Slashdot Mirror


Why the IRS Should Automatically Fill In Returns With What It Knows

theodp writes "An article in the NY Times begins, 'In the digital age, filing income tax returns should be a snap. Important data from employers and financial institutions has already been sent to government computers. Yet taxpayers are still required to perform the chore of preparing a return from scratch, in many cases paying a software company for the privilege.' Why, if your needs are simple, can't you just download forms pre-filled with whatever data the IRS has received about you, make any necessary adjustments, and automatically get the IRS calculation of your taxes? Sounds reasonable, but the IRS rejected the President's proposal to give taxpayers the option to do so as 'not feasible at this time' due to delays in the receipt of W-2 and 1099 data. However, California managed to offer a pre-filled state tax return, which cost only 34 cents to process compared to $2.59 to process a traditional paper return. Despite the success of the pilot, meager funds have been allotted for the program due to the strength of its political opponents — 'principally, Intuit' — according to the state controller. Intuit argues it would be a 'conflict of interest for government to be both tax collector and tax preparer.'"

86 of 613 comments (clear)

  1. This is how it's done where I'm from... by Louai · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Finland you get a pre-filled tax sheet in the mail, you only have to return it if there are any changes you need to make. I'm currently living in the US, I find the amount of crap you need to go through to get your affairs in order absolutely stunning.

    1. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just wait until you do what I did and live in 4 different states in a year... Seriously 5 tax returns, some owed me, I owed some.

    2. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by hitmark · · Score: 5, Interesting

      thats quite a reminder that USA is a collection of nations internally while a single nation outwards...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    3. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by danpat · · Score: 5, Interesting
      I had the same problem when I worked in 3 different countries in the space of 18 months. What made it even worse was that each required you declare your "overseas income" for their tax year, and none of the three countries had tax years that lined up (some when from July->June, some when from October->September, the other, Jan->December). And on top of that, there were tax treaties between each that allowed for special rates for certain types of income. You'd get totally screwed if you didn't take advantage of the treaties, but it also required reading said treaties. Fortunately, many tax treaties are structured the same otherwise it'd be damn near impossible.

      I couldn't find a tax professional prepared to help out either. Most accountants like to keep things within their own borders.

    4. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by c-reus · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Estonia, you log in to the web page of the IRS equivalent, click "Next" a few times, then click "Confirm" and you're all done. No dead trees involved.

    5. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by __aasqbs9791 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It can be even worse, too. Some counties have special taxes on residents, too.

    6. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by Neoprofin · · Score: 4, Informative

      The bastard thing is that most in the US overpay their taxes by having a portion withdrawn from each paycheck. "Paying our taxes" is just telling them that they ripped us off during the year and we'd like the money back.

    7. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by Lord+Byron+II · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm missing how its bad for the government. Right now, your employer sends your W2 to you and the IRS. You fill in a 1040 and send it to the IRS. If the IRS agrees, then everything is fine.

      Alternatively, the IRS could use the W2 to fill in the 1040 automatically for you and as long as you agree, then everything is fine.

      But in both cases, the same data is used and is available. And in both cases, the tax return is only accepted if both parties agree it is correct.

    8. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by idji · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In Austria it is even simpler than that. Do NOTHING at all unless you want to make some special claim because all normal claims - like number of kids, commuter-rebate and so on go through the employer. And you can change or add any data you like at anytime over the next 5 years in an online government portal / and the telephone hotline is free and there is no waiting and the people are really helpful.

    9. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by Aquitaine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I run a small business and we get nothing but 1099s (from our clients and for our contractors). It's not that hard to pay quarterly taxes. 'How hard' is it to pay quarterly taxes 4 times a year rather than just once? I know roughly what my tax rate is and I set that aside. I don't need Big Brother to run a payment plan for me.

    10. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by IdolizingStewie · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do know that the number of exemptions you put on your W-2 does not have to match the number you put on your 1040, right? Go to the IRS website, fill out the information for the calculator, and put in the numbers that it gives you. Last year I spent 10 months with 0 exemptions and extra money withheld, and then after getting the first time homebuyer credit, changed it to 18 exemptions to get a grand total of $0 of income taxes withheld from those last paychecks b/c I had already overpaid. Nobody gave me any trouble about those 18 exemptions.

    11. Re:This is how it's done where I'm from... by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You do know, both of you, that the form you fill out is the W-4. That's where you set the projected exemptions that will be used to set withholding. The W2 just reports after the fact, it doesn't make anyone adjust anything in advance.
            And yes, you can change it multiple times during the year. I have clients who set their withholding during the early months high, then check their numbers about June and add exemptions or stop having additional amounts withheld to try and target very close to zero either back or owed. Some of them tweak the numbers again about September. I even have one client who does a second W-4 every October, just so that November and December, he gets his full paycheck and the extra goes to Christmas shopping. Then December, he does another to set things back for January.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  2. Conflict? by mapinguari · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Intuit would probably argue that it's a conflict of interest to be both a tax payer and tax preparer.

    1. Re:Conflict? by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Oh yes, the tax preparation services will fight this tooth and nail.

      Almost every year about this time I post some sort of rant about how wasteful it is that we don't even have a free, official online tax-filing website. It would save filers tons of time, it would save the IRS tons of money. But the tax preparers don't care about that (after all, $1 of intentional government inefficiency is 25 cents of income for them) and somehow, though I can't figure out how, this tiny special interest has the power to dictate government policy.

    2. Re:Conflict? by nbauman · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/all_summary.php?id=D000026667&nid=3868

      Intuit Inc

      Rank: 598th
      2008 total combined contributions: $818,259
      2008 federal-level contributions: $394,475
      2008 state-level contributions: $423,784

      That's a pretty good return on the dollar.

    3. Re:Conflict? by jenn_13 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Almost every year about this time I post some sort of rant about how wasteful it is that we don't even have a free, official online tax-filing website. It would save filers tons of time, it would save the IRS tons of money. But the tax preparers don't care about that (after all, $1 of intentional government inefficiency is 25 cents of income for them) and somehow, though I can't figure out how, this tiny special interest has the power to dictate government policy.

      It's not exactly "official", as you have to go to a third party, but you can file online free. I worked as a tax preparer one year, and from my experience, the reason most clients chose $tax_service instead of doing it themselves (paper or online) wasn't because they couldn't, but because $tax_service offered refund anticipation loans. Which means they get a check for several thousand, less a couple hundred in fees, the next day, rather than waiting a week or more for direct deposit of the full refund.

    4. Re:Conflict? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Getting your taxes right is your responsibility. The IRS can send you a suggestion, and for some significant percentage of the population, the IRS will get it right.

      Would they get me right? No, probably not. They don't know the cost basis for my stock sales, and they don't know when I bought those stocks, so they don't know short-term vs. long-term capital gain/loss.

      Anyone who can do a 1040EZ shouldn't have to do anything.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
    5. Re:Conflict? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Is American consumerism so out of control we take out loans on anticipated income now, in order to spend it as soon as possible (with extra fees tacked on due to interest / finance charges) ?

      I wonder what happens to consumers who take said loans if the IRS "corrects" their return and eliminates their refund.

      I guess they bought their fancy toys/doodads by the time that happens though, and they can default on their anticipation loan in the same way they stopped paying their credit card bills and mortage; however.

    6. Re:Conflict? by Ironsides · · Score: 2

      The IRS will also penalize you under current law if you follow their advice and they were wrong. Shouldn't it also be their responsibility to get their understanding of the tax code right? Even an IRS Commissioner admits it's too complex for him.

      Can't we just bring some sanity to the tax code? Something like this: ((AmountEarned*X)-AmountPayed)=AmountOwed where 0
      I see no reason the tax code should be so complex that we have to have multiple tax forms.

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    7. Re:Conflict? by Rich0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really? I can prepare my own taxes and file them electronically without paying anybody a cent, regardless of my income level or what forms I am filing?

      Can you give a reference for this? The last time I checked the best you could do is have the government pick up the filing tab if your income fell into 1040EZ range. No doubt there would be other limitations like standard deduction only/etc.

      My state, on the other hand, lets me file electronically over the web. I don't need to pay for software, or services, or whatever. Now, the web interface is fairly minimalistic, but it certainly involves no more work than filling out the paper forms.

      I haven't filed electronically in years, despite using software to prepare my returns. I refuse to pay money to make the IRS's job easier - I manage my withholding anyway so that they never owe me a dime anyway - so if it takes them to June to cash my check so much the better.

      The IRS could create a web filing system that was free to use, and even after paying for the software development they'd make the cost back the same year with the reduced volume of paper.

  3. Funny that you mention California by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They still think I owe them over $5,000 for back taxes, even though all the documents were sent directly to them and they know precisely how much I made and/or didn't make, and only ever owed them about a hundred and fifty bucks (which has long since been paid off.) they stole a bunch of my money through withholding to which they were not entitled, and since I passed some arbitrary deadline without getting it all resolved, they intend to keep it. Fuck California and the California Franchise Tax Board in the neck.

    With that said, if you don't have to file if you make less than the exemption amount, why should you have to file if you don't have any unusual economic activity to account for? That's ridiculous.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Funny that you mention California by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't blame others when you dropped the ball.

      Your argument is that even though California had all the data to know that I didn't owe them the money, it's my fault? Blaming the victim is not only wrong, but will win you no friends.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Funny that you mention California by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      California decided that I should pay taxes on all my income as a California resident when I wasn't one. I moved back to CA towards the end of a year and got a job, and they decided I had made all that money in California as a resident when I wasn't one, and hadn't. The W-2s told the whole story, though. They had all the information to know better. I just need to re-file now, but I've been putting it off because I intend to hand a bunch of stuff to an accountant all at once "real soon now" and since I'm consulting, no one is trying to garnish my wages.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. works fine in Sweden by BuR4N · · Score: 5, Informative

    pre-filled tax forms that you only have to sign and return have worked well here in Sweden for years, no conflict of interest at all. A couple of years ago, they even started with an SMS option, where you just can "ok" your pre filled tax form with an SMS code.

    If you want to add information, you can just fill in your own form and send it in, but I think its pretty common to just use the pre-filled tax form.

    --
    http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
    1. Re:works fine in Sweden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know, when I was reading your post, I thought Sweden, eh? Wavy line... wavy lines...

      Knocking at the door. Swedish male citizen goes and answers it.

      Beautiful blond is at the door. (Translated to American)"Hi, I'm with the Revenue Service and I have your tax form. Do you want to have sex before or after reviewing your tax form?"

      Swedish make citizen: "Um. Let me ask my wife. Honey, should I have sex with the tax collector before or after reviewing the form?"

      Beautiful blond Swedish wife walks in: "Listen YOU! We filed jointly so it HAS to be a threesome before AND after reviewing the form!"

      Tax collector: "That's IS the law! File jointly and it's a threesome! I'm terribly sorry!"

      So this is the way it happens over there, right? Really?!?

    2. Re:works fine in Sweden by nanoakron · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whilst I don't live in Sweden (I'm in the UK), I have to ask quite what your point is?

      The Swedes may pay more in taxes, but in return get free healthcare, good roads, low crime, free schooling and university, (i believe) free (or heavily subsidised) childcare, efficient public transport, and much more.

      They're also very highly rated in terms of their low wealth disparity (road fines for example are based on a percentage of your annual income so that a rockstar in a ferrari feels the same sting in their speeding ticket as does a poor person in a skoda), and human development index.

      I could go on. The key point is that nations all make decisions about their priorities - the US believes in waging war and keeping the poor unhealthy and uneducated, other nations do not.

      tl;dr - high taxes are worth paying if you get good services in return. Think of Sweden as the 'Apple' of nations, versus the 'Windows Me' of the USA.

    3. Re:works fine in Sweden by TERdON · · Score: 2, Informative

      >Whilst I don't live in Sweden (I'm in the UK), I have to ask quite what your point is?
      I do live in Sweden. Let's check your claims...

      >The Swedes may pay more in taxes, but in return get free healthcare
      Untrue. Low cost only (there are small fees). And (sometimes very long!) queues...

      >good roads
      Questionable, depends a lot on where you drive! Many smaller roads and streets in towns have suffered badly during the last decades from reduced maintenance.

      >low crime free schooling and university
      Probably both correct (at least the crime rate is not high)

      >(i believe) free (or heavily subsidised) childcare
      Heavily subsidised. Very costly for society...

      >efficient public transport, and much more.
      Questionable, in Stockholm it's great, in most medium cities it's okay, anything more rural it's often quite spotty.

      >They're also very highly rated in terms of their low wealth disparity (road fines for example are based on a percentage of your annual income so that a rockstar in a ferrari feels the same sting in their speeding ticket as does a poor person in a skoda)
      No, fixed amounts for speeding tickets etc. Fines for "normal" (non-road) crimes (ordered by court) use the day-fine system you describe though.

      >, and human development index.

      --
      I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
    4. Re:works fine in Sweden by nanoakron · · Score: 3, Funny

      My apologies, I now recognise that your country is actually a shithole, and I will never make claims about it being a nice, clean, efficient, liveable place again.

      Although, I do apologise for the speeding ticket thing - it's actually Switzerland that bases fines on income.

      -Nano.

    5. Re:works fine in Sweden by mikael_j · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Which means that healthy people...

      Yeah, because you just know you'll never get cancer or get hit by a car. Or maybe you've got some special ability to plan this not to happen right after you got laid off from a job?

      ...who don't drive much...

      Taxes also pay for other pieces of infrastructure including bicycle paths and subsidies for public transport.

      ...and are long-ago graduates...

      "Hey! I got my free cake courtesy of my parents' generation, now why should I pay for the next generation's free cake?!"

      ...with no children...

      Ok, you may have a point here, were it not for a concept known as "solidarity" (look it up, the word is in practically every dictionary).

      ...pay to support people who want to freeload off the government.

      Most people who are receiving more money than they're contributing tend to feel pretty bad about this but most of the time it's also not as easy as "oh well I guess I'll stop having cancer/being paralyzed/being unemployed and start paying more taxes!". The current swedish government did some amazing arithmetics prior to the last election and claimed over and over and over again that the reason unemployment was so high wasn't because there weren't enough jobs but because those who were unemployed simply weren't looking for jobs hard enough, naturally they ignored people pointing out that all available numbers showed that for every available job there were something like 4-5 unemployed people, kind of hard to get rid of unemployment just by "trying harder to get a job" under those circumstances...

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    6. Re:works fine in Sweden by Phoobarnvaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Swedes may pay more in taxes, but in return get free healthcare, good roads, low crime, free schooling and university, (i believe) free (or heavily subsidised) childcare, efficient public transport, and much more.

      When the US is number 36 or 37 in terms of healthcare...but if you're poor...you're living like in a 3rd World country...doesn't say much about this country. I know people are going to bust my balls about how great is all the freedom we "enjoy" in this country. When you have around 17 percent of your population un/underemployed...these members aren't any better of than those living in Central America or Africa. I would love to be able to get my teaching degree...but with the outrageous cost/benefit to do so with governments firing teachers & such...it's not worth it. I would be thousands of dollars in debt & still un/underemployed as much as I am right now.

      I know some of you will tell me...love it or leave it. If I could afford to do so...I would move permanently to Canada/Europe in a heartbeat.

      They're also very highly rated in terms of their low wealth disparity (road fines for example are based on a percentage of your annual income so that a rockstar in a ferrari feels the same sting in their speeding ticket as does a poor person in a skoda), and human development index.

      Can't have that happen...since if you're rich...you're special. It's like the old question...what's the difference between being a porn star & the working poor in the US? The porn star is paid for having it done to them while the working poor gets it done to them for free.

      I could go on. The key point is that nations all make decisions about their priorities - the US believes in waging war and keeping the poor unhealthy and uneducated, other nations do not.

      As long as you have a religious/moral basis for practicing this type of behavior...it will continue. As a practicing Christian...I find US history/policies SHAMEFUL & not having a conscience to put an end to this behavior. There has to be a point where compassion/ethics/morality become a better way of life than being as rich as you can get. Jesus never said..."Do unto others before they do it to you". This should be put on US money...rather than "In God We Trust"...since it is the truth.

      --
      Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia. - Charles M. Schulz
    7. Re:works fine in Sweden by Sleepy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, so is your point that you want OTHER nations to stop advancing, just because you want them to?

      I've never met a "less government libertarian" who didn't ALSO have a boatload of their 401 invested in countries who benefit from the very same policies they object to at home. Which makes me wonder... if it were less tax-favorable to invest outside the USA, would conservative-leaning Americans suddenly be FOR public healthcare and public education (the useful kind, not high school)? I think the answer is yes.

      And if you think tax dollar giveaways to healthcare are LESS under the current system, you're not paying attention. The status of the US healthcare even forbids Medicare - BY LAW - from negotiating pharmaceutical prices... something all the private insurers can -and- do.

      In an age of fast moving populations, diseases, and bio-terrorism it's pretty "pound foolish" for a nation not even offer free _preventative_ healthcare and checkups.

      And I know someone who personally suffered because an insurance company got between the patient and their doctor...

    8. Re:works fine in Sweden by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It works in Sweden. The US is not Sweden - the relative cultural homogeneity of the Scandinavian nations is a really crucial part of their ability to conduct welfare states that are not overwhelmed by freeloaders, because that's the reason that ...

      [m]ost people who are receiving more money than they're contributing tend to feel pretty bad about this.

      That is not a given in the US. It has been my experience that most Americans I know who are big-government, welfare-state liberals grew up in places where government works. By contrast, most of the small-government, go-it-alone conservatives grew up in places where it doesn't. Don't forget that not all governments work...

  5. people are lazy by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    intuit is right: the government will claim this or that, and people will just accept it. when an honest mistake by the government, nevermind malicious intent, might wind up overtaxing someone. most people will wind up spending say $2,000 more on their taxes, accepting the government's proposal unseen, rather than reviewing it for mistakes

    i don't know about other people, but for me, i'd rather pull my own fingernails out with a wrench than do my taxes. however, the current status quo means that if there is an error, whether honest mistake or malicious, it is usually in favor of the individual, not the government

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:people are lazy by samkass · · Score: 5, Informative

      the government will claim this or that, and people will just accept it. when an honest mistake by the government, nevermind malicious intent, might wind up overtaxing someone. most people will wind up spending say $2,000 more on their taxes, accepting the government's proposal unseen, rather than reviewing it for mistakes

      I don't have a problem with that. You can't save everyone. The amount of efficiency in the average case would be so great, though, that overall I suspect it would offer more money to both the government AND the taxpayer.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    2. Re:people are lazy by Klinky · · Score: 2, Informative

      If there is an error in favor of the individual, if it's significant, the IRS may bring on an audit. If you catch the mistake after you file, your amended return gets more scrutiny and you have a higher chance of audit. I wouldn't sleep soundly if I knew there was an error and just let it slide because it gave me a couple extra bucks. Basically, if there is an error it needs to be fixed, you don't just want to sleep on it and go "well at least this worked out in my favor". As far as people being duped into what they owe. There could be a very simple summary provided, along with the pre-filled forms. "You made X, so you are in this tax bracket, so we need this much money and you paid this much money, so this is how much you get back or you owe". If the values don't jive, then people can review the actual forms or take it to a professional to review. Even professional tax preparers mess up & the individual may not know it at all, so I don't see much danger with a pre-filled tax form. Frankly Intuit & the like make too much money on what basically amounts to a couple data entry boxes & a macro that pre-fills forms w/ simple mathematics. That'll be $49.95 please, let's not get started on the B&M places that like to charge $100+ so you can have a human go to the website for you.

  6. We've had that for years in Norway by TickTEC · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here in Norway, if you feel you have nothing to add, you don't even have to return the papers. Just sit back and relax. I've never had to fill out anything.

    --
    I'm gonna be famous, tell everyone!
    1. Re:We've had that for years in Norway by Kjella · · Score: 2

      The moderators seem to think you're joking, but the right moderation is informative. We actually have passive acceptance, if you have no changes to make you don't have to do anything at all. And the government gets quite substantial amounts of data from employers, banks, property registry, car registry etc. so many people have nothing that needs changing.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:We've had that for years in Norway by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      And you say that like it's a *good* thing...

      You say that as if the government shouldn't know about it in the first place.

      You got income? Income tax.
      You got deposits? Capital tax on interest, wealth tax on balance
      You got loans? Deductions.
      You got property? Property tax.
      You got a car? Wealth tax.

      All of these are things you would have to declare anyway in order to stay legitimate. In many cases the government can't help but to know about it, employers have to file taxes as well including payroll, for properties and cars the government is the one tracking deeds and our version of the DMV registry and so on. All it does is saving you the paperwork, and there are lots of other taxes and deductions you have to correct yourself, it's not trying to cover everything.

      We are in fact rather suspicious of data storage and in favor of privacy protection, right now for example there's a debate on EUs data storage directive. Only the largest party of the ruling government is for, five are against and one is undecided but just recently their biggest region took a "no" vote with great majority. If they too oppose the directive, it would become Norway's first EU veto since 1994. I'm hoping that will happen.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:We've had that for years in Norway by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We are in fact rather suspicious of data storage and in favor of privacy protection, right now for example there's a debate on EUs data storage directive.

      People in the US think they're so advanced when it comes to privacy protection that they become blind towards what real privacy means in this century. While they are raging against the government surveillance boogyman private companies are trading between themselves databases of their names, addresses, SSNs, phone numbers, family, shopping habits, color of their underwear and what not with no restrictions.

      Ok... I'm not saying the government should have free reign to build databases on its citizens. Yet what you Americans seem to forget is that the same needs to apply to private companies, especially since fraud and misuse of information is more likely to happen due to leaks of information from unregulated private companies.

      The storage of the information in the parent post is tightly regulated in Norway by the Data Inspectorate. You need special dispensation in the law to be allowed to store such sensitive information, and it doesn't matter if you're a private company or governmental organization. And storing information you strictly don't need or having lax security means they'll demand answers or else.

      You guys can keep that paranoia of governments for your selves.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    4. Re:We've had that for years in Norway by Kjella · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interest is income, I get that - but you have to pay a wealth tax on money sitting in the bank? How can you ever retire on more than a government pension?

      Yes, the maximum rate is 1.1% on wealth above 540k NOK = 93k USD. So you have to make at least inflation + 1.1% to sustain your wealth. Not saying it's fair but that's the way it is. Actually, I find the inheritance tax nastier. The highest inheritance tax bracket is 15% (10% for direct descendants) above 800k NOK = 140k USD, so if you inherit 1,000,000 dollars the government takes almost 150,000$ just like that.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  7. Beneficial to Be Difficult by tarsi210 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder how much the IRS figures into its revenue stream the profit obtained via people filing taxes and not knowing what they're doing. Folks who use professional preparation services no doubt get them correct most of the time and owe the correct amount (or get the right refund), but how many people are just doing it via paper and submitting, and, due to the arcane, maze of rules and regulations, overpay and don't claim the exemptions they should?

    Leave it up to the IRS -- they probably have it figured out that if they pre-fill items on forms, that means less error and less money. Plus, this gives them more opportunity to audit and assess fees. Whee!

    1. Re:Beneficial to Be Difficult by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And of course, why do individuals who know what they are doing have no way to pay or file with the IRS directly? I should be able to submit my 1040 electronically for free, from the IRS.gov website. Instead, I have to go to a 3rd party, where my income levels dictate I have to pay, even though I know what I need. That is just protectionism..

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    2. Re:Beneficial to Be Difficult by Swave+An+deBwoner · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how much the IRS figures into its revenue stream the profit obtained via people filing taxes and not knowing what they're doing. Folks who use professional preparation services no doubt get them correct most of the time and owe the correct amount (or get the right refund), but how many people are just doing it via paper and submitting, and, due to the arcane, maze of rules and regulations, overpay and don't claim the exemptions they should? Leave it up to the IRS -- they probably have it figured out that if they pre-fill items on forms, that means less error and less money. Plus, this gives them more opportunity to audit and assess fees. Whee!

      As someone who has previously received a refund on tax paid in error, I think that IRS doesn't use the trick you're wondering about at all. If they find that you have overpaid, they refund the overpayment on their own.

      Of course they can't know what exemptions you are entitled to unless you have told them already, e.g. via the W-4 form that you filed with your employer and which the employer used to determine how much of your income to withhold for the IRS.

      For most people, the proposed method would probably work out just fine. Rich people who have complex tax filings would just continue to have their accountant handle the issues. Those who fall in-between could still use TurboTax :-)

    3. Re:Beneficial to Be Difficult by winwar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "But the government's not completely stupid -- if it was more beneficial, financially, to make the tax code simple, they would have done it years ago, IMHO."

      The tax code isn't simple because WE don't want it so. That's right, you and me, want it complex. Well, not exactly. We want deductions for home loan interest, education, and our pet projects. So does everybody else. Congress obliges. Hence the massive and complex tax code.

      A simple tax code would have modifications before the ink was dried. In the end, if people don't like the complex forms, they should stop using them. I've filled out many business related forms and found that they are only as complex as you want to make them. If you want to eke out the last penny of tax savings, go ahead. Just don't whine about the effort. Do you really think that if the tax code is simplified that you would pay less in taxes?

    4. Re:Beneficial to Be Difficult by bdleonard · · Score: 2, Informative

      You mean you wish the IRS provided a service that they started providing last year? Despite the some what sketchy looking design, this it the site that the IRS provides for free online submittable forms: https://www.freefilefillableforms.com/FFA/Gateway.htm

  8. Re:Why they shouldn't.. by drosboro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seems to me it would be good to find out if the government thinks such things... although the hassle of correcting them may not be worth it. For years, the government sent mail to me as Mrs., despite the fact that my first name is David. The hassle of convincing them that I was actually Mr. took about 2 years.

    Of course, here in Canada we get a $100 monthly benefit for each child. If the government thinks I have 27 kids, more power to them!

  9. Re:Since I get paid to be paranoid by jra · · Score: 2, Informative

    And, um, PS: before you go dissing fairtax.org, *actually read their site*; there are several flat-federal-tax proposals out there, some of which *are* snake oil. Theirs does not appear to be, to me.

  10. Re:An invitation to defraud by drosboro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except it will be the same situation - say, the employer sends in the information too late to make it onto your prefilled form, you cheat and don't pay taxes on it, and then the IRS gets the paperwork and reviews your file. You'll still get busted, just with less paperwork ahead of time!

  11. Re:Why they shouldn't.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dear Mrs David Rosboro

    Our records show that none of your 27 children are currently in school. We can only assume that you are violating child employment laws or have
    eaten them. We will be performing an inspection on the 29th Jan to verify the health and status of your children.

  12. Increases Fraud by mikeplokta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the IRS pre-fills what the government knows about on the form, then that tells you what the government doesn't know about, and thus can safely be omitted. If you get a blank form, there's always the risk that the government knows about your offshore account and will prosecute you for omitting it.

  13. UK Tax Returns by nanoakron · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here in the UK, most people pay tax through the PAYE (Pay-As-You-Earn) scheme. The only people who regularly don't are the self-employed.

    This means that the majority of the working population NEVER need to file tax returns.

    However, some people do regularly file tax returns -

    1. People asked to do so through random audit
    2. If you are considered a 'high-rate' taxpayer (meaning you earn more than about £36,000pa).

    But, you can elect to file a tax return even if you earn less than the 'high-rate', and you can often get some money back for overpayments.

    I still can't believe the amount of hassle you have to go through in the US each year when it comes to tax-time.

    -Nano.

    1. Re:UK Tax Returns by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When I was self-employed in the UK, I didn't have to prepare my tax returns. I simply took all the paperwork to the local Inland Revenue office, sat in their waiting room for a bit, allowed them to go through all the paperwork and at the end of the day, I walked away with a cashier's cheque of how much they owed me. Cost to me: Zero.

      It seems that they really try to not tell anyone that they must assist people with their tax returns free of charge.

      (When I left the UK middle of the tax year, technically they owe me a few hundred pounds but it didn't seem worth the while to chase up on it afterwards ... the phone calls, postage and time would rapidly eat up the refund.)

      --
      No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
    2. Re:UK Tax Returns by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ok. How does that work if you have outside sources of income or deductions? In the US, interest on your bank account is taxable. Dividends from stocks you own are taxable. Interest from Student Loans, House Mortgage or charitable donations are tax deductible. We also have retirement account contributions that are tax deductible until we start withdrawing them when they are taxable. (or vice versa depending on the retirement account) Does the UK have as complicated a scheme that is not based purely on income as the US has?

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
    3. Re:UK Tax Returns by bloobloo · · Score: 2, Informative

      In the UK:

      Interest on your bank account is paid net of tax automatically by the bank. If you are an upper rate payer, you declare the interest and pay the extra differential yourself (e.g. you receive gross £5 interest. The bank pays you £4 and the government £1. If you are an upper rate payer, you declare this on your tax return and pay the extra £1). The bank will give you a certificate stating how much interest you received so you can prove the amount you owe if necessary.

      EU company dividends are paid after deduction of withholding tax, so you don't need to declare anything there.

      We don't get deductions for student loans, mortgage or charity deductions. When you make a payment to charity, you can fill out a Gift Aid declaration. This allows *the charity* to reclaim the income tax that you paid - they benefit rather than you.

      Contributions to pensions are deducted from your salary before calculating your tax liability, and growth within the fund is tax free. When you retire and begin withdrawing funds, pension payments are treated just like any other income (i.e first £6k is tax free, next £37k is taxed at 20%, anything above that is taxed at 40%)

    4. Re:UK Tax Returns by bloobloo · · Score: 2, Informative

      The 20% is deducted by default - if in fact you earn less than the threshold for any tax, you notify the bank and they pay you the full gross rate without deductions.

      I believe that the deduction is common for all companies - you might need to declare them if you are a top rate earner like the interest on a bank account, but I'm not sure as I've never been one! We have Capital Gains Tax too, if you sell a property other than your main home for example.

      The US system of making charity donations deductible to your own benefit seems a little odd to me to be honest. But if it results in higher charity donations as people try to play the system then it may be a beneficial system.

      We have ISAs which I think are like IRAs - you pay in money after tax, then any earnings of the ISA fund are tax free. You can put up to a certain amount in each year - I think it will be almost £10k per year from this April but again I haven't checked as I don't have that much free cash!

      Public listed companies can have a share save scheme, which is like a 401k but restricted to the company you work for. I put 2.5% of my gross salary into shares, and my employer matches it with 5% more, so I accumulate shares roughly equivalent to 7.5% of my gross salary per year. This is before tax and so reduces your liability. Dividends, and if you hold the shares for over 5 years, then any proceeds you make from selling them are tax free too.

      You can invest in a private pension too.

      Rather than getting deductions for having children, anyone with children no matter what they earn gets Child Benefit, and then you get Child Tax Credits and Working Tax Credits on a means assessed basis, which phase out as you earn more like you say there too.

      I agree that the US has a more complex tax system - the UK isn't simple, but I think HMRC has done a better job of integrating the various parts so that for most people their monthly deductions come out right at the end of the year.

      One more nugget that you may find of interest - in the UK, gambling winnings are tax free. So you win £5 million on the lottery, you receive £5 million. Reason being that if it was treated as earnings, then losses would have to be treated as business expenses, and the net benefit of taxing winnings to the treasury would be negative!

    5. Re:UK Tax Returns by Ironsides · · Score: 2, Informative
      I think the reason for the Charity Contributions deductible to the individual is so the government doesn't have to pay the tax. If we had the same thing in the US as you have, we'd probably reduce our tax contributions by our tax brackets so the amount the charity receives is the same.

      Your ISA sounds like our Roth IRA. Then again, we have the regular ones as well. I guess this would be a 'private pension', but I'm not sure I'd call it a 'pension' as it doesn't necessarily have a fixed pay out at the end.

      Rather than getting deductions for having children, anyone with children no matter what they earn gets Child Benefit, and then you get Child Tax Credits and Working Tax Credits on a means assessed basis, which phase out as you earn more like you say there too.

      For this, I think we have the same thing. It's just a matter of describing it all.

      I agree that the US has a more complex tax system - the UK isn't simple, but I think HMRC has done a better job of integrating the various parts so that for most people their monthly deductions come out right at the end of the year.

      I don't think the IRS could get it right unless it knew everything you were going to do in the year. I'm filing for about a $465 return from the Federal Government this year. My state refund will be about $245. That's with only having withholding on my jobs income and from no where else.

      I really do wish we had a sane tax system and I really would push for a flat tax. As I've said elsewhere, if we had a flat tax it would only need to be 12.7% to collect the same amount of money as we have now (possibly less).

      --
      Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
  14. Re:Conflict of interest by TomXP411 · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's a conflict of interest for the clerk at Wal-Mart to tell me how much I owe AND collect my money?

    The real conflict of interest is for corporations to give money to election campaigns.

    The root cause of this is that corporations have too much power in our system. Corporations buy politicians and they buy court verdicts. It's just wrong, and we need to fix the system, starting with the "golden rule".

    In court, make the richer party pay for both lawyers, and eliminate corporate contributions for political campaigns and ballot measures. Then maybe the PEOPLE can run this country.

  15. In US private companies do this, only gov't can't by perpenso · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the US private companies are able to fill in your data electronically. Your employer, banks, etc can download their data (essentially the forms the IRS has them mail to you) directly into your tax preparation software. It is only the gov't that finds such things infeasible.

    --
    Perpenso Calc for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN

  16. Re:How could they justify an audit? by russotto · · Score: 3, Informative

    In fact, if you ask the IRS for advice on how to handle a tax issue, and they give it to you (which is unusual), they *still* disclaim responsibility for their possibly being wrong, and people have undergone financial and (I think) criminal sanctions *for believing what the IRS told them*.

    If you get the advice IN WRITING (I think this means dead trees), you can escape penalties and criminal sanctions. You're still on the hook for interest and taxes.

  17. What do you think happens today? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look, it's not like the government takes my word for it on most of the numbers I submit, anyway. If I put in the wrong number from my W-2 or W-9, they replace it with the right number, and either send me the bill or deduct from my account if I underpaid. So if they were consistently lousy with their records, this would be happening all the time.

    I once got a letter from the IRS informing me that I didn't report interest income from a bank account I forgot about because it had so little money in it, so since I'd payed by direct deposit they just deducted the $0.15 from my account.

    Another time I got a digit wrong on my W-2 amount, and the IRS informed me that they'd corrected the amount and credited me with the $400 I didn't need to pay, and if I thought this was an error to please call them (even if I thought it was, would I?) They do the same thing for math errors you make.

    Anyway, my point is, for most of the basic things that you put on a 1040 in a boring year, the government already knows and more to the point already considers the numbers they have to be authoritative unless disputed.

    So... My employer and banks still send me the tax info they usually do, the gov sends me their numbers and calculated tax liability, and if it's all right -- which it probably will be, the gov gets their numbers from the same banks and employers I do after all -- then I just pay it and am done with it. If it's not you do the 1040-Difficult like normal. I'm not seeing the huge problem here.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:What do you think happens today? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're fortunate it was just W-2 errors. If it's just a few one-off's by a few pennies, probably not in their interest to do much more than fix it.

      If you had significantly underreported on other forms like property exchange (1099B), or significant amounts on a 1099, it would have automatically triggered a full audit, probably.

      That doesn't mean the IRS records are good though, or that everyone always files the proper 1099s against you.

      They currently get the best of both worlds:

      They are reported the information, they can use to check your filings with.

      If less income was reported to them by people paying you than you filed, they either reap the profit, or correct and charge you a penalty for overreporting.

      If more income was reported to them for you by others than you reported, then they either fix the error or audit you depending on the circumstances, this might be an ad-hoc audit where IRS officers visit your house and seize your records for review, if the dollar amount is large, they will immediately suspect fraud.

      The reports that get filed to them aren't just to correct your errors, they also exist to detect dishonesty on your part.

      If they filled in the blanks for you, that would almost completely negate their advantage.

    2. Re:What do you think happens today? by Arslan+ibn+Da'ud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So let me see if I get this straight...

      The current system allows a taxpayer to be dishonest, but catches him if he is.

      The proposed change prevents a taxpayer from being dishonest (by informing him of what the IRS already knows of his finances), and only gives him a chance to correct the records.

      So how is catching taxpayer dishonesty an advantage, again?

      --

      Practice Kind Randomness and Beautiful Acts of Nonsense.

    3. Re:What do you think happens today? by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, you're not seeing the huge problem, but it definitely exists. I'm a professional tax preparer as one of my trades. This year, I have done or assisted on over 50 EIC forms so far for people in the range where Earned Income Credit applies and every single one of them has triggered additional IRS mandated questions, usually three or more per case. Questions such as "You are claiming a child under six - who takes care of that child while you are at work?" or "Your self employed income form shows less than typical expenses - have you accounted for all schedule C related expenses?"
      I'm not even focused in that area, rather I do mostly corporate and a ultra-specialization involving royalties received by estates of deceased authors. I see these EIC cases mostly only because I instruct 2nd and 3 year preparers who have to deal with them.
      Answering these sort of questions means being able to say, for example, "In home daycare conducted during evening to midnight shift hours produces few food and drink expenses compared to the daytime hour equivalent and does not normally require the taxpayer placing their vehicle into business service. These factors make business expenses low." I really can't see most of these clients claiming successfully that they are familiar enough with overall small business trends and average expensing issues that they could make that claim for a legal record, even if they somehow knew it applied to them.
      By what we are seeing this early in the tax season, the government has a very great deal it doesn't know, it wants to know it all, and if you are an average lower income filer claiming the Earned Income Credit and you do it via a free online service, your chance of being audited this year just jumped from less than 0.5% to about 7%, possibly higher. In my worst nightmare interpretation of what I'm seeing, the government is emplacing all the preparatory mechanisms needed to declare 5 or 6 million poor people felons by about next November, although a lot of politicans and IRS administrators are assuring people the response is going to be a lot more reasonable than that.
      The IRS was originally told to focus on EIC fraud specifically by the 2004 congress, and it's just now really ramping up. At that time, EIC fraud was rated as second to business form fraud, at about 1/4 of the total damages to the tax base for business fraud. People can argue about why the congress in that year demanded renewed focus on the less serious source of fraud rather than the greater one, but that's not why I bring this up. Simply, the government now needs money more seriously than before, and escalating efforts to detect the number one type of fraud are an obvious way to close the tax gap, so even if the IRS is not doing this to small business filers yet, it will very likely come next year or 2012 at the latest.
      There's a similar problem for people claiming the 1st time homebuyer's credit, in that the IRS has repeatedly revised the filing requirements to get more documentation, to where now the taxpayer will probably have to provide at least five additional documents to file the credit correctly. Taxpayers may have to wait until they have updated both their driver's liscence and vehicle registration to reflect the new address, and get a certificate stating the home is safe for occupancy on top of the deed and mortgage documents. I'm wondering right now what happens if the taxpayer doesn't drive, and has bought a previously occupied home, where the state doesn't normally do a habitability inspection. It seems likely at least some people who bought a home based on this credit will have a very hard time getting all the forms the IRS now wants.
      By the way, for the situations such as you describe in your post, there's a major downside. For example, if the government has records that show you sold stock, they will consider it equally authoritative that you had zero basis

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    4. Re:What do you think happens today? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Informative

      The proposed change prevents a taxpayer from being dishonest (by informing him of what the IRS already knows of his finances), and only gives him a chance to correct the records.

      The proposed system doesn't prevent a taxpayer from being dishonest: it makes it easier, because it informs the taxpayer of exactly which details the IRS is aware, and which they are unaware.

      It facilitates the taxpayer knowing what the IRS is unaware of, and thus assists the taxpayer in hiding money in future years..

      If the taxpayer is not presented with the info, then they have to be sure to report everything to really be certain they won't be caught red-handed.

      Probably the real 'big bad guys' such as insiders at the IRS, criminal orgs, etc, already know major blindspots, where they can elude dtection.

      If the IRS always reported everything it knew to the taxpayer... they'd lose a big part of their edge, they'd be opening up insight into the extent of info they get to the general public, resulting in opening up illegal tax fraud to the commoners, instead of just large entities with lots of money....

  18. Intuit Isn't the Only Problem by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The tax filing and preparation industry, of which Intuit is a part, has long been an obstacle to any change in the tax code that would serve to simplify and reduce the need for their services. However, they are far from the only special interest group with an incentive to keep the US Tax code as complex, opaque, and unintuitive as possible. The tax attorneys who help the wealthy arrange their affairs to minimize taxes under the complex rules, the Federal Law Enforcement agencies who periodically use the tax code as a tool to prosecute those who they cannot otherwise charge (i.e. organized crime, income from illegal activities, etc) and of course the tax accountants who work at all levels as guides through the byzantine labyrinth of the US tax codes. Each of these groups, and especially the attorneys (who are the number 1 contributors to the Democratic Party btw), lobbies vigorously against any change in the law which they perceive to be a threat to their ongoing and profitable stream of revenue. Few things in life are as certain as death and taxes after all and one would be hard pressed to think of a more stable source of revenue, as an attorney or tax industry insider, than a system mandated by the Federal Government that every American must use at least once per year.

    1. Re:Intuit Isn't the Only Problem by Eil · · Score: 2, Funny

      The tax filing and preparation industry, of which Intuit is a part, has long been an obstacle to any change in the tax code that would serve to simplify and reduce the need for their services. However, they are far from the only special interest group with an incentive to keep the US Tax code as complex, opaque, and unintuitive as possible.

      I see what you did there.

  19. Why they WON'T by sonnejw0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They won't do it because then the tax payer knows what sources of income the government doesn't know about. The uncertainty now is enough to scare some people into declaring their tips, gifts, or private sales. Full disclosure from the government makes it easierto dodge taxes. The correlary is that more people might pay if the simply get a bill in the mail. Of course, that just "puts the burden" on "poor people", because the educated would be smart enough to get away with not declaring an overseas investment, and the poor would be too afraid not to send money they know the government wants.

  20. It will increase correctly filed taxes for most! by JakFrost · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You forget that you take responsibility for what is on the form, even if it is pre-filled the moment you sign it. There's nothing stopping the government from sending you a blank or zero form and you'll just sign it and send it in thinking that you won't get prosecuted for the offshore tax haven account that you have. They'll still go after you no matter what.

    Less Fraud, More Correct Taxes

    There will be no increase of fraud due to this but I predict that most people will actually send their taxes in quicker and more of them will be more correct than the current numbers. We already have the IRS eFile system to let you do the web form part but they are all blank. It would be nice if they were pre-filled in with your information already. You'll just glance at it, take your Standard Deduction instead of Itemized Deduction for most people, type in your bank account or credit card number to pay or receive payment. You wouldn't have to look for or dig out those W2 or 1099 forms trying to figure out all the income.

    Special Interests At Work

    The simple point is that in the United States the government is run by "special interest" groups. The founding fathers, especially Thomas Jefferson and James Madison warned us about the dire effects that special interest groups will have on the government if they are allowed to mass their money and influence the rule of the country. It's all in their speeches that we all should have been forced to read in elementary and high school history and civics courses. America's educational failure.

    Now what do we have, a special interest part such as Intuit who is responsible for the Turbo Tax software and their electronic filing service trying to prevent the government from offering a pre-filled tax form service to the people. Just imagine how quickly Intuit would change its mind if the government approached them and told them that they would be the sole company responsible for getting people's taxes filed and I can guarantee that the first year you'll be presented with almost completed and pre-filled forms once your type in your Tax ID number.

    Educational Gaming

    We need a multi-genra massively multi-player video game where at first you play a First Person Shooter with friends as a team of The Founding Fathers and you first kick the British out of the colonies, then it switches to Real Time Strategy game where you maneuver the troops during the colonial war, and later it switches to a Civilization type diplomatic game where you negotiate terms of the new constitution and treaties with European countries. It'd be a nice way to have kids experience a modern way of what the history taught us. Sprinkle in a good load of historic facts in the game and you'll have kids arguing their view points because of the game.

  21. Re:In US private companies do this, only gov't can by Bengie · · Score: 2, Informative

    I completely forgot about this. Last year Turbo Tax let me fill out my taxes based on my company. All I did is select my company from a list and it auto-filled all of my data and I checked it over.

  22. Re:Why they shouldn't.. by mysidia · · Score: 2, Funny

    That's the point at which you go to the pet store and pick up 27 kittens.

    When the agents come to inspect the well-being of your children, you show them your "babies".

  23. Intuit are evil ... by aegl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just got a pop-up from Quicken 2007 telling me that it will cease down-loading data from my bank at the end of April. If I want to keep being able to do this, then I'll have to upgrade to Quicken 2010.

    This is the second time that Intuit have made an incompatible change to the download data format (at least while I've been using it). So I'm going to assume that their business plan now includes a forced upgrade every three or so years. Time to start researching non-evil alternatives.

  24. Re:Fair Tax by Edward+Teach · · Score: 2, Informative

    I suggest you actually read the fair tax site. The fair tax provides a prebate check for taxes paid up to the poverty line, so the poor pay NO TAXES for spending on basic necessities. Used items are also not taxed.

    Try reading what it is before commenting.

    --

    Setting his threshold to 5, Sparky eliminated most of the trolls on /.

  25. Re:Why they shouldn't.. by spongman · · Score: 3, Funny

    those digits that start with 9

    what, like '9' ?

  26. After a generation nothing else exists by bussdriver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It only takes about a generation and people begin to forget or even lose the imagination of the things the way they used to be.

    Government workers used to get paid reasonably close to the private counter parts. FACT. Public service was an honorable profession and for many it was worth the slightly lower wages (but increased stability.) Government workers were not thought of as incompetent crooks; well not all of them were - plus the bad ones tended to stick out MORE because there was more of a contrast and other well intentioned workers less tolerant of them. This was the general case long ago; now people can't even imagine the possibility of what was and did actually exist. Its so bad some people can't believe it ever was any better than it is today.

    On a local level, I've SEEN politicians sucker people into undermining and wrecking public services with the INTENT of replacing them with his friend's private business. I've seen this done and sadly; even when its so fast people can remember how much better it was before "reform" and expensive privatization with no real benefits -- not enough people get upset or notice to change the result. It actually takes something really really bad before it can be reversed. Its the fault of the citizens ultimately that this stuff happens. We've had a long term large scale more organized version of this going on in the whole country.

    I've seen money wasted on things that could have been done in-house simply because they don't want to compete with the contractors. Its crazy non-thinking behavior. I don't hire someone to cut my grass because I'm afraid I'm unfairly competing with them.

    The public and the officials set low expectations-- so we allow bad results because that is what we EXPECT to get. Any manager expecting little will eventually have their expectations met.

  27. Re:legitimacy of Taxes by srussia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That "social contract" sounds very much like a Microsoft EULA. I just ignore it.

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  28. Exactly right. MOD PARENT UP. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 3, Informative

    When Ed Foster was still alive, each year his GripeLog would rate the most abusive software companies in the United States. Microsoft was usually first, of course, but once Intuit was rated the most abusive.

    The U.S. government is so corrupt that it amazes and scares me. Anything for those who want to make money using the power of government. When Saudis attack, invade Iraq? When Intuit wants something, use any foolish excuse to give it? Put a 6 times higher percentage of the population in prison as any European country? All part of U.S. government corruption.

  29. Re:An invitation to defraud by bloobloo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'm sorry, but the US is the only country in the world I have ever heard of where it is a regular thing for people to claim refunds as if it is a normal thing to do.

  30. Re:intuit not thinking by careysub · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know, if Intuit were really smart they wouldn't fight this...but rather got to the IRS and ask, "how can we be contracted to help you."

    They'd probably make more. ...

    Ah! A proposal to bring back tax farming! (Or actually a suggestion that it would fit into Intuit's corporate strategy to bring it back.)

    This privatization of the tax system (And we all know that "privatization" is always a Good Thing! Right?) is one of the things that brought on the French Revolution and sent tax farmers to the guillotines. Can we just move directly to that latter stage? Intuit's executive suite sounds ready for a visit from the Committee of Public Safety right now!

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  31. Re:Fair Tax by careysub · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I suggest you actually read the fair tax site. The fair tax provides a prebate check for taxes paid up to the poverty line, so the poor pay NO TAXES for spending on basic necessities. ...

    Ah! It is good the legally defined poor (... up to the poverty line ...) are spared annihilatory taxation on their subsistence income (but then, they have little wealth to contribute to the public coffers anyway). This then merely dumps even more of the cost of running the government on the Middle Class, who have seen their proportionate burden of taxation greatly increase while their income stagnated over the last generation.

    There is always another "fair tax" or "flat tax" stalking horse around the corner designed to further cut the taxes of the wealthy, rich, and super-rich even farther below their already historic lows. As with Intuit, those who already have, never have seem to have enough. It's a shell game and the Middle Class always ends up with the empty shell.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  32. Re:Fair Tax by bloobloo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In a recession, spending doesn't necessarily go down. People will actually spend more on consumer durables as the utility they receive from them is greater than the (tiny) interest that they would get in the bank.

  33. Form 4070 by sjbe · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think you know little of how waiters work then. They already don't declare their tips fully.

    True but if they don't declare at least 8% of their sales as tip income it will almost certainly trigger an audit. This information is required to be reported on form 4070 and the IRS knows there is a high propensity to cheat.

    1. Re:Form 4070 by Yert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it's an automated system, yes. When you have a $10 check, the IRS assumes automatically that the server received a $1.50 tip - regardless of whether they got a $2 tip or a $.50 tip. At the end of their shift, they are given the opportunity to declare their tips - it's common practice to accept the 15% default as your declaration unless you're a horrible server; but declaring your true 5% will also flag the management system that you're not getting tipped correctly, so they'll usually pull you in for retraining or dismissal. It's a double-edged sword - lose your wages to the IRS or lose your job... At any rate, the tips are taxed and the taxes are deducted from the server's check at the end of the week, so it's in their best interest to declare the 15% and "forget" any discrepancy.

      --
      Truck driver, plumber, Linux systems engineer.
  34. Australia has this already by Caustic+Soda · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We can already do this in Australia. Electronic submissions have been around for at least the last five years, and you only need to fill out every section of the form the first time you submit electronically. In subsequent years, and info which has not changed (such as address, employer details etc) doesn't need to be manually entered, but is auto-filled from the Tax Office servers. There was also a suggestion recently that they should simplify the system even further, and remove the need for people who only need a "simple" tax return to submit a form at all (I'm not sure how they were going to define "simple"). This supposedly would mean about two million less tax returns every year.

  35. not really by jrkotrla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I had tax overpayments from 8 years that were owed to me (>$2000). IRS never said a thing. One year, I had an underpayment of $115. after penalties and fees and interest, IRS (first communication) sent me an "intent to file lein" letter unless I paid them $480. if they owe you money, they'll never look for you

    --
    In God we trust,
    everyone else we firewall!!
  36. Re:An invitation to defraud by Artifakt · · Score: 2, Informative

    The biggest reason for refunds is the Earned Income Credit. it's a replacement for older welfare systems, and it means there are fewer incentives to not work and just drift on welfare. (fewer, not none). Most US poor are either working or legally disabled. While the EIC isn't all that well implemented, it's probably better for the country as a whole than the system which preceeded it.

    The second biggest reason for refunds is people don't try to adjust their withholding so as not to give the government a free loan until they file. Some people actually regard withholding as the only way they can save a large sum each year, which is really saying they lack the discipline to open a savings account with that money instead. It's normal in the US for essentially the same reasons not planning for retirement or not having rainy day savings is pretty normal in the US too.

    --
    Who is John Cabal?
  37. Re:Fair Tax by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, LOW. Stop it using these stupid "X% of total tax" things make it look like the wealthy are unfairly taxed. All it does is show that 1% of people have 25% of the total assets. Income inequality is fine, but don't piss on the poor and tell them it's raining. If people pay the same share regardless of their income or assets then it's regressive and hurts people who make less.

    This isn't splitting a restaurant bill, where you only consume the portion you pay for.

    If you're going camping with your kids, you don't make them carry 1/4th of the total load and break their backs while you whistle Dixie, you give them a load proportional to their ability to carry it. That's because you are sharing a burden together that benefits everyone.

    --
    I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.