Slashdot Mirror
Tracking Your Taxes
CTealL writes "Apparently Intuit thinks it's okay to share information about taxes with third paries. According to this article,
Intuit is using a third party tracking technology on all tax forms submitted to the IRS. "We could capture your name, your Social Security number or any other information that you willingly pass to a Web site," acknowledged Matt Belkin, who serves as vice president of best practices for Utah marketing giant Omniture, which tracks the online activities of people using Intuit's TurboTax. The IRS disavows any knowledge of this, saying "The IRS does not take a position on Web tracking tools." Makes you wonder where your tax information is going..."
"We could capture your name, your Social Security number or any other information that you willingly pass to a Web site," acknowledged Matt Belkin, who serves as vice president of best practices for Utah marketing giant Omniture, which tracks the online activities of people using Intuit's TurboTax.
But he said Omniture doesn't do this. The reason, he said, is that client companies don't authorize Omniture to do it.
Yes they *can*, but do they? *no*
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
So nobody pays tax on necessities. From there, the more you buy, the more you pay. It's progressive without having to treat people differently under the law.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Banks make good money selling your financial information to "related buisnesses".
Sorry to burst your bubble. I work closely with dozens of banks and credit unions on this very topic. GLB inspires more neurotic fear in bankers than anything else I have seen in some time.
By the way, "related businness" means sharing information with other companies that must be there to support the bank, like disaster recovery companies, records archiving companies, etc.
Whether or not you believe it, "related businesses" simply cannot use your information for anything other than performing their service for the bank.
The closest a bank can get to profiting from your personal information is using it to offer services. A bank may notice that you have a high credit card balance and offer you a HELOC, it may notice that you have a high savings balance and offer its CDs, it may notice that your car loan is getting paid down and offer a pre-approved loan for a newer car, etc.
Other than that, your information is strictly off limits.
What it does is ask the server for an image (JPEG or GIF). But this request actually triggers a CGI program on the server side, passing it a unique session identifier that was served in the original page. The CGI app on Intuit's side most likely relays the request to the tracking company's server for logging. Cute, huh?
Since I'm not a customer, I didn't go past the login page. But it would be interesting to examine the analytics code served up in the account management pages - perhaps they pass not only the session identifier, but form values as well. (The analytics script could be triggered after the user hits the submit button, for instance). This may have been the point Omniture's CEO was making when he said that he could get customer's SSNs and salary data if he wanted to. Hopefully, there is a negotiation between Intuit and the web analytics firm about what customer information will be tracked, and procedures in place to verify that the analytics portion of the HTML does not collect more information than agreed upon.
Maybe someone with an account at Intuit should take a closer look at the page sources to see what parameters are being passed to the analytics server while you're managing your money.
Dissemination of your personal information without EXPLICIT voluntary consent is clearly against the law. I hope someone is smart enough and will sue the hell out of them.
Or, for that matter, you could file on paper, for cheaper.
Cheaper than free? I don't think so.
In an ideal world, you'll be sufficiently under-withheld that you don't have to worry about getting a refund anyway, removing the only rational reason to e-file.
I've got another rational reason to e-file. You save the cost of the stamp (actually to be safe you should probably use two stamps as one is probably not enough), as well as the hassle of printing out the form and mailing it in. In my case, I save the hassle of driving to the post office and buying stamps, since I generally don't have any stamps around anyway.
Of course, I wound up working less last year than expected, so I wound up with a refund, and I'll probably get one again in 2005 since changing my exemptions to 7 probably won't be enough (should have gone for 9, I guess). But yeah, the target is to owe $999 at the end, unless of course you can manage to get your income taxes down to $0, which is actually not too hard for 2005 (a married couple can earn $41,000 if they both contribute $4000 to an IRA and have $3000 of capital losses; if they have kids or one is a teacher or have student interest or have rental property or paid tuition costs they can earn even more; just having a few rental properties can theoretically raise that number to $66,000).
Filing on paper is still legal (as long as you prepare your own return, anyway).
For the federal return it's still legal. California (and possibly other states), has made it illegal for a paid preparer who files more than 50 (or something like that) California returns from not e-filing an eligible state return unless the customer specifically requests not to e-file, but the federal government has done no such thing - yet.