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'd be happier if it included corporations - the ones still 'located' in Mass. anyway.
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
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.
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
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?
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?
Well, they could still complete them for us, and as part of the normal submission process make us certify that they are correct. Note that they already make us do this.
GET YOUR WEAPONS READY! --DR.LIGHT
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
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
Sez who?
The year I quit my job and went back to grad school I was paying about $600/month rent and $3000 for classes, and I made $6000 that year.
It's call savings. I saved money from my three years of post-college work, allowing to me to live off savings that year. It's none of the government's business if I saved the money in a bank (on the books) or a mattress (off the books). I shouldn't have to prove anything to any investigator.
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.
Knock, knock, Mr. Liberal.
- mention-that-I-was-in-Vietnam-Kerry.
This is the state of your boy, Mr. John-I-was-in-Vietnam-but-I-don't-use-botox-did-I
Where he is currently the Junior Senator.
Where he was once Lt. Gov.
Trying to blame this on Bush is like trying to blame Mike Tyson for the price of tea in China. But don't let that stop you from hating Bush so much you don't care who you vote for.
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.
I'm going to have to agree with you. I think it would make things much simpler if I received both my W-2s *and* a completed tax return from the IRS/State. Then I could have the option of either signing and returning it or disputing it and filling out my own. The IRS could simply process those returns that were unmodified and only use extra resources on those that were reworked. That might streamline the process and save some money, depending on how many tax returns are *right* the first time.
I guess you could argue that these sorts of programs show up in the Northeast first because of its strong philosophical belief in "Government should be working for me." Hence lots of government programs. I'm not sure I really buy that - that philosophy is pretty universal nowadays - but it was my first thought, so I figured I'd mention it.
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. :)
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.
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.
insurance companies vs. fraud.
Insurance fraud is interesting. It happens mainly in states with very uncompetitive insurance environments, and therefore have high prices.
Car insurance is terribly important, but often people feel like they aren't getting anything out of it, which is the point, it's property insurance. So the more people pay in car insurance, the more they feel ripped off, the more likely it is they will consider insurance fraud.
New Jersey spends all its time trying to figure out why it has an uncompetitive market, and reducing insurance fraud. The problem is one in the same.
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
I admit to indulging in hyperbole, with that statement. But your rebuttal-by-analogy is kinda weak. You said
Clean air and water are concrete things, easily measurable. They can be evaluated according to biological standards. Pollution can be counted as a physical quantity, and judged according to ccertain absolute criteria for health.
Privacy is an abstract concept. Of what does it consist? It consists essentially of me having information that others do not have, and me having control over the spread of that information. But one of the reasons others know so little about me is not because I only act "in private", where nobody else can see me. I act in public all the time, and leave traces of my information everywhere I go. The only reason I still have privacy is because the information I leave lying around, "loose", is too thinly spread, and too poorly organized, and too difficult to collect and study in one place, for anybody else to learn anything useful about me unless I consciously and explicitly tell them.
In short, a huge part of what we think of as "privacy" hinges on the technological limitations of actually making sense of all my public information. And it is exactly these technological limitations that so many people, in so many sectors, have been working so diligently for so long to overcome.
It's true that government also has the technology to place a laser on your window and listen to your every word. But just because they have the technology doesn't make it ok to do.
That's not what we're talking about, though. We're talking about "loose" information, that for lack of cheap, effective technology, has never been gathered together in one place and properly analyzed. As the technology for that sort of thing advances, becoming cheaper and better, the government won't need to shoot spybeams at your windows--they'll know everything they need to know simply by studying the concatenated information about all your public acts and transactions.
The idea that mankind is limited to walking speed was an illusion facilitated by millenia without horseback riding, the railroad, and the airplane. Does this mean that the police should not use automobiles, because then they might go fast enough to catch more criminals than appropriate? Of course not.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
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.
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.