Slashdot Mirror


IRS to Allow Tax Preparers to Sell Your Info?

merkel writes "The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that the IRS has proposed rule changes allowing tax-return preparers, like H&R Block, to sell an individual's return information to marketers and data brokers. The proposed rule [PDF], which does contain some substantive protections for the processing of electronic returns, was published in the Federal Register on December 8, 2005. The official comment period has passed, but hearings will be held this month."

9 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Internet Stalking 101 by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ever filled out census information? Because, if you have, your information is available to anyone

    I only filled out the information they need for the constitutional purpose of the census. The rest of it is none of their damned business.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  2. Re:Why not leave it to the market? by lymond01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hmm...it's my data, I provided it, where's my cut? I'd say $10 for every company my information was sold to. And I get royalties for every time a new company takes it from one of the original buyers. At least that would be incentive to give up your information.

  3. Re:Internet Stalking 101 by Suidae · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am worried about someone with my same name trying to pass their credit card debt off on me

    This isn't really much of a problem if you keep an eye on your credit reports. If something shows up that isn't yours, force the credit reporting agency to verify the entry. They'll try to avoid doing this because its troublesome for them and they don't really care if the info is right or not (as long as is right enough across millions of people to be useful to businesses). Force them to actually verify with the reporting creditor. If they verify it, contact that creditor (Via mail) and force them to verify that the debit is yours. They'll try to get out of that too, and may send you improper verification. Keep after them and force them to send proper verification and proof that they are authorized by the original creditor to collect the debit. If the debit is not yours, at this point you win.

    Details about these processes and the laws that make them work can be found on the creditboards.com forums. In particular read about "Debit Verification" and the "The One-Two Punch". These are extremely effective techniques for getting inaccurate items off your credit record (or getting rid of reports from debit collectors who are not properly authorized to collect valid debits).

  4. Re:Internet Stalking 101 by Steve+B · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Ever filled out census information?

    I filled out the parts that are necessary for the Constitutional purpose of the census. For the rest, I amused myself by figuring out the most misleading possible technically true answer.

    --
    /. If the government wants us to respect the law, it should set a better example.
  5. Agreed... by C10H14N2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Enough is enough...of calling a GS tax "fair."

    At a certain point (generally at about $100k), the vast majority people quickly stop consuming their income and start hoarding it. Oh sure, some will burn through it on booze, drugs and hookers, but most start shoving that capital back into capital. The higher that income gets, the smaller the percentage of it that is consumed. So, your "fair" tax would, dollar-for-dollar, tax someone making $100k the same as someone making $1M...and I got news for you, that "used property" exclusion? Well, they ain't makin' any new land, so guess what will happen to the price of dirt? Well, until we're vacationing on the Moon.

    Business purposes = no tax? Again, people nearing or exceeding $100k routinely put their entire damned lives on Schedule C (or into corporations) for exactly this purpose. Even if they _do_ consume above that level, it will surely be claimed as business expense--and that's determined at the point of sale or are we back to filing returns to prove it? Well, guess what, if you can avoid taxes completely by claiming business expense...you're going to find a great number of entrepreneurs and if they have to file returns, what's the benefit again in terms of paperwork and complexity reduction? If they don't, how do we prove it was business-related? Hmm.

    A "prebate?" So, everyone gets a monthly check for the taxes on the first $14k of income, assumed to be consumed? Gah... That is going to eliminate the bureaucracy precisely HOW? So, people under $14k will get prebates for whatever % of $14k or will they have to file returns to prove exactly how poor they are? That'll really free up the ol' paperwork and fraud burden, now, won't it? What if it's a family of 12 and all but one are saving every penny. Now do we file returns to prove our consumption of "necessities?" Oy vey. ...and, come on, this "hidden taxes" routine is just lame. We need 2.5T to keep the proverbial lights on in the federal government. You WILL PAY FOR IT SOMEHOW. You don't need to go through all the individual taxes to know what the government is taking. Just look at the budget. It comes to about $17k per working adult. Yeah, that's a lot of cash--and that's your "fair share." Well, actually, it's about $8333 per person, so if you have a family of four, you really should be ponying up about $33k instead of getting all those child credits while sucking up the education budget.

    The tax structure we have now is designed to induce certain behavior in many sectors. It is also designed to pay for certain _types_ of consumption, like gas taxes paying for the interstate pavement based on use. You consume pavement, you pay for the pavement. This sort of all-encompassing tax would shift the bureaucratic burden, it wouldn't eliminate it.

    Really, I think the "Fair Tax" crowd has critically examined the current problem, which is certainly well due and admirable, but I don't think they've critically examined their solution, which on even first sight is fraught with all the same problems as the existing system -- and totally ignores a number of problems that the existing system deals with quite extensively.

  6. Re:Why not leave it to the market? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, it's called a government. You elect representatives that share your views, then they vote to determine a policy that represents the majority. They have absolute power to protect the people. At least, that's how it's supposed to work. Voting for the guy with the prettiest TV commercials kind of short circuits the whole thing.

  7. Here's a different way to look at that: by The_REAL_DZA · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "IRS to allow tax preparers to offer 'non-disclosure' as a selling point"

    or

    "IRS to allow tax preparers to charge you extra to not sell your information"



    Suddenly tax-prep gets more lucrative. Of course, if they ever come through with that "flat tax" all those guys'll be out of business overnight anyway (and then I can ride to work on a flying pig every morning...)
    --


    This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
  8. Re:Key point in the article by null+etc. · · Score: 3, Insightful
    As long as I have the ability to say no to this, I don't see a problem.

    Sorry to flame, but that's one of the most irresponsibly simplified statements I've seen in this thread.

    Do you think a company like H&R Block is going to hand you a neon orange sheet of paper with 172 pt. font that says "DO YOU WANT US TO SELL YOUR PERSONAL DATA?"

    No. They're going to hide it in one subclause of a 14-page contract agreement, tersely worded so that it doesn't even mention "selling", "personal data", or "yours". It's probably gonna be a single sentence like "Applicant surrenders all rights to proclude the preparer from providing gathered data to third parties." Taxes are stressful enough without having to become a lawyer to avoid being bilked by corporations.

    Wake up and smell the slap in the face.

  9. "Fair" Tax != Flat Tax by metamatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The "Fair" Tax people want to move the entire tax burden to sales taxes, so that poor people will pay more of the tax burden.

    Flat Tax proponents want to have a flat rate tax on all income, so everyone pays a fair share in direct proportion to how much they can afford.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak