Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts' Big Brother Tech to Watch Taxpayers
rocketjam writes "The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts state Revenue Department has launched a new technology offensive which strives to piece together all the stray bits of financial information about individual taxpayers that is contained in various public databases in order to catch tax cheats. The databases have been around for years, but technology has only recently enabled the state to assemble and review the information in a time-efficient manner. The so-called 'Discovery' initiative is already bringing in an additional $1 million a week. While denying the state is playing 'Big Brother', the Revenue Department Commissioner, Alan LeBovidge predicted the state may eventually be able to track so much financial information on individuals that the state could complete the citizens' returns for them."
I, for one, welcome our new, um..... well, overlords.
"If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid." - Epictetus
I'd be happier if it included corporations - the ones still 'located' in Mass. anyway.
I swear I didn't steal that pen from the post office!
Yeah, I just can't get offended by states catching tax cheats. The info is available, use it!
Oh, that's just great... Especially since there's about fifty ways that even a simple tax return can be computed. You've heard of those experiments where they take relatively simple tax information for a fictional family, and send it to 30 different tax accountants, and the result is about 25 or more different returns, ranging from "you owe $1800" to "you're getting $2300 back"? Gee, I wonder which computation Massachusettes would take...
Anybody every notice that most big brother projects or legislation comes from New England first?
This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
...we might be able to use this system to find out where all those Taxachusetts politicians are hiding their secret payoffs and slush funds.
I suppose they think they can include the $20 my wife's employer paid me in cash the other day for fixing one of their computers (it was a pretty minor problem). Granted, $20 doesn't mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things - but it is still possible, using greenbacks, to make one's financial transactions very hard to track. Consider people who receive paychecks instead of direct deposit, cash their checks at the grocery store, and keep their cash on-hand. How well do you track that?
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
One would think this could be used the other way around to refund people who have overpaid. Who wants to take bets on whether they'll monitor for this as well? My money is on "not a chance."
I have absolutely no problem with this. Save for the glaring fact that it will obscure the bigger, endemic problems. Much like the so-called war on drugs.
This is an ideal tool in a just society. Such things are the most dangerous of all, in the real world.
One thing to note here is that it would be very easy for the state to fill out tax paperwork for the taxpayer in MA. I'm an MA taxpayer, and I did my taxes recently with TurboTax. After completing the federal portion, there were very few questions the state software needed to ask me.
- Did I want to pay the voluntary 5.85% tax rate instead of the standard 5.3% tax rate? (No!)
- Did I have any use tax items to declare? (Nope, and if anybody asks further I plead the 5th.)
- Would I like some of my tax money to go to the state's Clean Elections Fund? (Sure, why not?)
Beyond those little things, TurboTax could complete my pages of state tax forms simply by porting over the values from the IRS forms that had already been completed. So, since the state can already look at my IRS forms anyway, why not have them compute my taxes for me, and automatically send me the already-completed paperwork attached to the bill or refund?
As much as i hate the idea of any state having this much information on anybody, I also hate the idea of people getting away with scamming the gov't out of money (thats the politicians job) especially when the majority of the people getting away with this are the people who can afford to pay said taxes. After all how often do you hear of someone with a $20K/year job bragging about how much he hid away in various tax shelters? Of course the people that this would hurt most is those in the service industry, who claim only 10-20% of their income from tips.
drunk chemists
Why do I get the feeling that John Kerry (D-MA) wouldn't follow the 4th amendment any better than his predecessor.
I guess I'm voting Libertarian again this year...
If you haven't had a chance to look at Massachusetts tax forms, I would highly reccomend them as reading for how not to write an informative document. It takes me half as much time to fill out the Federal 1040 Long Form, so I wuld be happy for the state to fill out my tax forms for me.
While denying the state is playing 'Big Brother', the Revenue Department Commissioner, Alan LeBovidge predicted the state may eventually be able to track so much financial information on individuals that the state could complete the citizens' returns for them.
Considering how much whining the tax software companies did when the IRS wanted to let citizens electronically file for free without needing a tax application to do it, I'm sure they'll whine some more if Massachusetts obviates the need for state tax forms.
but they won't.
They'd never accept the liability for doing the returns.
We're left with all the intrusions and none of the benefits.
Am I the only one that wishes the IRS would sent me a summary of what has been reported to them? At least that way I could reconcile *before* signing my name to something.
t
Personally I wouldn't mind having my taxes done for me as a public service. At the federal level maybe this would inspire simplification of the tax codes if the government had to shoulder the burden of handling returns completely internally. I mean as long as they maximize my deductions and such then they would save me a little money and time. Of course the government having that kind and quantity of information on me is a little troubling as much as governments tend to abuse power. At the state level, well in Louisiana they can barely count so I am better off doing my own taxes than any beuracrat...
Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther
Such system to peice together info from various sources isn't new. I belive 'the matrix' is being used for criminal information. These projects will hopefully be brought down before they can start installing telescreens in peoples houses.
This isn't anything new. Most states interface with the Federal IRS to compare notes. Most sources of income submit that data to the tax people.
It says "The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts state Revenue Department has launched a new technology offensive"...
It should say "The Boston Globe reports that the Massachusetts state Revenue Department has launched a new offensive technology"
we needed more of a reason not to live in Masochistettes. Anyone that continually puts Ted Kennedy in office can't be right, and obviously has a glutton for paying such taxes in the first place.
"Here's your form. Fill it out. We could just do it for you, but we're too lazy for that. We'd rather see if we can catch you cutting corners. It's a fun little game we like to play around here. They give points for every evildoing tax form we catch. Brian's leading this week but I'm gaining on him...."
If you live in a state that has a sales tax, you can't really avoid taxes by shopping online, by phone, or by mail. Yeah, you avoid the sales tax, but by causing to have imported into the state a taxable item you owe a use tax, which is usually equal to exactly the sales tax you would have had to pay on an in-state transaction.
The problem is, for an individual, it's hard to collect a use tax on most things. Your state can't ask an out-of-state vendor for their sales records because they're out-of-state and therefore not under your state's jurisdiction. They can't really force you to give a true answer because you have the ability to plead the Fifth Amendment if you're ever accused of not paying a use tax you should have.
It's a problem the states have wanted to solve ever since online shopping got big, but there hasn't exactly been a breakthrough. The states that don't have a sales tax have no reason to help the states that do. Tax classifications can vary from state to state, or even county to county or city by city, so computing what tax is really owed is a complex task that nobody wants to do either. So, it's still one of those problems in the unsolved bin at this moment.
I don't think they'll be figuring out basis on stocks, since it isn't an exact science. Maybe for the 80% of folks that file the short form they could do this.
I do not fear computers. I fear the lack of them. Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
Now the government will insure it gets it's 45% tax(federal plus state plus sales plus ...well you get the idea..) I am reminded of another event in new england area, a 3% tax on tea. Residents became so mad they threw all the tea in the river (boston tea party). I do belive we have proof the founding forefathers disapprove of our government.
I'm told you are what you eat, does that mean I can be you by tomorrow with some A1?
Most citizens' financial information is already known by the government. Working people pay taxes through paycheck withholding. The only ones who can cheat on their taxes in any significant way are corporations who are basically on the honor system when it comes to paying taxes these days. That's who this kind of system is designed to detect. Don't believe the hype. Working people are being ripped off by corporate tax cheats. The tax burden is being shifted to the middle and upper-middle classes while the elites get off scott free.
- Hail to our fearless misleader! Fool speed ahead!
Is that the reactions are too easy to predict. Personally, I like seeing tax cheats get caught, because it means I pay less. As long as there a legitmate system for addressing grievances, I don't see a problem. Big Brother is an overused cliche.
Well, unless those people cashing their checks are being paid under the table, they are probably having taxes taken out for them based on their income linked to their social security number. It doesn't matter how you cash the check, the company has filed what it paid the person with the social security number to the government on their tax return.
And even if taxes aren't taken out, if the person is making over $600 he/she's being 1099'd and again the business is going to be reporting that amount to the government on their tax return.
There are a number of things that still won't be accurately tracked, but it's going to be remarkably easy to keep track of what people are earning from honest and legally operated businesses.
--
RumorsDaily
Now where the hell is the syrup?!?
is whether or not I would get a refund if they found that I had overpayed. It seems that these kinds of programs only work to penalize taxpayers and do not work to the opposite, but equally legitimate purpose.
I swear, if that place was run by loving, caring democrats, this wouldn't be happening.
guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
Land of Liberals, Loons, and DOUBLE TAXATION
Greetings from Taxachusetts, the Land of Ted the Lifeguard!
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has an entity called the Massachusetts Department of Revenue. The DOR puts the IRS to shame.
File your taxes late with the IRS, they hit you with interest and penalties. So be it. They are the IRS, they are above the law.
File your taxes late with the Mass DOR, they hit you with interest and penalties. And then they hit you AGAIN. Yes indeedy, folks: it's DOUBLE-DIPPING DAZE FOR THE TAXING AUTHORITIES!!!
Bottom line: a little-knownstate law allows the taxing authorities to DOUBLE your base tax, interest, and penalties.
Be warned: DO NOT BECOME REMISS IN PAYING YOUR FAIRSHARE(tm) in MASSACHUSETTS LEST YOU END UP PAYING IT TWICE.
This is fact, not troll or flamebait. But it does help to explain why the Commonwealth is a pro-welfare-parasite, anti-working-taxpayer zone.
Could it be that the lack of Republican representation hereabouts has something to do with this?
after all GWB tax cuts are working right ?
I, for one, welcome our old government overlords....
Ho-ly cow! The government is using public information to do something they are delegated to do! Somebody call the freedom police!
It's not big brotherish at all. It doesn't invade my privacy, it just allows for the government to do it's job more effectively: tax the living hell out of the average worker. Now, I am opposed to the system, not because it invades my privacy, but because it could cost me money. Now, that makes me a good American Capitalist, doesn't it?
*ducks*
It's public information. Sure, it's really creepy and will be abused, but what are people going to do, put all the data back in the bottle? People here of all places should realise that public really does mean public.
Good work.
I know I'm trolling. No need to remind me.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
You know I actually wish I could have the Government fill out my w2 for me. This is largely do to the fact that I am lazy.
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
I'm not a lawyer or a legal expert but something about pulling this data together and possibly going on "witch hunts" smacks of "unreasonable search..." Either way, it's scary.
Happy Trails!
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
Expect no less for a Democratic state filled with Massholes.... Coming to a state near you, care of Presidential Candidate Senator Kerry.
1) How much money did you make? ____
2) Send it in
What the hell do they need that they don't already get? It's all reported! They get a copy of your W-2 forms too, and they get a copy of any other similar forms. I wish the gubmint's computers would just send me a tax refund check Jan 1st instead of making me send them something and then get it back. Better yet, a federal sales tax coupled with a large capital gains tax so the rich don't get off scott-free. Actually, you don't even need the capital gains tax if you make sure the sales tax applies to stock trades etc.
Eat at Joe's.
I work a number of different jobs throughout the year, and have to deal with the considerable annoyance of having each one attempt to deduce what my yearly earnings are going to be and tax me accordingly.
The jobs that pay me $200/week (even if I'm only working two days there) will take out almost no taxes becuase they assume I'm making $10,000/year. When I'm paid $2000 for one week of work, I get taxed on the ludicrous assumption that I'm going to be making $100,000/year. Neither assumption is accurate and both leave the government taking out a grossly incorrect percent of my wages in tax anticipation.
Why can't the government compile a system that will help companies to estimate what my tax payment should be not simply by what I'm being paid in the current week, but by looking back over the whole last year and seeing how much I've made this tax-year (through different employers) and what that average income is going to end up being near.
Better yet, why can't we come up with a system that doesn't depend upon weird estimates as the year goes on, but allows you to announce at the beginning what your income is going to be near and then simply take out the percent that that tax bracket would warrant. Then, if you were accurate, you'd have no refund and no taxes do and you could just fold everything up and go home.
Damned taxes.
--
RumorsDaily
..but the shouldn't. Or rather we (you, as I'm not in the US) shouldn't let them.
Not because it is Big Brother, but it would be all to easy to just add new taxes whenever the state needs money.
In that the taxpayer has to relate to his own taxes, instead of just paying another bill every month, there is a substatial amount of government control by the people.
How many you guys check your phonebills if it is $10 or even $20 above average one month? Sure, alot of people do, but even more just pays. You don't want this atitude towards taxes too!
They call them "tax cheats", we call them "people who can't pay taxes because if they did, they'd starve to death or couldn't cloth themselves". Interesting how in today's world the goverment's mouth comes before your kids' mouths, huh? But that's an old arguement. Just because unenployment is skyrocketing, our country is going into great debt, and the US prison industry is the fastest growing of them all is no reason to fear this one.
So, lets say the goverment decides they want to pass a totalitarian-like tax, say something rediculous like internet tax or media tax; they now have the enforcability. So if you decide to feed your kids instead of pay your taxes, guess what happens? Right into the knocker. And if orphanages become overfilled with kids, those kids go into any home that wants them, for any thing.
There are other people who don't pay taxes because they simply can't afford to. They have to pay rent to their slum lord to stay in their nice shithole apartment, or pay for food, clothing, college, car, car repairs, gas, etc. These people also have home buisnesses; a lot of computer technicians have started their own repair shops or networking contracts out of their home, and they live contract to contract and make barely enough to get by. What if they had to make 40% more?
Candy-Coated Knowledge
"If cash were invented today, it would be illegal."
"Information wants to be free", right?
Hasn't this been the whole point of the last century of effort in the field of computing? The constant push for faster processors? The drive for larger, faster storage, in smaller form factors? The constant advances in memory efficiency and effectiveness? For generations now, everybody has been working for smaller, cheaper, faster, computing--working very successfully at it.
Everybody wants it. Everybody wants their information to be more portable, more accessible. That's what the Internet is for. That's why relational databases were invented. That's why SQL and cross-platform development tools are so important. That's why everybody is lusting after Wi-Fi.
It's all so that more information can move with greater speed over greater distances, and be organized and studied with greater ease. That's what you've been working for. That's what you want. It's what everybody wants. The academics who used the original ARPAnet want it. The government wants it. The Open Source community wants it. Microsoft wants it. Your boss wants it. You want it. I want it.
Privacy was an illusion, perpetuated for millenia by a lack of technology. But the information is out there. It always has been. And you want it to be free. Now, you're finally getting what you want, and it's only going to get cheaper and easier from here.
Everything is going according to plan. Your plan.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
There are those who argue that having both individual and corporate income taxes results in double taxation, since whatever corporations take in goes to individuals, whether employees or stockholders, who are taxed on that amount. So let's end double taxation by abolishing the income tax for individuals and taxing only corporations. This is the only way to avoid an immanent future where governments intrude far-too-far onto individual privacy rights.
Would people just avoid doing business in corporate form in order to avoid taxation if we did this? No, most people would rather have the protection from individual legal liability which "corporate cover" provides. Tax would be seen as a form of insurance well worth it for any enterprise facing significant liability potential - which is any business large enough to have enough customers that a statistical likelihood of injury due to its products or services exists.
Of course criminal corporations (like the Mob) might start ducking taxes. Oh, wait....
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Seems like during good times, the goverment can care less about what people do with their money because there is such an abundance of it.
Seems like during lean times the goverment is more than happy to call that change in your couch "income" and penalize you heavily for not declaring it.
Here's a timely story for those of you filling out your federal tax return for Uncle Sam this spring.
According to my tax preparer, one of the ways they decide whether to audit a particular return is to correlate the adjusted gross income against ZIP code. Generally, areas segregate into rich and poor neighborhoods.
Persons in poor ZIP codes who have unusually high incomes would be singled out (Mr Coke Dealer that wants to avoid Al Capone's downfall - income tax evasion) on the one hand.
Then, people in wealthy ZIP codes with no visible means of support (again, illicit gains and unreported income).
It all goes to show that intelligent data mining can make much better use of the information already available. No need for John Ashcroft to review my frequent shopper card purchases.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Those darn right wing republicans! Taking every chance they get to take away our freedom. If we can get President Bush out of the Whitehouse, then maybe we start getting rid of the vast amounts of Republicans in the Mass. State Gov't.
Didn't she get 45.4% of the Mass electorate to vote to dump the entire income tax mess. Maybe it's time to get that little chestnut back on the ballot in light of these new initiatives.
Does anyone think the Kennedys and Kerrys will let this happen? No way!
It doesn't matter what you wrap your emotions around, Reality is a brick wall specifically designed to scramble eggs
I don't much care for the invasion of privacy...but I do like the idea of not having to do taxes. Grumble. Grumble. Grumble.
"Give someone a program, frustrate them for a day... Teach someone to program, frustrate them for a lifetime."
You are such a troll and you're not even funny.
Yeah, a ballot measure to repeal the state tax law was on the ballot, but such a measure if passed would do nothing more than create a state law that could easily be repealled. Furthermore, the Citizens For Limited Taxation group that put forward this measure offered no suggestions for just where the money to make up for the loss of the income tax would come from, or what exactly they wanted to cut.
So really, voting yes on this question was nothing more than a "We don't like the income tax!" protest vote that really wouldn't have much of an impact on anything. Even if it had passed, it would have been undone quickly. It might have put a shudder down the spines of the big spenders on Beacon Hill, but even the failed effort did that.
The middle class has always footed the bill. Income tax was originally only aimed at the upper class, but once the government got a taste of money, the tax was extended to the middle class. Ironic, since the middle and lower classes were the ones calling for the tax.
Historically speaking, the rich have had the resources and financial know-how to get out of paying a lot of tax. If you are going to play the game with the big boys, you better know the rules of the game well.
A witty saying proves you are wittier than the next guy.
How about you just post as if there is no such thing as karma? Just post with respect and insight. The rest will come in due time, young grasshopper.
Dealing with states on taxes, specifically non-income tax related items is somewhat of a joke.
A friend who has a large retail operation on Florida once received a visit from the state. State said, you owe $91K in uncollected sales taxes according to our records. The state was really a single rep who most likely would receive incentives based upon the amount he collected.
Needless to say my friend hired an outside accountant to review everything and look at the claims. With some interesting results.
State agent returns to collect the money. My friend presents him with documentation and says, "we reviewed everything, and looks like we don't owe you $91K, in fact we overpaid $15K, so we need a refund."
Agent looked everything over, and said, he'd drop the claim and they'd call it even.
I work for a software company that supports electronic filing for our users. One of the big pushes for the last few years has been to get partnership and corporate returns done electronically; this lets the IRS correlate individual returns with K1s from the businesses that they're part owners of.
This is a GOOD thing. Because of more and more effective data correlation over the last few years, the IRS is no longer really just randomly auditing people. It's getting to where if you get audited, you're probably already busted; they found you out and that's why you're getting audited. It used to be they just shotgunned the population and crossed their fingers.
You might be surprised how much your data is guarded though. Even the state DORs can't get hold of the federal info. For example, the fed IRS to have special permission to use social security records as an anti-fraud check, to validate your name and address against your SSN. The state DORs can NOT get that info. This does lead to fraud on state returns.
I think a lot of people assume that the "government" is a big monolith, but really there's a somewhat comforting level of division of information in there. Or at least, there is currently. If we keep getting Patriot Act-like stuff, God knows who will be able to get what info.
They do, you'd need to become an independant contractor, get all of your paychecks for every job with no withholdings, pay estimated taxes on a quarterly basis, and then settle up in April, or extend it to August to get a little more interest on any cash you owe them.
check this article out about turbotax spyware
--even a broken watch is correct twice a day.
If the companies are withholding income for the IRS you can adjust the amounts withheld through your W4 forms filed with each company.
Using this method you can take that estimate of what you expect to make, use the IRS tax tables to figure the approximate tax you will owe for the coming year, then adjust the exemptions and extra dollar amount withheld from one or more check so that by the end of the year you near break even (or just a slight refund to be safe).
As long as you have paid 80% of your taxes owed through witholding for any given year the IRS doesn't care where it came from and their is no penalty.
Someone please tell me how this is a violation of my rights? Seriously. I am normally protective of my liberties but I do not see the connection.
Should the poster feel violated that he may get caught cheating on tobacco taxes?
By the very act of taxing tobacco, hasn't the government been already GRANTED (by the people) this power? I'm assuming that data existed before for people who did NOT cheat, and made some kind of non-cash transaction that required paperwork.
Tax cheating is not a "questionable accounting practice" -- it's shirking your societal obligations and shafting your neighbor with your bill. It's a crime and obviously the penalties are a joke. Forget fining them... send them to Texas for 12 months, so they can make blue jeans and sneakers in the state jails.
Or does the poster feel 'violated' because the government "knows" he purchased tobacco? Woopie. It's a taxable item.
It's not as bad as say, the government illegally tapping your telephone because you buy cous-cous and goat cheeze, violating due-process, Geneva convention un-enforcement, or even FCC censorship crackdowns for the public display of a female nipple.
Please find a real issue to complain about.
This will probably get modded flamebait, but it has to be said:
Taxes are the price tag for being the most powerful nation on the planet. Military hardware and logistics (and even civil infrastructure upkeep) dont come cheap, you know.
What I'm actually afraid of is that one day, the American Empire will tax the rest of the world to sustain its technology/space/military endeavours "for the benefit of all mankind".
The state doesn't get a copy of your federal tax return unless you electronically file, in which case it's bundled with the state return file as supporting info.
State DORs don't get very much visibility to federal info.
I'm amused that some people think this helps them catch corporate catch cheats. It doesn't. Many of them are serenaded into a state with subsidies and tax breaks anyway. Even if they weren't, tax shelters are so prevalent and hard for the IRS to track down that it's estimated that 50-80 billion a year (nationally) is lost to corporate tax evasion. You could fund free health care with that. But you can't, not until the government chooses to get tough on tax evasion... and to pull that off means they either also have to get tough on importers (workers rights/health care/environmental laws in other countries) or stop the running Free Trade joke and have a more protective economy.
All your preview button are belong to Hello Kitty.
Doubtful. The problem our founding fathers had was not the taxation, but the fact that they had no say in said taxation. You do. You get to vote for your legislators. The fact that you keep voting legislators that just raise taxes is your own fault isn't it?
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
I doubt a state has the right to demand customer lists and such from companies that do not do business in that state anyway. And if the government decides to use intrusive unreasonable search techniques to enforce use taxes, let the citizens of that state vote to repeal those use taxes.
Eat at Joe's.
So, since the state can already look at my IRS forms anyway, why not have them compute my taxes for me, and automatically send me the already-completed paperwork attached to the bill or refund
because now you're trusting turbo-tax instead of the state to correctly interpret the tax code for your situation.
doing it yourself, or having a 3rd party accountant or software do it is the way you keep the revenue service honest - true to their own convoluted, overly-complex rules.
Isn't Kerry from MA?
BC
well look at the choices... a blue blood skull and bones man or a blue blood skull and bones man. (Bush vs. Kerry) We really end up choising the lessor of the two evils after the media has destroyed everyone they can't black mail.
I'm told you are what you eat, does that mean I can be you by tomorrow with some A1?
Check it out and make your own decision.
the state can never complete your return for you, havent you heard (and read in ALL irs publications) "voluntary compliance" there is more truth in that than most realize.
if you doubt, then for shits and giggles, join one of the yahoo groups, one i get is legality-of-income-tax, cool thing is, ALL of them say read the law for yourself, dont take their word for it. some of them are lawyers.
We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
Umm the teacher only has 1 ... I think the teacher needs to sit down in a students desk and wait for a real master.
I'm told you are what you eat, does that mean I can be you by tomorrow with some A1?
"the state could complete the citizens' returns for them" Great! They going to pay them for me too?
When all of your wishes have been granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed - Marilyn Manson
In Finland, and most likely in Sweden, it's been a standard practise for several years now that the tax-office knows enough about your incomes and expenses that they can pre-fill your tax-report.
And guess what, I have nothing against it.
The first and second report I got, I checked those. They did a better job than I (I admit, I'm a slob when it comes to retaining receipts) could ever have done.
So stop wearing your tin-foil hats already.
Why is it so fashionable these days to call things Orwellian when they obvious aren't. I recently saw an excellent BBC documentary on North Korea, and it really reminded of 1984.
Unless you've been commiting serious tax evasion, I doubt you have much to fear. And if you have, I hope this new initiative helps to catch you. People not paying tax raises the amount those of us that do have to pay.
Decode these
"Oh, I've never seen a refund check..."
there's no place like ~
the IRS can get a lot more bang for the buck by auditing the bigtime corporate tax cheats, who routinely shovel billions of dollars through illegal "loopholes" than they can by investigating small time individual tax payers. the only problem is that its not "politically" acceptable to do that. ooo they can get $1mil per week from this system? that's PEANUTS compared to a single decent audit of Worldcom's books.
They've been plotting for years...
1888 Franklin St.
If we assume for a moment that the state's budget is fixed, wouldn't this mean lower taxes for those of us that already pay the correct amount?
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
so instead of demanding a simpler form, you'd be willing to have them calculate something owed to them that's near impossible to double-check?
even credit card companies are not that dubious with their policies.
something tells me that the same people who are willing to accept a basically unaccountable bill from the government are the same people who don't bother to vote or pay attention to what bureaucrats are doing with our tax dollars.
Keep voting for those big government types (you call them Democrats and Republicans).
They did. Establish a S corp or a C corp and pay your taxes every week or every two weeks. You can get software to do it.
Pick up "Own your own Corporation" from Rich Dad Poor Dad(Amazon, bn.com, even sometimes the public library!)
If it's legal it's not cheating on your taxes. It just means YOU WORKED MORE ON YOUR TAXES. IF YOU WORK MORE you should earn more. And a penny saved is a penny earned.
I know this may seem obvious, but it will probably just make cash a more often-used form of payment. At least, when that's an option. This is IMHO just another case of the crack-down on the "mostly" law-abiding citizens of the country. There are much worse things the government should be spending resources on.
But of course, it's still all about the $$$. Easy revenue stream, big target.
If I thought they could get it right, I'd be all about that. No more accountants, no more paperwork, just pay my freaking taxes and be done with it.
Begin hidden conservative agenda: Of course, it'd be even easier for them to do if they implemented a flat tax across the board. :)
We are at a cross-roads, my friend.
If GWB wins the next elections, I'll be sitting in the gulags and you'll be posting on /.
Think about it.
Some may praise the tax collectors for getting all the money from tax fraudsters. But there is anoter side of this that should be considered. I don't know the stats for MA, so I will use the IRS as an example. The IRS web sites says that it has $2.5 billion that it owes people for the year 2000. It says that if the money is not claimed then the IRS keeps it for good. There are a few issues with this.
* If they know that they owe $2.5 billion then they must know who they owe it to. So why do they not return it? Compare that to what happens if you do not give them money they think belongs to them.
* If they do not want to return it to its owners then why not disperse it through universal income tax credits rather than keeping it? In other words, they engage in what for a private citizen would be "tax fraud".
* So some people cheat on their taxes. This is offset some by the IRS keeping money that is not theirs. Thus in the interest of fairness, until a tax collection agency cracks down on themselves kepeing money that is not "theirs" (though saying a tax collection agency "owns" any of the money it collects is a bit absurd...), we should oppose such agencies cracking down on us.
"The State is that great fiction by which everyone lives at the expense of everyone else." -Frederic Bastiat.
good ol "Taxachusetts"
See Sig! See Sig Zig! Zig Sig Zig!!!!!
I HAVE to keep my money in the bank. What if I think the government is going down or I'm paranoid and keep bars of gold or a stack or euros in a safety deposit box in switzerland?
1888 Franklin St.
FROM IRS,CENSUS
WHERE IRS.SSN=CENSUS.SSN
Wow, dude ! This Relationist Datatable thingy is really neat !
This is clearly unconstitutional. I really hope that our federal government steps in and stops states from doing things like that. If it concerned me personally I would sue the hell out of them.
In any case, it is a serious issue and I would like to bring it up to our lawmakers and local representatives. Who can I speak to? Does anyone have any ideas?
You are not supposed to have savings.
It's unpatriotic not to invest all of your surplus income into corporations like Halliburton, Raytheon, Boeing and other patriotic corporations that supply arms and high technology to our troops fighting against terror!
Can you provide sources for your school cost figures? And do those figures include the cost of all the admins that run the schools?
/ 79 35717.htm
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news
100 USD Million spend on unauthorized prison guards...During the past decade the budget has doubled, to about $6 billion, while the number of inmates has risen only 23 percent, to roughly 160,000....
I don't think he's trolling, even though he claims he is. It's perfectly true: MA residents had the opportunity to boot the confiscatory income tax. Once you cede government the right to claim any portion of your income off the top, how can you argue when they want more and more of it?
If cutting programs is not an option (and it almost always is) that income could easily be replaced by a sales tax that exempted the basic necessities of life: food, clothing, medicine. Personally, I'd much rather pay a sales tax, as I am in charge of what I buy, than have an income forcibly taken from me with little accountability to how it is spent. The whole notion of withholding is devious, as people pay little attention to how big a chunk of their money the government is taking away. We're conditioned to think in terms of "take home pay" as if government really "deserves" the rest of what we earn. It would make a more honest (bigger) impact if every $10 purchase at the store rang up for $14.27 instead.
One simple rate. Nobody gets special treatment, no loopholes or tax shelters. No griping about corporations not paying "their fair share". It could all be very easy. (Internet sales apply the tax of where the business is located. If your state doesn't like the loss of revenue, adjust the sales tax to be comparable or less, and watch business move in to take advantage.)
I'm amused by people who are irked by "tax cheats". (Whether they are or not depends on the particular situation, but I'm convinced there would be far fewer of them if taxes weren't so burdensome in the first place.) It's like saying, "He's not getting screwed as bad as me!" If you know you're getting screwed, how about fixing things so that nobody gets screwed rather than trying to bring everybody down to your level of misery?
Constitutionally Correct
in america, the biggest form of oppression is taxation.
nice to live in such a free country, where the most oppressive thing is taxation.
dont like the patriot act? lower taxes and it cannot be enforced.
dont like bush? lower taxes for all means he wont have as much money to spend on what you dont like.
as you lower taxes, you will find your freedom expands. its simple, people.
You obviously don't understand the term "skyrocketing". Skyrocketing unemployment would be that of a country like Germany which is around 10%. Ours is going down -- the opposite of skyrocketing. The current unemployment rate is lower than the average unemployment rate of the "booming" 90s. Much lower than the highly enlightened European Union. Much of our country's history has been spent in debt, the key is the percentage of the debt versus the GDP of the nation. Debt is not the problem, its the ability of the nation to manage that debt and make the payments in relation to the country's ability to produce goods and services that people want to obtain. And there is a good reason that the prison population is rising, there are bunch of jerks in this country that need to be locked up that we haven't been locking up in the past. That is why we are seeing a declining crime rate for the last several years. It is very hard for criminals to prey on society when they are locked up behind bars.
Also, the best thing this Government could do is take food out of kids' mouths. Have you seen how freaking fat kids are today? My God, its like we have an army of Fat Alberts running (er, walking) around these days. In fact, the biggest health risk for "impoverished" American children is obesity. If you want to see real poverty it's not in this country. Our poor get cable TV.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
When it comes to people and filling taxes, there are an insane number of cheaters out there. How do I know? Well, I worked for a year for Revenue Canada (~Canadian IRS), specifically to track down tax cheaters.
My job involved tracking down cheating building contractors. I only needed two databases for this: the first, their tax return information, and the second, a database compiled as part of the Canadian New Home GST Rebate program.
Aside: the Canadian New Home GST Rebate plan is a plan that gives back to the buyer around a third of the GST (a 7% tax) that went into a home.
To qualify, every contractor who worked on the home must be listed along with their GST number. I simply cross-referenced a contractor's tax return with their GST rebate stats. We caught (and continue to catch) so many idiots who would claim $5,000 in earnings yet had done $1,000,000 or more of work on new homes.
I would consider this a good use of available information by gov't employees, and not quite the same as a big brother gov't.
"The market alone cannot provide sufficient constraints on corporation's penchant to cause harm." -- Joel Bakan
"While denying the state is playing 'Big Brother', the Revenue Department Commissioner, Alan LeBovidge predicted the state may eventually be able to track so much financial information on individuals that the state could complete the citizens' returns for them."
Automated government wallet-raping, coming soon to a tax office near YOU!.
[Avg Citizen] "Please just tell me how money I have to pay to not be thrown in jail."
-- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
They do your return for you, at least in the respect that they can lay it out with the info they'd expect you to provide. If too much of a disrepancy shows up on your actual return (which very likely you would still have to provide)... it's audit time.
But seriously, nowadays you can't even trust a bank to calculate payments/interest on your money correctly, would you really trust a government agency with your tax return?
Just /. the Mass. Dept. of Revenue's website
Wishing I was a millionaire since 1969.
In CA, you need to attach a copy of your 1040 to your 540 (CA tax form), even if you file paper.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
The people who would complain about this are the same who complain about automated speed 'traps'.
..speed trap. Expect the fine in the mail. They didn't lose time, but they did lose money. What did the police lose (if ignoring initial investment - those things do repay themselves easily) ? With the level of automation involved, not much.
It's basically a mindset issue. They feel that some things are against the law, and yes.. those people should get busted for it.
However, they should only get busted for it on 'equal grounds'.
Take the speed 'trap' (who called them 'trap' anyway ?).
They speed, they know it's illegal, and they know there's a chance they get spotted by cops, the cops pull away from wherever they are, follow you, pull you over, etc. etc. Fine, talk to the friendly officer, make up some stupid excuse even if they know it won't work anyway, get fined. They lost good time and money, and so did the police.
Now in comes the speed 'trap'. They speed, knowing it's illegal, but not a cop in sight.. *flash* "wtf?"
Thus, these speeders feel 'cheated'. They think it is 'unfair' - nevermind that they were comitting an illegal act.
Same with cheating taxes... they feel they have the right to cheat on taxes with the acceptance of the risk that they might be caught by an investigator for performing this illegal act. But NOT by an almost fully-automated machine. After all, they put effort into cheating, the IRS (or whichever other tax collector) should be on level grounds and put the same sort of effort into catching them.
At least, in their view.
This system doesn't break into your home rifling through your belongings. It doesn't track your computer usage online by installing back doors. It collects information, that as far as I am concerned until I hear otherwise is perfectly and completely legitimate for them to have. Disagreeing with one of the above posts passionately speaking about these "tax cheater" who can't afford to live and therefor cheat on their taxes, is the biggest bald-faced lie I've ever heard. Most people who cheat on their taxes have more money, and a better education on how to get away with it. That's why it's considered a "white-collar" crime because it's mostly committed by the wealthy. To prevent the poor from being smacked around by taxes it's why Massachusetts and the Federal Government taxes scale based on income.
Something intelligent here.
If I buy something in another state with a lower tax, in theory I have to pay taxes to my state to make up the difference. But it doesn't work the other way around. I don't get a refund for buying something in a higher tax state when I live in a lower tax state. If the government(s) don't seem to play fair, but rather to maximize profit, can you expect citizens to do any differently?
Case in point. I moved from a state with 6% sales tax to one with 5%. I had to retitle my car, and if I had bought it in a state with a lower tax, I would have to pay the government of my state the sales tax difference between my state and theirs - but there is no refund for a higher to lower. And this isn't just for people who just bought their cars in another state - I bought the car 2 years earlier.
I have blog like everyone else
Not really. If you buy TurboTax or TaxCut (I prefer TaxCut because there were never any MBR records to overwrite and it's less expensive) you get 100% of penalties and interest paid if they are wrong. If your accountant is wrong I doubt you'd get the same.
The Massachusetts Non-Resident form is a godawful mess of nested, interlocking schedules, forms, and mini-worksheets.
We, like plenty of other folks, live in Rhode Island, while receiving income from Mass sources (my wife works still there and I used to work in Boston). Every year, TaxCut Deluxe is reduced to sucking on its fingers and quietly crying while I grimly clench my teeth and enter the data for the Mass state forms manually.
On the other hand, good ol' Rhodey just asks you to copy over a few entries from your 1040 onto their one-age form, and then asks for a small percentage of that.
Good thing I live in Arkansas, these morons can't make it to the dentist - let alone calculate any taxes I would owe them.
Yet another example of how frightening an educated government can be. They'll stoop to any level to make sure they squeeze every penny out of you they think they can. Amazing, they do this all from laws that are unconstitutional.
This is exactly why we need to preserve our right to keep and bear arms. Because, at some point enough people are going to get fed up with this sh!t and revolt.
I only hope I'm alive to see that day. I've had enough of over 40% of my income going to the government.
It's just that people are embarrassed when someone else finds the deep, dark secrets that people generally hold to themselves (or percieve they do). Most people want privacy, to have a private domain that is separated, walled off and protected from the rest of society (public domain). We interact with the public domain with a MASK, which portrays certain information - the stuff we WANT people to see. We don't want them to see the bad stuff. We don't want people to think badly about us (I'm generalizing here).
Once you allow every human on the planet to know every intimate detail about your life...well, that's what makes SURVIVOR so fascinating for so many people (plus our voyeuristic nature), and is exactly what scares the hell out of us when the government does it (because we fear the government anyway, with their absolute power over us [as individuals]).
Do you really want to live in a world where every law, no matter how trivial, is enforced 100 percent of the time?
Limits must be placed upon what the government can learn, retain and aggregate.
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
Your wish is answered. Grandparent is correct, parent is not yet enlightened into the ways of legitimate karma gain.
"America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
Thing is, the government wants to avoid a situation in which people are able to tax revolt. When they get your money before you even see it, you can't withold it from them easily.
There are ways to do what you are suggesting, see some of the other replies. You will notice that none of them are completely painless.
Why not just make the tax system so simple that we don't need the IRS to monitor returns. The only cheaters would be the ones not paying, not the ones that take advantage of stupid loopholes.
Oh wait, that's too easy, and the government certainly wouldn't want to do something easy for people to understand. We might catch on to how much we're actually paying them.
They tax you for buying stuff, or something???
lol, that'd be the day! =)
Read "Perfectly Legal" by David Cay Johnston to see how both parties have ensured that their wealthy donors get all the breaks while we pick up the tab.
I can only read a chapter at a time because the book makes me so angry.
the major advances in civilization are processes which all but wreck the societies in which they occur - A.N. White
"I doubt a state has the right to demand customer lists and such from companies that do not do business in that state anyway."
IANAL, but I figure a state has the "right" to demand the sun and the moon from anyone - but not the legal power to enforce the customer list demand on a business which does not have a business presence in the state.
The Boston Fox affiliate runs regular investigative reports on how the state is failing to collect on its taxes and chases down people who are slipping through the loopholes. Then the intrepid reporter gets some representative of the DOR on camera and starts grilling them about why the Department isn't doing its job. I wonder what the net effect of that is?
bun-fhuinneog agam!
Actually entitlements make nearly 2/3s of the budget. cut that and i would have a lot more on my tax bill
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
Instead of going "Big Brother" on its citizens, how about they turn that microscope on themselves? I would like to see The States audited by each other, or some third party. Use a percentage of the budget savings for finding waste, fraud, etc. as an incentive. Also, make the bureaucrats liable for the funds.
I have a feeling that if any government, (state or federal) was held to its own standards (or higher) it would not be so quick to turn the screws...
Service guarantees Citizenship! Questions Guarantee GITMO.... Amerika Uber Alles!
Do they return money when they find people who accidentally overpaied? (if not, isn't that a government knowingly stealing outright?)
==>Lazn
A local government can just say that protestors are terrorists, and the feds will give them a load of cash to spend on shiny new cops and stuff.
So, if one were to define Tax Cheats as cousin to Osama, then BushCo will give money to help create your very own Total Information Awareness centre to fight the "'war' on terror."
Yeah, right.
I'm new to Cali, been living in SD for a few months, so I might be wrong, but couldn't the governor still veto those tax increases?
Not like Arnold will be around for that much longer...
--Have a good night's sleep. Don't forget to brush your tooth.
What war?
When was it declared? Against whom? Was it done by the Congress as demanded by the Constitution?
For example, in and around many small towns cops set up these traps as "revenue generators", sometimes on a semi-permanent basis! Basically, you will be on a road that is say marked for 55 MPH, then as you come into town, the road will be marked as 35 MPH. Well, that is all fair and good if there is enough room between the markings (signs) to slow down safely (ie, coast or light braking).
Many times, though, you will see these signs set 50 to 100 feet apart! Nowhere near enough time. The cop or radar camera will be behind a bush (or some other hidden niche) somewhere in the vicinity of the second sign, generally right after it. If you are 5 MPH more or over the 35 MPH limit (many are, especially if you are out of town or driving through) - bam, you are hit with a ticket.
Photo radar galls people more because of the lack of a human element. Many times, you see these things on the side of a freeway. Say you are doing 80 MPH in a 75 MPH zone, in the middle lane - maybe fluctuating between 80 and 81 (or you got new different size tires and didn't have your speedometer adjusted). The freeway is newly paved, you are driving a well-tuned family sedan with good tires and pressure, no one else around you for a couple of miles. Any person with common sense would say you are only being a danger to yourself, if anyone. I would say if you passed a cop, he might pull you over and give you a warning to slow down, or a small ticket at best. The photo radar machine? BUSTED - for whatever the local government can get out of you. Heck, they might even jack it up a bit, because by the time you get the mail, you are already home, they are far away, and you have NO WAY to prove the conditions. At least with a cop, you can talk with him - treat him nice and he will probably let you off with the warning.
This is why people call them traps - because that is what they generally are.
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
...gov'ts would have done this earlier - while the Patriot Act presumably made some information easier to get that gov'ts would not have otherwise have gotten, the main impetus driving this collection is the ability to gather personal and financial data using the internet. Once that capability came along, it was only a matter of time. Bush didn't make it possible - the tech did. Once the capacity is there, people want to use to best enhance their power, and bureaucracies (sic) are no different.
Also remember that both Democrats and Republicans gave us the Patriot Act and its spawn - while Ashcroft (and by consequence GWB) can take the blame for some of its misuse, they didn't give themselves this power - our elected representatives did. Something to remember come November.
>
> doing it yourself, or having a 3rd party accountant or software do it is the way you keep the revenue service honest - true to their own convoluted, overly-complex rules.
Doing it yourself also makes it blatantly clear to you that the tax code has nothing to do with raising revenue, and everything to do with social engineering.
Seriously. With respect to those who died on the Challenger, did we really need Congress to direct the IRS to spend time writing up "Astronauts Who Die In The Line Of Duty" guidelines for the 2003 tax year? Do we really need laws that micromanage our lives to the point that seven people on the entire planet (maybe 6, I'm not sure if the law covers the Israeli, but if he earned that income from NASA, perhaps he also has to dual-file with the IRS) get a tax break?
If the goal of tax policy is the collection of revenue to fund projects that the State has decided to commit resources to, the answer is "no".
If the goal of tax policy is to remind the serfs who is Lord and who is Serf, and that the Serfs had goddamn well better keep in their place if they know what's good for them, then the answer is "yes".
Do your taxes by hand with a calculator. And decide for yourself on the basis of your observations, what the tax code is really all about.
I'm not gonna go Randroid and suggest that taxes should be abolished. I'm not even gonna go with my personal opinion that taxes should be reduced.
As someone who lives in America, the land that spends $200 BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR in complying with ITS OWN GODDAMN TAX CODE, I am going to go so far as to say the Internal Revenue Code needs to be scrapped and replaced with something less complex, even if tax rates rise under a new system.
Either the US tax code is radically reformed, or I - someone who pays more in taxes than I spend on all other expenses, including my own food, shelter, and entertainment combined - will fucking walk to any country that'll have me.
We still have the option to demand the removal of a public official from office. While california isn't the shining example of polotics, they did show that if you get enough people pissed off, they can change leaders mis stride.
What this means is that we need to start holding politicians to standards. Get elected on the ticket of reducing spending? Do it or you're gone.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Alright, for all of us 'working stiffs' not in business for ourselves, we pay taxes BEFORE the check is handed to us, and when we buy something we pay the sales tax as a condition of the sale. You can't get arrested for not paying sales tax if you didn't buy something because you didn't want to pay the tax.
Food, groceries, the stuff people eat, is tax-free where I live (Rhode Island). You pay a tax on 'prepared foods' but not on groceries. No argument there.
Nobody's starving because of the piece Uncle Sam takes out, people are starving because wages are so low compared to cost of living these days. My dad worked at McDonalds and put himself through private college and lived in an apartment in the 1960s, I make THREE TIMES minimum wage and I can barely afford the basement apartment I live in.
And don't forget that there are TONS of programs to keep kids (and adults) fed. They wouldn't be there if uncle sam didn't foot the bill for them by taking a bit out of all our checks.
And I fail to see what's any more 'totalitarian' about an internet sales tax or a media tax than there is to a regular over-the-counter sales tax. Does taxing something new that's replacing an old revenue stream imply some sort of cold-blooded dictatorship to you?
And your enforcability problem? What's any more enforcable about the taxes you're talking about than the ones we already have? I can't mosey down to the convenience store and get a pack of gum and a twinkie 'hold the sales tax' can I? Hell, that's the way taxes SHOULD work, tax what you KNOW FOR SURE. All this 'calculated this-and-that deferred thingy quarterly' bullshit is just more holes for people who can afford accountants to slip out of paying their fair share. I wish they'd tax sales and income FLAT, no BS, "you make a buck, we take a quarter", none of this pre-tax and post-tax expenses stuff, no AGI, no capital gains, no minimum income.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
As for WMD, Bush acted on intelligence and the need to rid the world of an evil, mass-murdering dictator.
It has been widely reported that the intelligence that was gathered said that Iraq had NO WMD stockpiled. Presented NO real threat to the US. And if anything the country was suffering big time due to the current sanctions and was in no way shape or form ready to be able attack anyone, let alone us.
However, since the powers that be needed some form of scapegoat to show us sheep that we were going to do something about 9/11, Iraq was going to be as good as any target and would present a much lower casulty rate than attacking a real threat like North Korea. What they needed was thou was some "real" reasons to start a war and so any report that was favorable to this was sent right to the top while reports that were contrary to this effort were buried.
In short, you belived what you wanted to just like a good sheep and now stand on your pulpit banging the same lies that they expounded upon before because you'll be dammed if you have to accept the fact that you swallowed all that bs hook line and sinker before. (Don't get me wrong, democrats are just as bad about not wanting to belive that they got lied to and then get busted on it. Which is why someone like Dr. Howard Dean will never become a president. He's too damn honest.)
Bottom line, you were lied to. The truth wants to be free. You don't want to believe it because, gasp! it might actually make the president look like the vote grubbing, oil robbing, coke doing, drunk driving, AWOL loser that he really is. But hey, by all means keep your head in the sand brother! It's the new American Way!
I agree with most of your words, but this needs to be corrected:
And there is a good reason that the prison population is rising, there are bunch of jerks in this country that need to be locked up that we haven't been locking up in the past.
This is false. Non-violent drug offenders do not need to be locked up, and they constitute an ever-rising percentage of prison population. I agree that predators should be locked up or executed. Incarcerating a person for smoking marijuana or using any drug (such as alcohol or sleeping pills) brings only negative consequences. It does not stop drug use, it does not stop drug abuse, it does not stop drug sales. Prisoners can get drugs in prisons.
I have never heard any rational defense for the War on Some Drugs.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Yes, the market could crash and I could lose it... but that's an issue of financial responsibility. It's also a deductible loss ;)
SIG: HUP
suta dumping for example:u ipl2k2/uipl_3402.htm
http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/dmstree/uipl/
i'm all for privacy just as much as anyone, but there's something to realize, generally speaking the only people who really cheat on their taxes are rich people who can afford to get accountants to squeak them through. i say, screw them! they're the ones who need to pay up.
m.
"...the state may eventually be able to track so much financial information on individuals that the state could complete the citizens' returns for them." Uh huh. And if that ever comes to pass, you think they'll be as eager to give out refunds as they are to collect?
Sounds like its time to cut up the credit cards, and move all my vast reserves of cash into gold bullion... (you never know, they might put RFIDs into money so they can track your purchases).
Anything that can have data attached to it is suspect in this climate...
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
The state form sucks. Its much harder than the federal form. If there were some deal to be had with the devil, it would be tempting.
However, all trust in any state government system was washed away by the few years I worked as a state employee. Here is my story.
I had to enter payment leins against various organizations that my monster agency might have to one day pay. I had to use the dummy terminal mainframe system to enter data in a format that I think pre-dates western use of the numeral 0. If thats possible in a computer system.
And the IRS agents were sooo understanding. As we both worked for the state, and used the same systems. (Knowing perfectly well I could not comply with the requests using the tools available.) I would receive multiple certified snail mail letters threating me personnaly with liability for the tens of thousands someone owed the government. And, if multiple agencies had a claim, they would each claim that they were the ones to be given priority and I would be in serious trouble if I didn't do what they said.
Technology aside, this is the state. These people are more than likely still the ones who would use this data. And its those people I fear far more than the technology.
No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.
The plan is technically flawed - so it won't work. Why does this slip past implementers so often? (I have my own answers to that).
Return to the FUNDAMENTAL ASSUMPTIONS made by these people. They ASS-U-ME that if your (item A "tax return") reflects a different economic ability than your (item B "lifestyle evidence trail") then you may be cheating, and deserve further investigation. I am sure each of us can come up with hundred of scenarious where our credit history lies.. with very little mental burden.
They also ASS-U-ME that further investigation is without cost TO THE PERSON INVESTIGATED. This is patently untrue, as the costs run from imposed stress (yes, even honest people are stressed by government inquiry), paperwork management costs, legal and professional fees, and LAST BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEAST society's obsession with circumstantial appearances.
As with every use of technology, unles it is based on sound theory it will not work. It will, however, hum along impressively, generate/consume tons of revenue, make good/bad press, and impress naive congresswomen/taxpayers. If that is what we are really after... then it's a solution.
I would vote for a MANDATORY 20 year test run of this before allowing any actual use. Over 20 years, there should be sufficient data to see the holes and understand the data sets. Sans anything like that (ok, maybe 10 years) this deploment is as foolish as (pick two: Internet voting, unencrypted for-profit corporate email, offshore outsourcing of credit bureaus data management, relocating DARPA research centers to mainland China).
How many times does this retarded AWOL story have to be proven untrue before idiots like you will shut up?
Right, but unless you do that, the state doesn't get your info. The parent was talking about the state being able to auto-generate your return based on fed data. The state doesn't GET the fed data unless you send it to them; it's not legal for the IRS to give out your info to the states, even to the state taxing agencies, though it's legal for the states to ask it of you.
Wrong. I moved into CA on Febuary 2002, and then filed my 2001 taxes (which had nothing to do with California) in March. A few months later, I got a nasty letter from the CA Dept of Revenue stating very matter of fact that I filed a federal tax return from a CA address, but I didn't file a CA state return. Consequently, they assumed that I was cheating them out of taxes, and they told me that I had to prove that I didnt have a 2001 CA tax liability in writing within 2 weeks, or they were going to "estimate" my CA income and assess a tax. I'm not sure, but I think my written response to them will almost guarantee me audits for the next few years. I was not very happy with them.
But since he was AWOL, that's a bit unlikely.
Of course, he had to go AWOL because of all of that inconvenient drug testing. He knew he couldn't beat that (and keep partying like he was).
I would guess you don't live in MA.
:http://www.state.ma.us/rmv/regs/reg2.htm
The first time you register a car in MA, you are required to pay 5% sales tax on that car (no matter where you bought it. Tax free NH be damned!) So, if your rich uncle gave you the car, you'd still have to pay sales tax on it.
So, you would have already paid tax on the car, and would be in the system as having paid the tax, and therefore would not be red flagged.
Course, insurance rates are high enough in MA (set by the state) to keep you from being able to drive that car you clearly can't afford.
From
"Fees To transfer a plate from one vehicle to another of the same type, the fee is $15.00. A $50.00 title fee and the applicable sales tax will also be collected."
and
"The sales tax for a private sale is calculated at 5% of the purchase price or the National Automotive Dealer Association (NADA) trade-in value, whichever is higher."
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
You get the burden of proof and exactly dick in return. Same with tax cheats. I like to see them get caught, too, but don't think for a second that means you pay less.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm starting to feel taxed and regulated to freaking death. And I want all these "public" databases to go away, permanently. I liked the world better when we still had a little privacy.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I don't fully understand your situation. If you were only working somewhere for two days, or a week, or similar.. you'd receive a 1099, not a W2. There are no tax withholdings in a 1099'd ("subcontractor") position. I, like many of us, have been self-employed for years and am more than familiar with this mess. Please explain your situation so that I can better help.
Claim N on your W4, pay up at the end of the year. (N = ridiculous hyperbole of an integer) IANATL, but AFAIK theres nothing illegal about putting a false amount on your W4 as long as you don't fudge it on your 1040. Good luck.
You always hear about those people who get paid in cash, so they never files taxes... The few times I've heard of them I've found out they are the most rabid "soak the rich in taxes" people. Some make 6 figures, and pay no taxes. Then vote for the guy who raises my taxes.
Fortunately such people are rare, but when they not only cheat the system, but then turn around and sock me for more. If I ever find someone doing this I'll turn them in, please do the same.
But, can you imagine the outcry if
a) Everyone who doesn't actually pay taxes didn't get that "gift" (aka refund) every year
and
b) The people who do pay taxes had to write one huge check on April 15th?
The government would never be able to maintain support for the tax rates we currently have if people actually had to write out what would probably be the largest check of the year..
On second thought, I fail to see the problem. Where can I vote to get rid of withholding?
This
I've had two incidents that show this is already happening in California:
Given what little I've seen of the Massachusetts beaurocracy, I bet the residents there are going to be subjectd to even more fun than we Californians!
I mostly agree, taxes should be collected in one lump payment. It should be due on election day though, make people think a little bit on if these taxes are worth it.
Note, this is not a poll tax, you can pay the tax and not vote if you want. If you don't owe taxes you can still vote.
You're completely bullshitting, man. What's here in New England? Gay marriage; legalized, medicinal, pot; few states (if any?) that support the death penalty; the Free Software Foundation; etc; etc; etc.
New England is, arguably, one of the last bastions of liberty, and progressivism. If you want Draconian anything, go west, young man, but especially, go south.
Our national anthem will likely be changed to Dixie after President Wolfowitz wins the Diebold election.
Radically reforming the US tax code.
Liberty in your lifetime
The comment, though true, was meant to be closer to "funny" than "interesting". And I have asked them to bring back the online filing whihc made the forms a little closer to bearable.
Ours is going down -- the opposite of skyrocketing.
2000 - 4.0%, 2001 - 4.7%, 2002 - 5.8%, 2003 - 6.0% That doesn't look like it's going down to me sport.
Allow me to direct you to here and here. The first link gives yearly unemployment averages from 1948 to 2002. The second link, to the homepage, says the average unemployment numbers for 2003 are 6.0%. As for the "booming 90s", 1990-1999 yield a simple average of 5.75% Lower than present. Now if we take the numbers from 1994-2001, the years the Clinton administration is mostly responsible for, you get 4.925%.
Much of our country's history has been spent in debt, the key is the percentage of the debt versus the GDP of the nation. Debt is not the problem, its the ability of the nation to manage that debt and make the payments in relation to the country's ability to produce goods and services that people want to obtain.
A budget deficit doesn't paint the whole picture? Brilliant deduction! Let me guess, you went to college for an Economics degree, didn't you? 'The country's ability to produce goods and services that people want to obtain'... that sounds directly related to our trade deficit. Which is also at an all time high. In terms any American can understand, this country has lost it's job and is now living on the credit cards.
I won't even bother to respond to the rest of your flamebait. How this post got modded 4 Interesting is beyond me. I'm beginning to think Slashdot is the target of astroturfing.
And why did he stop taking physical exams 3 years before the end of his service? He was supposed to take one every year to coincide with his birthday. Bush passed an exam May 15, 1971, but in the summer of 1972 he refused to take one, and lost his flying status because of it. In the summer of 1973 Bush was still serving in the Guard, but no records exists to prove he ever took a physical. In fact, there's no evidence that in the 42 months between May 1971 and the time he officially discharged on Nov. 21, 1974, Bush ever took an Air Force physical.
His failure to take the physical in 1972, and his subsequent loss of his flying status, should have triggered a disciplinary review, copies of which would be contained in Bush's military file. But none exists. Where are they?
And why, after the government spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to teach him how to fly, did he apply to be transferred to an Alabama postal unit?
What's that sound? That's the sound of AWOL.
Bring on the Tuttles!
27B/6!
everything you fill out is just verification of what your employer reported already...and they are hoping you will voluntarily pay more...95% of the people are just wasting time effort and paper, it's really only the self employed who do not regularly report during the year and the poor service people, waiters etc that they are busy screwing...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
How come it's always the men get blamed for privacy invasion? More often or not, it is the women who do the spying! Calling it a 'Big Brother Tech' is blatant sexism!!!
I never have modpoints when I need them...
P.S. Anyone who tells you unemployment is dropping like a rock is lying or uninformed. As another poster said already, they stop counting people once their unemployment benefits run out. And a *lot* of people are losing their benefits these days. Not to mention all of us who don't qualify for unemployment, be we recent college grads or whatever.
A. Because if they hold your money, they know they'll get it. Plus, the spectre of a refund is incentive to do your taxes.
B. Because then they wouldn't get to hold your money interest free. (Hey, interest free loans are great -- given inflation, the borrower technically makes money on them)
I think Maryland must be doing something similar. Several months ago they hit me for something like $5000 for 2001. The problem with this was that I lived in California for the entirety of 2001, with the exception of the last three weeks. Two of those were spent in transit across country, and the last was spent in Philadelphia. No Maryland anywhere in there. However, I did move to Maryland breifly in Feb 2002, filed my taxes, stayed a while longer and then moved to Taxachusetts. And because I filed my taxes there they decided they were entiled to a cut of 2001 as well as 2002 (they already had their cut of 2002).
So I sent back a reply explaining this and haven't heard from them since.
As government agencies become more and more invasive in the name of collecting taxes, it's always a good time to think of cheaper, fairer and less intrusive ways to fund the government. A few years ago there was a bill in the House, I think it was #2050, to abolish all income tax and disband the IRS, replacing it with a 20% federal retail sales tax. To counteract the inherent regressiveness of a sales tax (places a greater burden on the poor, since they spend a higher percentage of their income) there would also be an annual flat refund to every taxpayer. The refund amount would be the sales tax rate times the federally defined poverty level income, with a slight variation for marital status and number of children.
For example, if poverty level is defined as $15,000/year everybody would get a check for $3000. So would Donald Trump. Someone making about $15,000/year and spending every penny would get back all the sales tax they paid. Donald Trump would also get $3000 even though he pays far more sales tax because he buys more.
Last I heard, this proposal was tied up in the House Finance committee. It must have died there. One of the things I liked about it was that it would have eliminated the 105,000-employee IRS, replacing it with a much smaller bureau whose job would be to collect the tax from the existing 50 state revenue depts. But another plus is that it would eliminate most of the enforcement, including indirect surveillance of citizens through their financial records.
I was hoping that once the sales tax was implemented at the federal level it would catch on in the states, and we would be free of notifying the government of our every financial move. Our taxes would be paid at the cash register when we made purchases. We would know exactly how much tax we were paying, since corporate taxes (a hidden part of the cost of every product) would also be eliminated. Best of all, a tax system this simple would be extremely difficult for Congress to abuse behind closed doors.
I feel so much better now. This makes the FTC's (I think) "Know Your Customer" initiative of a few years ago pale in comparison.
They do not get access to the data, but they can get access to the fact that you filed, and some very minimal data. They certainly do not get enough data to complete your taxes for you. Obviously this is true or you never would have gotten that letter.
Practically every form I get that I have to use to enter data on my tax return also gets forwarded or is otherwise already reported to the IRS.
It's not that they can't fill out my return for me, it's just that they can't handle and organize all the data for me.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
don't worry.any day now we will all be eaten by robots.don't worry.
Crisis is the rule, not the exception.
Neither of them addressed why W went 42 months without taking an Air Force Physical (which had to be done by Air Force personnel, not personal doctors like a W surrogate implied at one point). That's more than half his term of service.
Neither one addresses why, considering the fact that he stopped getting physicals and lost his flight status, there is no evidence of the disciplinary review that should have automatically occurred.
And finally, neither discusses why Pilot W made his first request to transfer service to Alabama to a Postal Unit where there was no flying at all.
So how the hell are either of those supposed to be replies to my grandparent post?
Here in Spain, our own IRS has been doing this for years. Here, the government can fill your tax forms for you, send it to you via email, and you only have to sign it with a digital certificate and send it back. You'd better review it, because the IRS (we call it Hacienda) is not legally bound to what it says, if there is a mistake you are legally responsible for it.
The only downside to this, is that only data from people with a wage is accurate. People with their own business, manage to hide a lot of revenues from the IRS (which is cheating, and it's one of the reasons why I pay more than I should!!!)
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Or for those who enjoy conspiracies, maybe the CP finally did succeed in running a mole to the very top cloaked as a conservative to collapse the country, like they'd been planning in the late 50's early 60's.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
I cannot believe slashdotters would get all hot and bothered by this latest money extraction scheme. Politicians are notoriously incapable of understanding all the minute technical reasons why this system WILL NEVER WORK. Simply put, all those databases contain errors. Attempting to tie together databaes from multiple different state agencies, across multiple US states is not going to be a simple task. Then when you consider that all databases contain erroneous information such as misspellings, inaccuracies, multiple instances of two different people having the same name, and so on and so forth, all they are going to end up with is a big, expensive mess. My guess is that Tax-achusetts had better start liquidating its assets if they think that this proposed system is going to actually INCREASE revenue. I predict that it will be a money sink forever and will be quietly abandoned at some point in the near future.
If their software is so fscking great why don't these governments just mail us our tax bill? That way we wouldn't be able to make a mistake on it. The tax laws are totally out of control and everyone should read Perfectly Legal and find out how the tax laws are the most politicized of any laws in the US.
So you believe that the harder you work and the more successful you are, the less right you have to keep your own money. Interesting that the right to property diminishes with the amount of property possessed. I wasn't aware of that.
Or maybe you're just jealous, greedy, and resentful that others have more than you.
I'd agree that "the rich" should carry a larger portion of public responsibility by virtue of their ability to do so. But don't you think noblesse oblige should be voluntary? Or do you think it is just and right to force people to do things they don't want to, in a country that calls itself "free"? Charity compelled under threat of force is not charity.
How is there room for loopholes? "7% tax on every item sold, except food, clothing, medicine."
That's the beauty of it. It works the same for everyone. It's not an income tax. It's a sales tax. You pay tax on what you buy. You are in control of what you buy. Rich people tend to consume more, both because they have more to spend in the first place and also because a larger share of their income is "disposable", so they pay more. It's self-regulating, and the individual citizen is in control. You would have a direct say in how big your government gets. If you don't want to it to grow, buy on the essentials (food, clothing, medicine) which are exempt from the tax as a matter of principle. If you want democracy, this is it - the free market in action in the political realm.
It's also the most tyrannical. What right does government have to any of my money? I earned it; it is mine. Once you believe gov't has the right to some arbitrary amount of your assets, what prevents it from taking more? Nothing! The amount is at the whim of legislators. You are forced to give up something that by right belongs to you, and if you refuse you are thrown in jail.
Do you believe in private property? Could I walk into your garage and say "I need 5% of your car, so I'll take this tire"? If this sounds ludicrous and idiotic, that's because it is, and that's precisely why this country had no income tax for 140 years.
You cannot give a right to government that you yourself do not possess. If you were my neighbor and you knocked on my door and asked me for $20 to help you pay for medicine (or whatever) you need but can't afford, I might (or might not) give it to you. This is fine. If you knocked on my door, put a gun in my face and demanded $20, you'd be an armed robber. You do not have the right to take my property by force, and neither does the government.
A sales tax sidesteps this issue. If you don't want to pay it, don't buy the goods. The tax is voluntary. Since food, clothing, and medicine are necessary for life, which is also an inherent right and government cannot take part in depriving you of, these items are exempt from the tax.
So ask yourself, what are your motives? What justifies seizing someone else's property? (Because a majority want want the minority has?) What justifies doing so progressively, in a manner that shows favoritism by damaging some more than others? (Because you can count on the votes of the 51% poor to support you giving them freebies?) People say my attitude is "greedy" for just wanting to keep (or dispensing as I choose) what I already have...I think it is truly greedy to want what someone else has.
Constitutionally Correct
instead of filing your taxes, you can accept the state's tax bill. if you think you should pay less, then you file your return, else you pay the tax bill. i think there exists many tax billing methods like this that work more or less to everyone's benefit.
There is, however, a substantial tax penalty if your withheld amount isn't at least a certain percentage (80%, IIRC, but IANACPA) of your actual tax liability. IOW, withholding (or pre-paying or its equivalent) is mandatory, and they'll fine you 'til you're dizzy if you duck it.
Considering the efforts that were made in the 60's to locate and persecute people who participated in or contributed to anti-war groups, gay and lesbian groups, etc. Can we really be comfortable knowing that every charity dollar we send out it recorded. Especially since the federal government is seeking increased powers to spy on nonviolent groups.
I don't want my life to be scanned by some homophobic beureucrat with access to a database and time on his hands. Or for my donations to the green party to put me on any watch lists.
Don't laugh, it happened in the 60's under COINTELPRO. And, despite the fact that it was illegal it happened to the Japenese-Americans in WWII.
That's why he's promoting proposition 56 which reduces the requirement that the state legislature have a 2/3 majority on tax increases down to a slim 55%. Just try blaming that on Democrats!
I'm sorry to pester you like this, but I've had this argument before :-). I'm trying to refine my argument.
:-)
I say it is easier for the rich to get richer than for someone who is poor. This is because the rich can afford to hire help. For example, in making investments.
Suppose I have $10,000 to invest. I can buy a mutual fund, invest it in stocks I pick; this will cost me some fraction of the total investment, less if I am good at investing. Now, if someone has $1,000,000 to invest, they can hire a competent manager to invest on their behalf. Maybe the manager is good, maybe bad; but if the manager is better than me, the rich guy will earn more than me. In other words, it doesn't matter whether I am a better investor than the rich guy; the rich guy just has to hire a manager that is better than me. And of course, if you are Bill Gates, you can build a University to study how to make money for you
The rich also have more influence. I think I know how the RIAA ought to make CDs and deal with file sharing, but I'll bet Janet Jackson's opinion is more likely to be acted on.
For all these reasons, it is easier for the rich to get richer (in an exponential way!). It's easier for a rich person to make extra money, so hitting them harder with taxes just cancels out their advantages.
Now I'm not going to argue that the government isn't spending huge amounts of money and sticking me with a large portion of the bill. I think there are plenty of cases where it's spending wads of money to make things worse (e.g. in the war against marijuana). There are useful things that only a government can do, and as a society we have to pay for that, preferably with fair taxes. I think it is fair to tax everyone; and to tax the rich at a higher rate.
-- Pot is safer than Beer
If your employer reports what they pay you on a 1099 form instead of a W2, then you are responsible for making your own quarterly estimated tax payments. You have a lot more overhead for record keeping, but it's worth the effort if your employer can accomidate you. This evens things out quite nicely if you do lots of short jobs or you have big peaks and valleys in your pay rate. W2 is not appropriate for short-term contract work.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
-----
something tells me that the same people who are willing to accept a basically unaccountable bill from the government are the same people who don't bother to vote
-----
Voting doesn't matter. The democratic way of making decisions (ie. voting) has been around since the earliest days of human intellect. It's only logical that figuring out how to rig voting has been around just as long.
-----
or pay attention to what bureaucrats are doing with our tax dollars.
-----
Since voting is a moot point there's really nothing we can do about it.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Something a friend pointed out to me, from Thomas Sowell.
That's another reason why I can never agree that it's "fair" to tax the rich more. Having capital (money) increases productivity. Capital represents previous work spent acquiring it. Building on previous hard work enables one to be more productive with the same amount of work than building without that foundation.
Since capital represents time working, and all men are created equal, how can we legitimately say that gov't can take 20 minutes of this man's hour, but only 10 minutes of this man's hour? If men are equal, and they own themselves (and therefore their time), then we cannot lay claim to any more of one man's time than any other's. (Further, I would say we cannot rightfully claim any amount of any man's time; it is his time - we cannot steal from him. And that's what laying "first dibs" to a portion of a man's income, the fruit of his labor, is - theft.) Of course, some men are more talented than others, and have giftings and abilities that others don't, that make them more productive than others with what they have...but the inherent value of the man himself is equal to any other. Would you rob 20% of what the crippled leper has? Then why would you rob 20% of what the rich athlete has? These men are equal. To look at them only in terms of their earning capacity is denigrating their fundamental value as human beings.
Some people have physical/mental talents that make them more productive with their time. Others start out with financial/material assets that have the same basic result of greater productivity. Should we handicap the athletes, the scholars, the artists...for the sake of those that don't have those benefits starting out? The two things are equivalent, and if you favor handicapping the rich, why not handicap the talented? (Beginning to sound like Harrison Bergeron, which also had a warped idea of "equality for all".) Everyone hopes to pass on the benefits of their hard work (or dumb luck) to their children. Whether it's money on genetics. If we're going to handicap those that happened to have rich parents and "didn't work for what they have" should we also filter chromosomes to make sure nobody starts out with too large a head start over his peers? They didn't "work for it" either.
Redistributing money equally means you are not distributing human dignity equally. It means you value those you take more away from less than those you take less away from. Making some people more enslaved to government than others is not freedom, nor is it justice.
Constitutionally Correct