

Can you believe that there are countries in which your God-given right to a market is not vigorously protected by the government!? To think that these Swiss goons feel like they can just give away tax software.... I hope the IRS doesn't get any crazy ideas about spending .000000000024% of their revenue to produce a free tax package. How would poor Intuit survive then?

I would much rather see... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-15 04:19 · Score: 1, Insightful

a much simplified tax system. Create a flat tax with a high minimum. (you make less than the minimum, and you pay no taxes).

Eliminate all the deductibles.

Everyone's tax form would look like:

Your total income for 2002:
x
subtract the minimum of y:
x-y = z
multiply z times the tax rate:
z * rate = total tax
Tax you paid:
paid
find the difference:
total paid - total tax = your refund
OR
total tax - total paid = tax owed

Much simpler.

Re:I would much rather see... by flacco · 2003-02-15 11:48 · Score: 1

How about this one: a) [ ] <= your total income b) - [ ] <= subtract your total expenses ---------- c) [ ] <= please make out a check for this amount to the IRS

--
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
Re:I would much rather see... by The+Salamander · 2003-02-15 12:18 · Score: 1

Get rid of this "minimum income" and its even simplier.

taxes = income * tax rate.

No deductions. At all. None.

(slightly) better translation from a human being by zztzed · 2003-02-15 04:19 · Score: 4, Informative

Hopefully this will make more sense than the Google translation. :P

Swiss revenue office distributes OpenOffice and Mozilla

The revenue office of the Swiss canton of Genf is furnishing all taxpayers who are "natural persons" in the canton with a CD for electronically filing their tax returns for 2002. Along with the tax return program GEtax 2002, which was developed in connection with DV Bern AG, open source programs like OpenOffice 1.0.1 in French for Windows and Linux as well as the web browser Mozilla 1.2.1 in French for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X can be found on the CD.

With this, the government of Genf is one of the first governments worldwide to provide its citizens with open source products. OpenOffice.org contains, among other things, a word processor, a spreadsheet, presentation software, and Zeichenprogramm [I have no idea what that means. "character program"?]. The web suite Mozilla 1.2.1 includes a web browser, and email and chat clients, as well as an HTML editor.

You know... by Spazntwich · 2003-02-15 04:20 · Score: 5, Interesting

This really doesn't change the fact that if we just had a more simple and less convoluted tax system, we wouldn't even need to worry about complex deductions, brackets, taxable income, credits, etc.

I'm not advocating a flat tax. Hell, I'm not even sure what I'm advocating, but if we had a more simple tax code, we wouldn't need to spend that money on tax software every year.

This brings up an interesting point though. Would the makers of Turbo Tax make a move like the RIAA and try to sue the government if we moved to a simple tax system people didn't need software for?

After all, it would technically be destroying their business model.

Exactly! by TopShelf · 2003-02-15 04:23 · Score: 1

This unfortunate circumstance doesn't just apply to tax software companies. There are plenty of other businesses which should be put down for the common good, but the nature of our republic keeps them suckling at the public teat. For instance...

Tobacco farmers
Telemarketers
The RIAA

--
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more

Re:Exactly! by entrigant · 2003-02-15 04:39 · Score: 2, Interesting

I had to pay $20 a week for 10 weeks to a drug rehabilitation program because I got caught with 2 grams of weed. This program had struck a deal with the state to get the courts to do this. I'm sick and tired of corporate welfare.
Re:Exactly! by The+Salamander · 2003-02-15 12:26 · Score: 1

Amtrack?

$2 lost for every $1 in revenue?

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by dunkelfalke · 2003-02-15 04:24 · Score: 2, Informative

it is german for drawing software. open office draw then.

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

this may not be such a good idea... by Anonymous Coward · 2003-02-15 04:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

If many taxpayers are installing this software to file their taxes, then there definitely will be a few where the software doesn't install cleanly or well. Something used for this purpose definitely has to be "turnkey." I really hope that they have the bugs worked out of this process. They must have a lot of confidence in the software. I just know how many times I have been frustrated by relatively simple software that must be used to file a government form.

Why not simplify so no software is necessary? by The+Mutant · 2003-02-15 04:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

IMHO this misses the fundamental problem; tax codes in most countries are just too damn complex.

In the United States they've managed to create such a complicated system that with few exceptions, the services of a professional - or the use of sophistcated and costly software - are necessary. This is ridiculous!

My situation is a little bit more complicated than most since I'm American and live in London. Last year my US tax return alone was 88 pages! Unbelievable.

And yeah, I have to use an accounting firm to complete my return even though I've got a Masters in Finance. The cost of an honest mistake discovered years later would be far too high for me to risk it.

So I get to pay KMPG about two thousand Pounds to complete my US and UK tax returns. Great.

--

A message from our sponsor

Re:Why not simplify so no software is necessary? by Orion_ · 2003-02-15 07:19 · Score: 1

In the United States they've managed to create such a complicated system that with few exceptions, the services of a professional - or the use of sophistcated and costly software - are necessary. This is ridiculous!

Not defending the US Tax Code -- it is too complicated, and gets more complicated every year...

But I've never understood this attitude. Taxes aren't, for the vast majority of people, all that hard. The worksheets are pretty damn straightforward, the instructions are easy to follow, and if you need clarification about something, IRS publications (free from the IRS web site) have all the information you could possibly need about the various tax laws.

A little research and a four-function calculator are all most people need. It seems like a lot of people have this attitude like "there's no way I could possibly do this on my own," and that, I don't understand.

It's one thing if you're going to say "the time I would have spent doing my own taxes is more valuable to me than the money I'm going to spend having someone else/tax software do it." That, I can respect. It's another thing entirely to say that you are somehow incapable of doing it on your own -- that you need an accounting service, or tax software.

I don't get it. Maybe it would be different if you have unusually complex taxes, but for myself, I've never once felt the urge to have someone else do my taxes.

What's REALLY interesting about it... by koi88 · 2003-02-15 04:28 · Score: 4, Insightful

... is that OSS is distributed together with the tax software and that every adult gets a copy.

This way many people who are often too "lazy" to download new software and stick with their included Internet Explorer can try a different browser.

Same with OpenOffice: I know a lot of people who are CONVINCED that there is no alternative to MS Office... I'm sure many will give it a try-- in the end it means you can save a lot of money...

ps: Hey! I posted this story yesterday, but it was rejected... I know, don't complain...

--

I don't need a signature.

Re:What's REALLY interesting about it... by msouth · 2003-02-20 13:55 · Score: 1

ps: Hey! I posted this story yesterday, but it was rejected... I know, don't complain..

That's the best .sig I've ever seen...

--
Liberty uber alles.

so where is the French Mozilla 1.2.1? by John+Seifarth · 2003-02-15 04:29 · Score: 1

I just checked the Localization page on the Mozilla website again, and I still can't find the French translation of version 1.2.1.
Anyone have a pointer?

Re:so where is the French Mozilla 1.2.1? by ramdam · 2003-02-15 04:49 · Score: 4, Informative

Here it is
but the localisation for 1.2.1 version is still experimental.
woah, Swiss gov is it running a mass beta-testing of OSS on mundane people ?
I hope they have included a simple feedback application too
Re:so where is the French Mozilla 1.2.1? by Papineau · 2003-02-15 04:51 · Score: 1

Sure. The project page on Sourceforge is the place to go. The 1.2.1 release is not official yet, but the pre-release version which is online is complete, and awaiting the official rubber-stamp from the project leader.

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by stud9920 · 2003-02-15 04:31 · Score: 1

You could also point out that Genf is Geneva

The canton of Berne, too. by de+la+mettrie · 2003-02-15 04:32 · Score: 5, Informative

The Swiss canton of Berne has been distributing the TaxMe Software for two years now. It's a Java app, so it runs on any OS. You fill in the tax data, it creates PDF tax forms for you to print out and sign. Or you can even do it all online through a web interface, using the ID/password printed on the physical forms everyone gets by mail. Very slick.

Re:The canton of Berne, too. by de+la+mettrie · 2003-02-15 08:52 · Score: 1

Is it open source? (Just curious.)

Java being an interpreted language, of course the sorce code is de facto open. Although the state of Berne retains the copyright, I can't imagine them preempting any improvement attempts. It's not as though they make money off the program.
Re:The canton of Berne, too. by dragonman97 · 2003-02-15 13:22 · Score: 1

Java is not purely an interpreted language - it goes through a first level of compilation to 'byte code,' which is executed by the Java Virtual Machine, running on any of the supported platforms. You can distribute Java programs without the source code, as .class or .jar files.

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by zztzed · 2003-02-15 04:36 · Score: 1

I didn't know that. Thanks. Too bad I can't go back and edit my comment. :P

(much worse) translation from a human being by Hubert_Shrump · 2003-02-15 04:42 · Score: 1

> man filter ... > cat news_report | chef | less Sveess refunooe-a oofffeece-a deestribootes OopunOfffeece-a und Muzeella. Bork! Bork! Bork!

It takes a guru...

--
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!

Re:(much worse) translation from a human being by Hubert_Shrump · 2003-02-15 05:23 · Score: 1

That's why I can't read the output. I'd wondered - hey, thanks!

Everyone look at the dumb fucker!

--
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!
Re:(much worse) translation from a human being by Hubert_Shrump · 2003-02-15 08:05 · Score: 1

Americans: We're more than just idiots!

ACs: Nope, we're still trolls.

;)

--
Keep your packets off my GNU/Girlfriend!

Lots of wasted CDs? by melonman · 2003-02-15 04:45 · Score: 1, Interesting

So just to get our story straight here, AOL sending out lots of unwanted CDs is bad, but the Swiss government sending out lots of CDs is good?

Actually, given the Swiss government's rabid stance on recycling (at one point the genevois were smuggling bags of garbage into France to avoid paying garbage tax), this whole project could be considered to be a form of stealth tax, ie they send you the CD, and if you don't dispose of it properly they fine you...

--
Virtually serving coffee

Re:Lots of wasted CDs? by rusty0101 · 2003-02-15 05:10 · Score: 1

CD's recycle very well as coasters, microwave testers and christmass tree decorations. They also make a very nice emergency signaling mirror. Lots of uses.

-Rusty

--
You never know...
Re:Lots of wasted CDs? by melonman · 2003-02-15 05:17 · Score: 1

How does the microwave tester thing work? Sounds fun...

--
Virtually serving coffee

Buy software?? by aka.Daniel'Z · 2003-02-15 04:45 · Score: 5, Informative

but it still forces me to buy tax software every year.

Buy software? Here in Brazil, we can download the software from Receita Federal for free, and send them the information online, or go to the nearest Banco do Brasil and give them a floppy disk (for those that don't want / can't send online)

Re:My 2cents by TheRaven64 · 2003-02-15 04:53 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't think the Mozilla crowd have any idea how socially inappropriate it is to be seen using a browser with the flame-throwing dinosaur in the introscreen.
Really? I installed Moz on my mother's computer (and she is a 100% certified technophobe). Her comment was 'I like the dragon thing. The spining world one [Internet Explorer] was quite boring'. Why exactly do you think the 'flame-throwing dinosaur' is inappropriate? Who exactly does it offend?

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News

Free tax program by fatquack · 2003-02-15 05:08 · Score: 1

In the Netherlands we get the free program for your taxes from the Taxoffice since at least 1995, the first year I did my taxes electronically. You can choose to print it out, send the disk back or sent a signed file back. Too bad the recent versions are Winonly.

Re:My 2cents by acedtect · 2003-02-15 05:16 · Score: 2, Insightful

Perhaps I am just dull but explain why a fire-breathing dragon is socially inappropriate. Is it racist? No. Is it sexist? No. Is it juvenile? Possibly but I don't think so. Are you saying that when button-down boring business types load it it will offend their chrome and cherrywood sensibilities and start the painful process of creative thinking?

It is obviously not too socially inappropiate. Although the Swiss Tax Office is widely known as a freewheeling socially inappropriate hotbed of frivolity.

Re:Bah! by schmink182 · 2003-02-15 05:18 · Score: 1

I did this in my company months ago...

You gave CD-R's of open source software to a bunch of French people?

US Postal Service by artdodge · 2003-02-15 05:22 · Score: 1

This didn't stop the United States Postal Service from running advertisements where they dissed UPS and FedEx for being way more expensive than their own services. ("Fly like an eagle...")

Re:My 2cents by KilerCris · 2003-02-15 05:23 · Score: 1

I think his point is that it is un-professional looking, and I agree with him to an extent. It makes it look more like a nerd toy than mainstream software.

As well as the canton of zurich.. by WhiteBlack · 2003-02-15 05:41 · Score: 1

..which offered a free stripped down online-version of a taxtool already last year. the full featured version is available for like 15$ on cd.

You're paying either way.... by NFW · 2003-02-15 05:44 · Score: 1

1) You, as a taxpayer, pay to have tax software developed by a monopoly (the government). This is a recipie for bloated software and bloated organizations full of middle-managers.

2) You, as a consumer, pay the company of your choice to develop tax software in the way that best fits your needs. In this scenario, multiple companies compete for your money, which keeps them efficient and keeps their products evolving to meet the needs of the most people possible.

Or, just maybe... 3) A bunch of OSSers get together and write tax software and give it away for free. Wouldn't that be grand? Unfortunately, AIUI, tax software has to be certified, and certification costs money, so I'm not sure this will ever happen. (That is kinda stupid... it's the output that should be certified by the taxpayer (sign here...), not the software that should be certified by the government.)

--
Build stuff. Stuff that walks, stuff that rolls, whatever.

Re:You're paying either way.... by Bert64 · 2003-02-16 01:22 · Score: 1

But it`s highly likely, as evidenced by other areas of the software industry, that you would only end up with a single software company (a monopoly) offering a single bloated product at an over inflated price and full of bugs, and ofcourse charging you for a new version each time the tax rates change or such.
What`s more, a commercial company would want to write the most generic software possible, so it can be sold in as many countries as possible, so you will need to configure it to the way your tax system works, and may lose out if you make errors. The IRS would have software which is specifically designed for the american tax system, just like the software produced by the swiss.

--
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Re:You're paying either way.... by anthony_dipierro · 2003-02-16 13:22 · Score: 1

3) A bunch of OSSers get together and write tax software and give it away for free. Wouldn't that be grand? Unfortunately, AIUI, tax software has to be certified, and certification costs money, so I'm not sure this will ever happen.

It costs 37 cents to file the application, and that's only if you want the software to connect to the IRS modems to e-file. It might not ever happen, but if it doesn't, it's not because of the certification costs.

Help me make the software, here, and I'll gladly get the software certified. I'm already an authorized IRS e-file provider.

No garbage tax in Geneva by Erik_ · 2003-02-15 05:44 · Score: 1

The garbage tax has never been applied to the Canton de Geneve nor in the Canton de Vaud.

The swedish government by Jugalator · 2003-02-15 05:45 · Score: 2, Informative

Hopefully, the swedish government will start switching soon as well. :-) There's been quite a bit of talk about it lately, so at least they seem to give it some serious consideration.

--
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!

Abolish Taxes by jefu · 2003-02-15 05:45 · Score: 1

Along the same lines, we can easily infer that if the US government were to propose actually dropping the personal income tax, that it would be opposed (and I guarantee you it would) by the same people on the grounds that it would cause so many people to lose their jobs.

Similarly we can expect the "War on Drugs" to continue forever not because there is a "Serious Drug Problem" but because it would cause all those prison guards and cops and lawyers and so on to lose their jobs.

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by dunkelfalke · 2003-02-15 05:45 · Score: 1

no, it isn't. you don't say "to draw software", do you?

Zeichensoftware is correct, just as Zeichentrickfilm (animated film, cartoon)

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

Re:My 2cents by MrLinuxHead · 2003-02-15 05:46 · Score: 1

Moz rules but it does need a new logo. The Dragon does not inspire consumer confidence

just my .02

--
I may be bad with names, but I'll never forget your IP address

Re:My 2cents by sepluv · 2003-02-15 05:47 · Score: 1

I really do not understand why a dragon is socially-inept. It seems pretty much like any other corporate logo to me.

What makes it different?
How is it inept?
Where is the evidence?
Is the logo (or the introscreen) really that important? (it explains how to change the introscreen on MozDev btw)
I would not object to it being changed but why should it be?

Mozilla (the dragon) is a strong brand image with a long history and one that many seem to relate to and think of as positive (user friendly, open source, &c).

--
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by dunkelfalke · 2003-02-15 05:48 · Score: 1

swizerland isn't in the eu.

--
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap

UK Self Assessment by Tanami · 2003-02-15 05:48 · Score: 3, Informative

In the UK the self assessment tax form can now be completed entirely on-line (not sure how long this has been the case - last year was the first time I needed to complete one).

It will even calculate the tax and national insurance constributions owed.

Can't say I like paying tax (or more specifically, the way it is spent), but they certainly made it pretty straightforward.

As a corollary to the above however, I believe you have zero chance of using any of the british governments online services if you don't have Microsoft's Java VM - which is a bit of a bugger if you use Linux, or it recent enlightenments, have XP SP1a!

OT: support slashdot with MSFT cash(banner ad ) by Locutus · 2003-02-15 05:48 · Score: 1

I keep seeing a bunch of Microsoft banner ads on Slashdot and other Linux-friendly sites.

Can we support our favorite Linux site with Microsoft $$$ by clicking( back/forth ) on those banners?

LoB

--
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus

Departement des Finances by Erik_ · 2003-02-15 05:54 · Score: 1

This is the link to the offical site of Departement des Fiances of the State of Geneva.

Re:1.21 has the dhtml bug ? by sepluv · 2003-02-15 05:56 · Score: 1

The version you are talking about is 1.2.1 not 1.21 . It was released very very quickly after the release of 1.2 (which had the bug with DHTML (side-point: who needs DHTML anyway?)). Funny enough that is why it has an extra # at the end (i.e.: a sub-sub-version).

Since you bring up M$, everyone heard about this Mozilla bug because Mozilla is so well known for being a good bug-free browser unlike M$'s browsers. M$ Internet Exploiter is one big bug in the sense it does not display real valid HTML (as opposed to M$HTML) correctly, but this is considered by M$ to be a feature (to help them take over the WWW (and so help in their WDP (World Dom Plan) ;-) ) not to help the user).

--
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]

It's not tricky by ShatteredDream · 2003-02-15 06:13 · Score: 1

You have no right to make a profit at providing tax services. If the government decides that it would save tax payers more money to contract out to write its own software for free public use then that's it's obligation, not privelege. Taxes cost us money. Paying $50-$100 for tax software adds to that. If the IRS decides that it'd be easier and cheaper for the public to get free software from the government to streamline taxes then so be it.

--
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!

Poor v rich by mgkimsal2 · 2003-02-15 06:22 · Score: 2, Informative

I think it was Dick Armey's proposal from a few years ago that income under $30k not be taxed, and everything over that be taxed at 10% (or maybe 15%?)

I really don't see how 'the rich' (great label there) would pay *less* than they do now. Not much to hide behind when it's basic math that a 10 year old should be able to do.

You made $200,000 last year? Pay $17,000 (10% of $170,000).

Why is that so hard or evil?

'The poor' wouldn't pay anything. Someone earning $50,000 would pay $2,000. What's wrong with that?

Also, what is seldom pointed out is that *activity* is taxed. Money sitting under my bed isn't taxed, but when I transfer it to someone else (purchase/gift) that activity is taxed. More money in people's pockets means they will engage in more activity, which is what is taxed.

--
creation science book

Re:Poor v rich by gorgon · 2003-02-15 07:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

The tax you're talking about above would not bring in enough money. The rich and much of the middle class would pay a lot less than they do now.
Your person making $200k probably pays $30k+ right now, so your are talking about roughly a 50% tax decrease. I make a little over half of that $200k, and I am paying just a little less than the $17k.
There's nothing inherently evil about a flat tax, but I think that it is a stupid idea. The rich get the most benefits from the current system and they have more money to spare, so they should pay more in income taxes. The poor have to pay enough on the local level in most areas on sales and property taxes. If anything, I think that the current system isn't progressive enough. We should be increases the tax rate on the higher levels. And if you want to cut out taxes on dividends then I think that the taxes should be cut out on interest from bonds and savings accounts as well.

--

And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
Berke Breathed
Re:Poor v rich by sholden · 2003-02-15 07:31 · Score: 1

I think it was Dick Armey's proposal from a few years ago that income under $30k not be taxed, and everything over that be taxed at 10% (or maybe 15%?)

That's not a flat tax. That's a two level progressive tax, one level has a 0% tax rate and one level a 10% (or 15%) rate.

A more progressive system would have more levels, but the justification for that is very much a take from the rich and give to the poor, which is porbably not what capitalists like...

I really don't see how 'the rich' (great label there) would pay *less* than they do now. Not much to hide behind when it's basic math that a 10 year old should be able to do.

I had 'middle class' at first, but since I used the term 'poor' I thought 'rich' was a better opposite term so I changed it.

If you switch from a progressive tax to a flat tax, then people whose income was at an effective tax rate below the new flat rate pay more tax, and those whose was above it pay less. Hence those at the bottom end up paying more, and those at the top less (and those in the middle the same). That's assumming you want tax revenue to stay the same (and that people aren't evading tax...).

Of course in reality we have tax deductions and credits and so forth which if removed would increase tax revenue and hence allow a smaller tax rate for the same revenue. But that's a different issue, you can remove those with a non-flat tax as well.

Personally I would prefer a progressive tax system with more than two levels but more importantly I would prefer if all the exemptions and encouragements from the government to do certain things (by giving a tax break) were removed. I would much prefer a flat tax with tax free threshold (the simpest progressive tax) with no deductions and rebates then the current system we have in Australia, a progessive system with huge numbers of rules and regulations to do with deducations, etc.

Yes I won't be able to pay less tax by claiming some of the money I spent on the computer I do work from home on, so my employer will have to pay me enough so I can afford it. Same with uniforms, etc. There'd be no financial incentive to give to charity, so hopefully people are actually nice and not just in it to save some tax.

Of course things get complicated anyway, by fringe benefits (how much tax do I pay if my employer pays me $50,000 a year, but also provides me with rent free accomodation and a company car?) but that complication could be moved to the employer easily enough.
Re:Poor v rich by GlassHeart · 2003-02-15 08:37 · Score: 1

There's nothing inherently evil about a flat tax, but I think that it is a stupid idea. The rich get the most benefits from the current system and they have more money to spare
That's not "stupid", just incompatible with your personal sense of social justice.
Let's put more nuance into it, just for fun. Let's say there's an 18-year old taxpayer who makes $1M a year, because his dad is rich. Let's say there's a 30-year old hard-working entrepreneur with sixteen adopted kids, who makes the same $1M working 60 hours a week. Even under your graduated tax plan, they'd still pay the same taxes. Some people might feel that a young playboy should pay more.
On the flip side, does either $1M taxpayer really use more fire or police resources than you do? Why shouldn't firefighter or police salaries be evenly divided among the people who live in their district? In fact, you'll probably find that poor neighborhoods consume more police attention. The millionaires may also buy their own books, and never visit a public library. Is it fair that they should pay more to get less?
That's where the problem is: trying to use taxes as a social equalizer. This results in endless complications and exemptions that benefit some and irritate everybody.
Personally, I don't have a problem with the rich paying more, but trying to create social justice with a tax plan is plainly doomed to failure. Collect the taxes, and then spend the money on social programs.

Why not distribute GnuCash too? by mgkimsal2 · 2003-02-15 06:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

I don't think there's a Windows version currently, but if they're distributing OO and Mozilla, giving people a copy of GnuCash as well wouldn't hurt. Maybe it's not 'internationalized'?

--
creation science book

Probably saves the Tax Men Money Too! by WoTG · 2003-02-15 06:44 · Score: 2, Interesting

This has bugged me for the last few years.

It's in the government's INTEREST to have people file electronically. I cringe when I imagine the number of people working in Ottawa (I'm Canadian) just doing DATA ENTRY, never mind auditing/reviewing of our returns. I have no idea how many people or how long it takes or how many tons of mail are involved, but I'm pretty sure it's better for _everyone_ (well, maybe not the aforementioned data entry people) to provide free electronic filing software.

Nothing like wasting tax money to unnecessarily process tax returns. =)

Re:1.21 has the dhtml bug ? by Shymon · 2003-02-15 06:48 · Score: 1

http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2002-07 -22

what?? by SuperDuG · 2003-02-15 07:12 · Score: 1

This strikes me as a really cool idea. I already get the cards that tell me to file online rather than fill out paper forms, but it still forces me to buy tax software every year.

http://www.turbotax.com/freedom go there and do your taxes online and for free. It's for us poor people that don't really have the ability to buy three or four sports cars a year and are trying to get an education, but in the process are driving ourselves deeper and deeper into debt.

FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW!!! TurboTax offers electronic filing, combined with direct deposit, means I got my refund in 3 days! Eat that H&R.

--
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed

Security? by ross.w · 2003-02-15 07:42 · Score: 1

The Australian Tax Office (and The UK Inland Revenue, I think) were recently criticised for security issues in their free tax software. This despite the fact that you have to jump through several hoops to download it, and provide lots of ID verification before you can upload your return.

Does anyone know what this Swiss one does to protect people's personal details?

--
If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?

Why don't AOL do this? by -tji · 2003-02-15 08:04 · Score: 2

They send out MILLIONS of CD's already.. I haven't looked at the contents lately, but I assume there would be some free space. Stick a few cool Free Software packages on there as a nice little "fuck you" to microsoft, and also a benefit to the citizenry, to offset the annoyance of the spam-CD.

Re:Why don't AOL do this? by sepluv · 2003-02-15 09:12 · Score: 1

A very good point. It would seem to be in their best interests but maybe they're not that smart...uuh...this is AOL/TW we are talking about. Actually, no, wait, even though they own Netscape (who are a Good Thing), AOL (ISP) currently only works with M$ Wind*ze and they seem pretty much like M$.

--
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]

Re:Complex deductions? by Bishop · 2003-02-15 08:21 · Score: 1

geesh man get a better imagination! I have no trouble imagining that I have another $100000 in my bank account.

Avoid duplication of work. by etymxris · 2003-02-15 08:55 · Score: 1

The government spends millions if not billions of dollars processing all the tax returns each year. Not only do all tax returns have to be processed, but many of them have to be audited.

I've heard many cases of tax software saying that a person owes less to the government than they actually do. So the government evaluates this return from the tax software, and either runs it through its own program to check it or hires an expensive accountant to check it. Then the goverment figures out that the return is in error, and has to contact the tax payer to reconcile the difference.

Most problems of this sort would be totally avoided if the government published a program that represented the corpus of knowledge of the tax system. Hell, they practically do it already. If you look at tax forms, it looks like program pseudo-code.

The only reason makers of tax software get so much money is that gathering all this information is a big pain in the ass for the average citizen. It would be a pain in the ass for the government to do it as well, but they already do it.

So really, the private tax software packages are just duplications of the government's work.

Re:(slightly) better translation from a human bein by de+la+mettrie · 2003-02-15 09:11 · Score: 1

swizerland isn't in the eu.

Yes, it's because we like being rich too much. Plus, all 700 years of Swiss foreign policy basically has been variations on the theme "get your foreign fingers the f--k out of our most respectable business".

I am in favor of adhesion to the EU, but the bigwigs, Germany and France, aren't really providing inspired leadership right now.

Re:My 2cents by WWWWolf · 2003-02-15 09:41 · Score: 1

I don't think the Mozilla crowd have any idea how socially inappropriate it is to be seen using a browser with the flame-throwing dinosaur in the introscreen.

<mostlynonserious> And the Sheep who Still Run Windows don't have any idea how much bad karma they accumulate by using a web browser whose logo is a... a... floating eye! I mean, really. A floating eye. Everyone who has some insights in the Hidden Secrets and the Grim Truths of the Magic behind the Machine know quite well the meaning of this symbol, and what kind of power it invokes. Stagnation and slowdown, instant freezing. </mostlynonserious>

Seriously, though, Mozilla as a Netscape mascot has quite a long history, and as everyone knows, the character was quite visible during the time when Netscape became the dominant browser. If Mozilla character furthered the growth of the company in mid-90s, I see no reason why it wouldn't work today.

Israeli Government sponsors OpenOffice L10n by noamt · 2003-02-15 10:46 · Score: 1

Nothing new, but I thought slashdot readers should know that. The first public beta should be out any day now, and the release will probably come in a few months.

Newt Gingrich by Pseudonymus+Bosch · 2003-02-15 11:07 · Score: 1

And why not give me a computer too.

Years ago, Newt Gingrich had this project of giving computers to poor people, to somehow kickstart them.

--
__
Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
GW Bu

Dude! Tangent. by NFW · 2003-02-15 12:17 · Score: 1

Maybe you missed the subject on the post I was replying to, particularly the part about the IRS. Here in the US, that's the tax collection authority.

AFAIK nobody in our government is distributing Mozilla or OpenOffice, nor is Microsoft developing tax software, much less monopolizing that market.

The conversation turned, try to keep up.

--
Build stuff. Stuff that walks, stuff that rolls, whatever.

Re:My 2cents by MidnightBrewer · 2003-02-15 18:36 · Score: 1

I have a computer that is represented by an apple with a bite taken out of it. Talk about socially inappropriate; some people find seriously negative religious implications in such an image.

Not to mention that the default GUI for the operating system has "lickable" buttons. As a matter-of-fact, I think it was probably the marketing department that came up with that idea.

Linux is represented by a penguin, and my girlfriend, who is a Windows user, likes it and thinks it's cute. (Of course, she's also Japanese, a race of people who tend to think that many things are cute, usually right before they eat them.)

Heaven forbid that computers should be fun. I think we're far better off by having a window as a mascot. Or maybe a door. Life has way too much humor as it is.

--
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life

Re:My 2cents by acedtect · 2003-02-16 19:14 · Score: 1

Yeah I know what his point was but I just disagree. I think it's superior operation and security are much more important in inspiring consumer confidence than whether it's splash logo looks good.

I will concede that some enterprise manager's might judge the book by it's cover and that might keep it from being accepted but I thihnk the logo is a pretty small priority.

In fact there have been some pretty successful programs that had more ridiculous logos like spinning E's and talking paper clips.

Re:My 2cents by KilerCris · 2003-02-17 04:54 · Score: 1

Yeah but we're not talking about enterprise managers or people who know a damn thing about "superior operation and security" The splash screen is the first thing people see. Whats on the surface is what people see first, and if they like what they see, then later they find out what really makes it good.

Slashdot Mirror

Swiss Tax Office distributes Mozilla and OpenOffice

127 of 186 comments (clear)