Slashdot Mirror


To Fight $5.2B In Identity Theft, IRS May Need To Change the Way You File Taxes

coondoggie writes: Based on preliminary analysis, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) estimates it paid $5.2 billion in fraudulent identity theft refunds in filing season 2013 while preventing an additional $24.2 billion (based on what it could detect). As a result, the IRS needs to implement changes (PDF) in a system that apparently can't begin verifying refund information until July, months after the tax deadline. Such changes could impact legitimate taxpayers by delaying refunds, extending tax season and likely adding costs to the IRS.

17 of 410 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Corporate taxes by edawstwin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's fix the corporate tax evasion first please.

    Let's fix corporate taxes first, so that there is no evasion.

    --
    I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
  2. Did you find that hard drive yet? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, it's going to be a long time before anyone believes anything the IRS says again.

  3. Simplify Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about we simplify taxes so there's no need to issue refunds in the first place?

    1. Re:Simplify Taxes by mjr167 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or how about we get rid of all the stupid tax credits in exchange for a lower base rate... You are probably going to give your $1000 to the red cross anyways. If you pay a tax rate of 20% and you get a $1000 deduction, then the govt gives you back $200. You are still out $800.

      Now you say that because the government won't give you $200 back, you will only donate $800. However, if the lower base rate gives you the extra $200 as disposable income without having to file the paperwork, then why wouldn't you give it to the Red Cross like you wanted to do before? If the answer is you are going to take the extra $200 and spend it on hookers and blow, then that's on you, not the government.

      Personally I like the Fair Tax proposal. Consider this... do we really need to have an entire industry devoted solely to reducing people's tax burdens?

  4. Solution by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Insightful

    End income tax.

    No more tax returns. Only tax based on use (i.e. Sales Tax) Problem solved in one fell swoop.
    Tax evasions now impossible and you encourage people to invest rather than spend.
    Oh wait, that's right, we have an entire industry run by blood sucking vampires that need the current system to remain as confusing as possible.

    1. Re:Solution by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that the government will just increase taxes on other common goods to make up for the shortfall.
      So? Low income people still spend a lower percentage on their income on those "common goods" than the wealthy.

      Actually, the opposite - low income people spend less dollars, but a larger portion of income, on those items than rich people. Plus, you really can't limit spending on "must-have" items like food, shelter, utilities, etc.

      As OP stated, and I already repeated, a 20% tax on a $20,000/yr income is a much larger chunk of income than a 20% tax hit on a $200,000 income.

      With a "flat tax," there isn't any way around that issue.
      There are lots of ways around the issue.
      You could tweak the system further.

      Then it's not a "flat tax," it's a graduated tax system, like the one we already have.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:Solution by ArcherB · · Score: 4, Insightful

      gas is taxed.
      repairs are taxed
      registration is taxed.

      Why wouldn't the sale of a car be taxed?

      How about clothing? Need clothes to live, right?
      Nope. If it makes you feel better, you could make school kids clothing tax free, or only make new clothing taxable. If you don't want to pay the tax, buy second hand.

      Now Paris Hilton can buy 400 pairs of shoe tax-free!
      So? Why do you care what Paris Hilton does? See, that's the problem. You are so damn worried that a rich person might save $80 on a pair of shoes that you want EVERYONE else to go through hell so a rich bitch won't save a buck.

      Watch out for that slippery slope you're on.
      Odd. Nearly everyone of the 50 states has programs like this and they don't have a problem. Were you referring to the "slippery slope" fallacy?

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    3. Re:Solution by ArcherB · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As OP stated, and I already repeated, a 20% tax on a $20,000/yr income...
      See, that's where your mistake lies. When 75% of your income is spent on tax free items, you're not paying 20% of your income in taxes. ...is a much larger chunk of income than a 20% tax hit on a $200,000 income.
      So? Class envy much?
      $3.50 a gallon fuel is much more of a burden on a person making $20,000/yr than a person making $200,000/yr. Should we charge poor people less for gas? For that matter every dime a rich person spends is going to be less of a burden to the rich than the poor, and we are doing nothing about it? Did you know that rich people can afford to have other people cook their food? I've heard they can keep their houses at 55 degrees in Florida year round, and it's no burden at all. That's not fair at all! Why should eating be more of a burden on the poor than the rich?

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  5. Re:Corporate taxes by Karmashock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The IRS is raking in record income to the US federal government.

    You aren't out of money because the IRS isn't taking it in... you're out of money because you're spending too much of it.

    By all means... fix corruption... but while you're at it... balance the fucking budget.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  6. Re:Corporate taxes by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's fix the corporate tax evasion first please.

    Let's fix corporate taxes first, so that there is no evasion.

    Both. The US has very high corporate taxes (relative to other countries) but also has the most advanced system of tax loopholes ever developed by a corrupt legislature. States frequently offer tax incentives to big companies to move or stay in a state, while leaving the same unpalatable taxes (like business property taxes on machines and furniture) on everyone else.

    Tax corps uniformly and quit with the loopholes and the same same income would come in at a lower tax rate, thus addressing both evasion and avoidance.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  7. Apt Tax by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We don't need more rules, more laws, more agents (that cost a shit ton of money at work and in retirement), more jails.

    Just banish most taxes, simplify the system to a low rate transaction tax, don't deal with deductions or deciding which charities or legit or not (tax would be too low to matter in individual cases), stop caring if business are on shore or offshore or if couples are married:
    http://www.apttax.com/

    Of course, by nature, bureacracy always has to build itself up, never deconstruct itself, so don't expect to see it short of in the face of a revolution.

  8. Stop requiring people to overpay by swillden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The current IRS regulations effectively require people to overpay their income taxes, which results in nearly everyone getting a refund, which they want processed quickly, because somehow it's okay if the government is holding money you didn't actually owe, until you actually know how much they're holding. If, on the other hand, people have to mail in a check they don't care if it takes the IRS a few months to verify everything.

    Simple solution: Eliminate the regulations that require overpayment, such as the regulation that penalizes you for underpaying if your withholdings are inadequate to cover your liabilities and aren't at lease as large as the prior year's withholdings. Some, perhaps many, people will still choose to overpay, as a sort of brain-dead savings plan, but many will reduce their withholdings, and those that still overpay will have no basis for complaint about a slower refund, since it was their choice.

    But, then, I think the whole concept of mandatory withholdings is evil and wrong. It's just one of many ways that taxpayers are misled about how much they're paying. It's not the worst of such deceptions, but it's a significant one.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. Re:Thanks for the fraud, Turbotax by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would be happy if the government would just provide PDF forms with just enough brains so that you could fill them in and they would automatically do the calculations for you. Then give people the option to either sent those in electronically or print and mail the damn things. The automatic online filing would be a godsend but I would settle for PDFs with fields and auto calculations that I would have to print and mail.

    --
    Time to offend someone
  10. Thus the problem with the TEA party by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..and really all of the "simple" solutions. It seems like a good idea - just don't spend that $1 Trillion and we can drop our taxes by $1 Trilllion. Except that economies don't really work that way. You can't add or subtract a trillion dollars like that and expect things not to spiral out of control.

    Remember the recession that freaked out the entire world? Remember the job losses, the stagnation of the economy, and the general feeling that the world would end? We lost 8.8 million jobs, most of them paying $14-21/hr (if wikipedia is to be believed). Do you know how many jobs $1 Trillion dollars pays for? About 18 Million - more than double what was lost in the great recession.

    "But wait," I hear you cry, "that trillion dollars would still be spent by the people who wouldn't have been taxed!" Oh, that's partially true. Understand that 40% of that money would go to multi-millionaires who's purchasing habits generally are not affected by their income. The other 60% probably would be spent, but that 60% would be spent on goods and services in an economy which has almost zero overlap with the manpower which would be idled by the drop of $1T in defense spending. Those are soldiers, intelligence report creators, bomb makers - not really things you purchase in your every day life. And because you can't train and re-purpose people fast enough to build the TVs and tablets and cars and hotel staff to pick up the increase in demand, the prices for all those products would increase. And because of the numbers, dropping the US income tax would result in a net increase in take home pay of about 4%-5% for most people in the middle class (Say, $60-80,000 annual household income) or about $50 a week.

    So you're magical tax-free utopia would end up with 18 Million people out of work and without the skills needed to change jobs, inflation in the disposable goods and discretionary services market, and a net effect of $50 a week in the pockets of the people who still have jobs.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Thus the problem with the TEA party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      These are the exact fear-mongering arguments that, fortunately, lost at the end of WWII, which was immediately followed by the largest jump in employment and GDP that the nation has ever seen.

    2. Re:Thus the problem with the TEA party by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "But wait," I hear you cry, "that trillion dollars would still be spent by the people who wouldn't have been taxed!" Oh, that's partially true.

      Its completely true unless you subscribe to the under-the-mattress fallacy.

      Understand that 40% of that money would go to multi-millionaires who's purchasing habits generally are not affected by their income.

      I see. You are a subscriber. Yes, rich people when they get money stick it under mattresses in order to deny the money from the economy, and this is believable in spite of the fact that rich people are rich because they dont do stupid shit like that.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
  11. Factually incorrect by raymorris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > The corporation has a profit margin or they would not be taxed.

    FYI, that is factually false. Approximately half of all taxes on business re unrelated to profit, or margin. A few of the taxes I, as a small business person, pay each month or quarter:

    Social Security and medicare
    Federal Unemployment tax
    State unemployment tax
    State training tax (in some states)
    State workforce disability tax (in some states)
    --Note all of the above are for hiring people. As the president has said, if you want people do less of something, put a tax on it.
    Business personal property tax (Every year, I pay a tax for owning my 15 year old desk, my pens and pencils, my mouse pad ...)
    Franchise tax
    Sales and use tax

    Income taxes account for only 20% of tax revenue. 80% of the taxes paid are paid whether they bankrupt the business or not.