IRS Reforms Free File Program, Drops Agreement Not To Compete With TurboTax - Slashdot

IRS Reforms Free File Program, Drops Agreement Not To Compete With TurboTax - Slashdot
Close
binspam
dupe
notthebest
offtopic
slownewsday
stale
stupid
fresh
funny
insightful
interesting
maybe
offtopic
flamebait
troll
redundant
overrated
insightful
interesting
informative
funny
underrated
descriptive
typo
dupe
error
122130710
story
Finding free online tax filing should be easier this year for millions of Americans. From a report:
The IRS announced significant changes Monday to its deal with the tax prep software industry. Now companies are barred from hiding their free products from search engines such as Google, and a years-old prohibition on the IRS creating its own online filing system has been scrapped. The addendum to the deal, known as Free File, comes after ProPublica's reporting this year on how the industry, led by TurboTax maker Intuit, has
long misled taxpayers who are eligible to file for free into paying
Under the nearly two-decade-old Free File deal, the industry agreed to make free versions of tax filing software available to lower- and middle-income Americans. In exchange, the IRS promised not to compete with the industry by creating its own online filing system. Many developed countries have such systems, allowing most citizens to file their taxes for free. The prohibition on the IRS creating its own system was the focus of years of lobbying by Intuit. The industry has seen such a system as an existential threat. Now, with the
changes to the deal, the prohibition has been dropped
The addendum also expressly bars the companies from "engaging in any practice" that would exclude their Free File offerings "from an organic internet search." ProPublica reported in April that Intuit and H&R Block had added code to their Free File pages that hid them from Google and other search engines, diverting many users to the companies' paid products. "The improved process will make Free File stronger and give taxpayers another reason to consider this valuable software option," IRS Commissioner Chuck Rettig said in a statement. The agency hopes the changes will make the free option more accessible for taxpayers in the 2020 filing season, he said.
Related Links
Trump Signs Traced Act Into Law in Bid To Help Put an End To Robocalls
Inside TurboTax's 20-Year Fight to Stop Americans From Filing Their Taxes for Free
How the On-Demand Economy Reshaped Cities
This discussion has been archived.

No new comments can be posted.
IRS Reforms Free File Program, Drops Agreement Not To Compete With TurboTax
More
IRS Reforms Free File Program, Drops Agreement Not To Compete With TurboTax
Comments Filter:
All
Insightful
Informative
Interesting
Funny
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
IRS
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Arthur, KBE
( 6444066 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @09:23PM (
#59575220
They shouldn't worry about profits or private-sector competition any more than the Marine Corps should.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Antique Geekmeister
( 740220 )
writes:
The US Marine Corps does, indeed, concern itself with the competition of mercenaries around the world. If it's less expensive financially or politically to hire mercenaries than to trade arms with the USA or sign treaties with the USA, nations around the world can and have done so. Even the USA hires them: in 2016, according to the last listing I could find, there were over 5000 US Marine Corpmen deployed in Iraq. There were over 7700 mercenaries, many of them US government employees.
Standard Deduction covers most taxpayers
Score:
, Insightful)
by
davide marney
( 231845 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @10:18AM (
#59575982
Journal
The Trump administration raised the standard deduction to
$24,000
for married filing jointly. Unless you had a ton of expenses, the standard deduction will beat itemizing. Without itemizing, filing taxes is a 20-minute exercise, one form, front and back.
Parent
Share
You mean the same Marine Corps...
Score:
by
BAReFO0t
( 6240524 )
writes:
...that were part of for-profit resource wars waged on foreign countries to serve the interests of US corporations?
Your point is right and good. But your view on US warfare is predictably distorted.
IRS Tax Software
Score:
, Interesting)
by
webnut77
( 1326189 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @01:14PM (
#59576398
The government should provide us tax software or a website where we can file our taxes. The side effect of Intuit, H&R Block, et. al. providing the free filing is that they get our financial details. Now days with data breaches...
One year I paid $18,000 in taxes and then the news came out about
the GSA spent $20K on drumsticks
[go.com]. Made me sick. Yes, my family should do without a 2nd car, braces, health insurance, or whatever so that the GSA can throw a party!
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
webnut77
( 1326189 )
writes:
So you're saying that the government over-spends $20K 100 million times every year? That's dumb.
On top of that, who says this was not an OK use of money?
"This is another sad day for the taxpayers in the United States," Rep. John Mica, the Republican chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure committee, said. "This sounds almost unbelievable to have this kind of waste reported when we're running trillions in dollars in deficit makes absolutely everyone's blood boil."
The outrage was bipartisan
."
It was $20k for 4k people. That is $5/person. OMG! The government spent $5 per employee at a party? Holy shit! Panic now! My wife works in the private sector and they blow way more than that per employee at her company parties.
Nothing like taking numbers out of context to make your point.
Talking about taking numbers out of context; you're ignoring the total cost:
$268,732 on a one-day conference
Another conference: "GSA Inspector General reve
Re:
Score:
by
sarren1901
( 5415506 )
writes:
The IRS doesn't make tax law...
The control the orocess
Score:
, Insightful)
by
fermion
( 181285 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @09:34PM (
#59575242
Homepage
Journal
The wealthy, progressive and conservative, control the process. As reported last April in pro publica, John Lewis spearheaded the effort to protect the tax preparers at the expense of the rest of us because wealthy progressives were afraid that the IRS if allowed to prepare taxes would reduce thier ability to cheat on taxes. Of course conservatives have spent the past 40 years trying to kil the IRS so that they could transfer the tax burden to the middle class.
In any case, those of us who at technically competent know it would be easy to write a program that would prepare the tax return for about 3/4 of the taxpayers, and a baseline to given the auditors to catch the cheaters in the other quarter. The said thing is for most of us we get in trouble not because we intentionally s heat, but because we do not know and do not have the ability to pay someone who does
I know one family who went into HR Block and because black was not going to be able to sell them one of their cash advances was told they did not have to file. This was not true, because they had to file to legally avoid taxes otherwise owed. In the end it cost a great deal of money to stay out jail. All because the government official on all parties take money for services.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
rmdingler
( 1955220 )
writes:
Lobbying is a feature of fascism, rather than a bug, as corporations petitioning governments to interfere in the markets work to the disadvantage of the free market consumer.
Political corruption always exists. The extent to which it affects the people is the measuring stick for whether or not you live in a country riddled with corruption, or fair for the most part.
So far, life is pretty good and the middle class is strong in much of the Western world. Do not take that as a sign that constant vigilance is u
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
It's cash lobbying that perverts a fair system. Of course, this particular system was actually designed to keep a certain subset of rich white men in charge and attached to their heads, which is why it offers the illusion of democracy without the substance.
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
Rich != Wealthy
Money in America (and most of the world) is still overwhelmingly dominated by old white guys.
Re:
Score:
by
Antique Geekmeister
( 740220 )
writes:
Oh? What definition do you think applies, and how does it exclude the ordinary lobbying that we perform as humans in day to day life? What makes it a "feature of fascism" when it exists in communism, capitalism, royalty, and every other form of political leadership?
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
markdavis
( 642305 )
writes:
>"Of course conservatives have spent the past 40 years trying to kil the IRS so that they could transfer the tax burden to the middle class. "
Wrong. Many (probably most) conservatives want to greatly reduce the complexity of the income tax for many good reasons:
1) To prevent tax code from being de-facto legislation that allows the federal government yet more control over its citizens with the stroke of a pen from a non-elected bureaucracy.
2) To greatly reduce the wasted money necessary to keep the IRS w
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Anonymous Coward
writes:
#4 is clearly bullshit. They cut funding so the IRS couldn't find more cheaters.
#5 is total bullshit. Conservatives wan't people to pay more taxes,lol.
The rest are probably crap too.
Conservatives are trying to kill the IRS because that's how they want to kill the government itself.
Re:The control the orocess
Score:
, Insightful)
by
samkass
( 174571 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @08:04AM (
#59575870
Homepage
Journal
None that I know of want to "shift the burden to the middle class"; that is just nonsense.
I'm sure conservatives have "reasons" to promote schemes like a flat tax, but the bottom line is that conservatism in America since the 80's has consistently pushed policies that reduce the overall tax burden on the wealthy, and replaced it either with extreme deficits or a greater percent covered by the middle class. Tax brackets are not complicated. And common deductions have been championed by conservatives just as much as liberals in a desire to promote "family" values for the people, and "investment" for the rich. (There's absolutely no reason why capital gains should be taxed lower than worker income, for example.)
We have the technology today, and the IRS has all the information necessary, to send out a pre-filled tax form. In fact, it was one of the reforms Obama suggested on his campaign trail. But Intuit, H&R Block, and the like effectively killed it because they want to keep sucking money out of the system.
If I were in charge, I'd push for a law where companies were not allowed to profit on a 1040-EZ tax preparation or a basic health insurance plan. A lot of this nonsense would just stop, and things would ACTUALLY get simpler.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
markdavis
( 642305 )
writes:
>"I'm sure conservatives have "reasons" to promote schemes like a flat tax"
That is a different topic, but an interesting one. Assuming it has no loopholes, and taxes all income the same, it would be a more conservative concept, yes. Even if it just had some fixed, mathematical progressiveness without "brackets." But many conservatives would prefer to do away with income tax completely and tax only consumption.
>"but the bottom line is that conservatism in America since the 80's has consistently pus
Where do you get your information from?
Score:
, Informative)
by
TubeSteak
( 669689 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @02:28PM (
#59576656
Journal
Wrong. Many (probably most) conservatives want to greatly reduce the complexity of the income tax for many good reasons:
[propublica.org]
Oct. 1, 2018
Starting in 2011, Republicans in Congress repeatedly cut the IRS's budget, forcing the agency to reduce its enforcement staff by a third.
The IRS is incredibly efficient at bringing in revenue. The more money you throw at the IRS, the more revenue they bring in.
So naturally, because of their ideological opposition to taxes, Republicans have been massively defunding the IRS since 2011.
Unsurprisingly, this creates massive deficits in the Federal budget, which is something that Republicans are ostensibly against.
Fully funding the IRS would close the budget gaps without any other action by Congress.
Republicans could have their cake and eat it too, without being seen to raise taxes.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
MtViewGuy
( 197597 )
writes:
I think what the IRS wants to do is that for many taxpayers, why go through the entire process of having someone else fill out your forms? Many taxpayers only need the so-called "EZ" forms, and those should be able to be filled out free online.
It's sales training
Score:
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
> How about sheer incompetence because what do you expect when you pay $100 to have your taxes done by someone who got 2 days of tax prep training in a spare area of the loading dock warehouse?
My mom took their training. It's mostly sales training, not tax training.
> Racism had NOTHING to do with how that family got treated.
I think "black" was a typo. I think they meant "block couldn't sell them
..."
> I paid over $7k to have my taxes done last year. That's a lot higher than most would ever consid
Re:
Score:
by
Aighearach
( 97333 )
writes:
To decode his comment:
He didn't pay his taxes and the IRS came after him ("fucked")
so he had to hire a tax specialist to get him off the hook, but he saved money compared to having just paid in the first place because the specialist got him a deal.
Re:
Score:
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
That's one scenario in which paying $7K for tax help could make sense.
:)
Re: The control the orocess
Score:
by
jabuzz
( 182671 )
writes:
I personally don't cheat on taxes and would never do so. Further I deliberately pay more than I strictly have to as I don't claim all allowances I could. I am aware of other like minded individual's. Not everyone in the world is a Scrooge
Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
, Insightful)
by
93 Escort Wagon
( 326346 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @09:35PM (
#59575244
The government should only be concerned with collecting the money it's due. If setting up its own online system is the best way to accomplish that, they should do it.
It's not as if the government running its own tax collection site is going to put accountants out of business.
Share
Comment removed
Score:
, Interesting)
by
account_deleted
( 4530225 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @09:46PM (
#59575264
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
Patent Lover
( 779809 )
writes:
Come on now. We all know that socialism kills.
Re:Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
, Insightful)
by
sarren1901
( 5415506 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @04:08PM (
#59576992
You didn't read that article about Europe not having enough military to defend themselves if USA decides not to, did you?
Apparently spending all your money on healthcare and letting another country protect you is the thing we are missing.
Maybe we should put China and Russia in control of world police so we can take 5/6th of our military budget and put it into social programs like so many European countries do.
No thanks. You can move to Europe or Canada if you want that.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
redlemming
( 2676941 )
writes:
You didn't read that article about Europe not having enough military to defend themselves if USA decides not to, did you?
Apparently spending all your money on healthcare and letting another country protect you is the thing we are missing.
Maybe we should put China and Russia in control of world police so we can take 5/6th of our military budget and put it into social programs like so many European countries do.
No thanks. You can move to Europe or Canada if you want that.
You have been misled. That happens to a lot of people on political topics.
The USA spends around 3.4% of GDP on the military. Most EU nations are in the 1.5-2.5% range - but have two advantages:
1. They don't need to cross a big ocean to put boots on the ground, or keep their military supplied, and
2. They don't have have substantial Asian commitments.
The difference between US and EU military spending basically comes down to those two considerations.
A huge chunk of US military spending goes into naval and
Re:
Score:
by
schwit1
( 797399 )
writes:
"I thought it was crazy that tax software was not publicly provided"
I find it crazy that you would need software to file personal taxes. If we had a system that taxed transactions at the time of transaction this whole 15 April thing could be put into the "why didn't we do this sooner" folder. Like 1st class stamps without an amount on them.
And prices I see for EVERY product and service is the drive-it-off the-lot-price. All taxes, fees, etc. are built into the price.
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
account_deleted
( 4530225 )
writes:
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Re:
Score:
by
zugmeister
( 1050414 )
writes:
How, exactly, does one boil a live frog?
Re:
Score:
by
DCFusor
( 1763438 )
writes:
People are less and less willing to risk the slightest inconvenience to rid themselves of a big one that others just go along with. The herd is strong with these. Seems like they don't care about absolutes as long as they're doing slightly better - or might someday, then the one next door.
Re:
Score:
by
magusxxx
( 751600 )
writes:
Generations of former slave owners have murdered hundreds of former slaves' kinfolk because they couldn't legally own them anymore. Don't you feel proud?
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
Ahh classic libertarian screeching, where we are "robbed". You want robbed? Move to Ukraine, Russia, China, or other places where you pay taxes and get NOTHING for them.
The GP was not talking about the government, rather talking about people who specifically accumulate wealth. You already get NOTHING when Google pays not taxes, and when wealth is concentrated in the upper class who proceed to carefully report it so they pay very little tax.
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
Ah classic libertarian insults. If you accept that we need some public services and that requires taxes then you must be a statist bootlicker. Sorry but your dream world needs a utopian society just as communism does in order to exist and work as desired.
The government is too big, and taxes too much. But no, taxation is not theft if we have representation in the establishment of the taxes and the ability to replace that representation. It's not a perfect system by any means, it's too hard to replace inc
Re:
Score:
by
uncqual
( 836337 )
writes:
The vast majority of people in the US don't "need" software to file their taxes. Most people have simple taxes and can easily do them without software if they have a proper high school education - the problem is that far too many people in the US appear to lack a
proper
high school education and/or the discipline to follow instructions. I did my taxes for years by hand, on paper, and had a more complex tax situation than probably 95% of the households. There are low income people who have the absolutely sim
Re:
Score:
by
djinn6
( 1868030 )
writes:
A system that taxed each transaction as it happened would, by necessity, not be progressive as each transaction would be taxed independently without knowledge of the income of the person engaging in the transaction.
You can easily remedy the problem by implementing UBI on top of it. I think there's a presidential candidate proposing exactly that.
Re: Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
by
jabuzz
( 182671 )
writes:
Or the USA could simply move to a "pay as you go system" like most countries and have your tax deducted from your wages every month, leaving the vast majority of people with nothing to do. If the UK tried to move to the US system there would be riots.
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
Yes anyone can do their own on paper. But the advantage of tax prep Software isn't just the math calculations. Our tax system is so convoluted with so many exemptions, qualifiers and loopholes that you have to have a CPA or use Tax prep software which not only does the calculations but also looks for and applies the many various rules and exceptions and then double checks to make sure you are in compliance with the convoluted tax laws of this nation. I married a former corporate tax attorney, the first
Re:
Score:
by
schwit1
( 797399 )
writes:
"I thought it was crazy that tax software was not publicly provided"
I find it crazy that you would need software to file personal taxes. If we had a system that taxed transactions at the time of transaction this whole 15 April thing could be put into the "why didn't we do this sooner" folder. Like 1st class stamps without an amount on them.
Re: Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
by
phantomfive
( 622387 )
writes:
We do have a system that taxes transactions at the time of transaction. I don't know where you live that you don't.
Re:Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
, Insightful)
by
zugmeister
( 1050414 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @11:23PM (
#59575412
I'd actually go further than providing free tax software. The gov't (presumably) has a number they think is the amount you owe.
Why not just send you a bill (or check) with justification for same? Don't make every citizen guess how close we are to the amount owed and if we're wrong get hit with compounded penalties up to seven years later.
Can you imagine buying groceries this way? Buying a car? Why do we pay taxes this way?
Parent
Share
Re:Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
, Interesting)
by
Train0987
( 1059246 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @01:05AM (
#59575520
If you really want to reform the tax system then end employer withholding. If taxpayers actually had to pay the lump sum from their income that they're never given in the first place there would be a revolt.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
sarren1901
( 5415506 )
writes:
Many people would owe serious amounts of money if you 1099ed everyone. I don't think most people are that financially responsible. Just look at the credit debt so many people have because they are incapable of saving for raining days.
Re:
Score:
by
uncqual
( 836337 )
writes:
Actually, in many cases in the US the government doesn't know what a taxpayer owes.
For example, the government has no idea what all your medical expenses were and those may be deductible. They also have no idea if you have a lot of modest gambling winnings and certainly not your gambling losses that can offset your winnings. They have no idea which divorced parent is going to claim a child as a dependent each year. They have no idea if you were struck blind in a given year. They have no idea if you sold a c
Re:
Score:
by
rossz
( 67331 )
writes:
The vast majority of people do not have any deductions to speak of. The government sends a bill and it would be paid by most people. If you have deductions worth the trouble, you file to reduce your tax or get a refund.
Re:
Score:
by
MMC Monster
( 602931 )
writes:
There was a Planet Money podcast about this last year:
[npr.org]
Basically, the state of California sent out a trial tax form to a small number of individuals.
The forms were entirely filled out with what the state felt that the individual owed them. It was clear on the form that this was a trial and also just what the state had on file regarding the individual. It was also clear that the individual could:
a) sign the form and send it back (with appropriate payment/address to
The same is (more) true the other way around
Score:
, Funny)
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
The original idea (if TurboTax etc had lived up to the deal) was:
Why spend your taxpayer money creating yet another tax software when companies like TurboTax and TaxAct already provide it for free?
It would be a waste of money and time to have the IRS build another one.
Further, the US government is designed* to be fair, not efficient or effective. North Korea's government is efficient. Jong-Un gives an order, it gets done. The US government wants to do something, there are six months of hearings, seven tho
Re:
Score:
, Insightful)
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
"Further, the US government is designed* to be fair"
Wat
That's why capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than earnings which represent work getting done and thus value actually being added to the system, right? Fairness?
Go in t, pull the other one.
Re:
Score:
by
Train0987
( 1059246 )
writes:
Capital gains taxes represent investments that involved risk. There should be zero capital gains tax.
Re:
Score:
by
ortholattice
( 175065 )
writes:
Capital gains taxes represent investments that involved risk. There should be zero capital gains tax.
By this reasoning, lottery or casino winnings also shouldn't be taxed. Actually, almost anything that makes a lot of money
involves risk, so it shouldn't be taxed. Only hard-working people earning a steady salary should be taxed, right?
Re:
Score:
by
Train0987
( 1059246 )
writes:
The lottery is already a voluntary tax and it does seem odd to tax the winnings. An argument could be made that it is an investment in the state though, interesting question. Casino gambling isn't an investment at all.
Income taxes in general are highly regressive so I'd support doing away with them altogether in favor of a consumption tax that exempts food and clothing,
Re: The same is (more) true the other way around
Score:
by
astrofurter
( 5464356 )
writes:
"investments that involved risk"
Except that every time duh murket tanks, Uncle Sam steps in to bail out duh unvestors. "Risk" my ass...
Socialism for the rich; dog-eat-dog capitalism for everyone else.
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
No, actually bail-outs are not that common. Yes 2008 had significant bail-outs. But the economy has had many dips and drops and recessions where there was no bail-out. Some of the bailouts of 2008 were needed to avoid the recession turning into a depression which is what would have happened had the banking industry collapsed. Now the bail-outs were not applied as they had originally been sold, but over all we the tax payer made a profit as the banks and auto-industry repaid the funds received in the bai
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
More specifically Capitol Gains represents return on investments where you put your money into various business enterprises creating the possibility for economic growth. They should be taxed lower as they are how we make sure money doesn't get stuffed in a mattress or a Scrooge McDuck style vault. Capitol Gains are the reward for contributing towards the growth of our economy.
Lower taxes on Capitol Gains encourages more investment, which gives us more growth and greater prosperity.
A lotto or other gamblin
Thanks
Score:
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
Thanks for posting that. You were obviously paying attention in economics class. Not so much in English class.
:)
Just FYI, in order to help you look as smart as you actually are, equipment that produces is capital; Washington DC is a capitol.
Capitol gains would, I suppose, be the money politicians skim off the top when they tax the people in the states, run the money through the capitol in Washington, then send some back to the states.
Capital letters are used to start a sentence and for proper nouns, so "
Re:
Score:
by
thegarbz
( 1787294 )
writes:
There should be zero capital gains tax.
Why should there be no tax just because of risk? Should my income be tax free because I work at a major hazard facility? It makes no sense. Your investment either earns money (taxed) or loses money (tax deduction), just like any other income or expense.
Risk and taxes have nothing and should never have anything to do with each other.
I sure understand that feeling
Score:
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
I absolutely 100% understand why that feels unfair.
Also, pretty much every other country has lower taxes on investment than the US does because saving and investing is how an economy does well. Discouraging investment really hurts the economy, regardless of how that feels.
The fact is, if you aren't willing to put up your retirement savings to invest in building a factory / ship / silicon fab, there would be know factory, ship, or silicon fab to work in, and no income for anybody. Maybe that sucks, but that
Re:I sure understand that feeling
Score:
, Interesting)
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
drink@hyperlogos.org
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @01:59AM (
#59575572
Homepage
Journal
You encourage investment through inflation, and taxing hoarded cash. Problem solved. All wealth is derived from the land by the efforts of labor. Capitalism is an excuse the wealthy use to explain why they should have everything even if they do nothing.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
rossz
( 67331 )
writes:
You failed econ 101 in school, right?
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
If you have an objection to make about what I said, go ahead. Otherwise, let the adults have a serious conversation.
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
Inflation does not encourage investment, it undermines it by reducing the effectiveness of each dollar invested. Taxing does not encourage investment, if anything it punishes it by taking the results of good investments. Nobody but the drug cartels hoards cash. Scrooge McDuck was a cartoon character and his money vault is fictional. The rich invest their money or put it in a bank. That money sitting in a savings account is still in use in the economy. It's what the bank uses to make loans. It's not s
Re:
Score:
by
drinkypoo
( 153816 )
writes:
"Inflation does not encourage investment, it undermines it by reducing the effectiveness of each dollar invested."
Nope. Uninvested dollars devalue with inflation, but assets have value based on their ability to generate income
" Nobody but the drug cartels hoards cash."
Wrong again. Cash is hoarded left and right. It's hidden in foreign accounts, or often not even hidden. Look at how much cash Apple is sitting on.
Your statements are based on false assumptions.
"cash" means investments sellable within 1 year
Score:
by
raymorris
( 2726007 )
writes:
On a company balance sheet, especially a large company, "cash" doesn't mean stacks of $20 bills. It means investments, such as bonds, which can be easily sold within a year. That's distinguished from a factory full of equipment, which could take more than a year to sell off, if there were any buyers.
It also includes, of course, bank deposits. When you got that car loan, the money you're driving is corporate and investor "cash". Apple (and me) hand money to the bank. The bank hands that money to you. You
Re:
Score:
by
uncqual
( 836337 )
writes:
If you've ever worked at a startup company or used the products of what was once a venture capital funded company, tell me that capital is not critical to a functioning economic system.
Imagine a world where all products and services you use that are provided by a company that once received capital from investors (including instruments like convertible bonds) disappeared. No Microsoft products. No Google products (including Android to compete with iPhones - but see the rest of this list). No Facebook product
Re:
Score:
by
demonlapin
( 527802 )
writes:
I see no reason why investing in a startup company should have a huge tax advantage over investing in myself. I went into enormous debt to go to medical school, but none of my student loans are tax-deductible (I make too much), and I pay W2 rates for what I earn. Offer it to everyone, or get rid of it.
Re:
Score:
by
rossz
( 67331 )
writes:
That would be fine if Intuit didn't make damn sure it was impossible to find their free version. Intuit violated the agreement they had with the IRS. They shouldn't be getting away with not even a slap on the wrist. I'd say that refunds to every single person who was eligible for the free version is in order.
Re:
Score:
by
blindseer
( 891256 )
writes:
The IRS would almost surely create a worse system than TaxAct offers for free.
I'll remember that when the topic of government provided health care comes up.
I like the idea of private industry competing with others in private industry. I also like the idea of private industry competing with government provided services. I fully expect companies like TaxAct to stick around should the IRS offer their own website to prepare tax returns. This is no different than weather.com competing with weather.gov, both have the weather forecast for free. I assume the privately run weather website
Re:
Score:
by
uncqual
( 836337 )
writes:
Re: Medicare option...
Any "Medicare Option" for those who are not eligible for Medicare by current criteria must be
completely
separate from current Medicare as those who have paid into the system for their entire working life and have planned their finances in retirement around that commitment should not be harmed by an influx of "Medicare Option" participants. This should be true for both Original Medicare and Medicare Advantage.
Thus, a doctor or facility will likely see two prices for goods and services
Well in Norway and such ...
Score:
by
BAReFO0t
( 6240524 )
writes:
... you apparently don't file anything at all.
The goverrnment has to know about transactions, marital status and such anyway. So why do they need you to tell them again?
They just send you an invoice. Done.
(Yes, you can appeal in case they got something wrong.)
What exactly, of the tax-relevant things does your government not know already? (Serious question.)
Re:Seriously, there's no reason not to do it
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Richard_at_work
( 517087 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @10:12PM (
#59575294
Why does there even have to be an online system? In most countries I have worked in, I haven’t needed to have *any* relationship with the tax system because my income tax for the year is deducted at source based on a normalised tax code - I get a form at the end of the year to say how much income tax I paid for my own records, and that’s about the extent of what a normal tax payer needs to care about.
The only time I needed to actually start doing anything like filing is when I started taking income that was not taxed at source - directors dividends, overseas landlord status etc.
The US system has always struck me as overly complicated for no good reason - deductions, refunds, calculations etc. Other countries seem to have a much better system.
Parent
Share
Re:
Score:
by
rossz
( 67331 )
writes:
Actually, if you don't owe anything, you don't have to file. The problem is, if you screw up, even by a tiny amount, you get seriously screwed over, so it's best to file no matter what.
Re:
Score:
by
Richard_at_work
( 517087 )
writes:
But it sounds like significantly more people in the US need to actually interact with the IRS around tax year end than in any of the other countries I had in mind in my previous post (interacting with their respective IRS equivalents, before some pedant steps in...) - going by the fact that pretty much any geek on the internet, regardless of their nationality, knows how bad the US tax system is and has annual reminders of that, it sounds like the system is horribly broken...
Re:
Score:
by
chiguy
( 522222 )
writes:
The US system has always struck me as overly complicated for no good reason - deductions, refunds, calculations etc. Other countries seem to have a much better system.
Other countries might have simpler systems perhaps, but not necessarily better.
Those deductions, refunds, etc are to incentivize and dis-incentivize various behaviors or make up for certain situations. A simple example is a tax credit for installing solar panels. Obviously this is to incentivize installing solar panels. Should every person who installs solar panels (or one of thousands of other deductions/credits/etc) report this to their employer when the event happens so the employer can calculate a new w
Re:
Score:
by
Richard_at_work
( 517087 )
writes:
You might find it surprising, and you might even believe it’s impossible, for a tax system to not have incentives driven through tax codes, but that’s the way it is in the UK.
You have your basic tax code, which governs how much tax you pay through your income. That’s where it ends for most adults, that’s the extent of their exposure to the taxation system in the UK.
If you want to take advantage of a government incentive to install solar panels, or improve your insulation, then you a
Re:
Score:
by
blindseer
( 891256 )
writes:
The US system has always struck me as overly complicated for no good reason - deductions, refunds, calculations etc. Other countries seem to have a much better system.
This overly complex tax code is what happens when the government starts using public funds as leverage to encourage or discourage behavior, as opposed to merely collecting funds to run the government.
Maybe there's a good argument for every thing that the government offers deductions and credits. What has happened though is the number of these has grown so large that not even the IRS can accurately compute the taxes for a large number of people that have to pay them.
It used to be that the federal government
Re:
Score:
by
novakyu
( 636495 )
writes:
It could put H&R Block out of business. They aren't giving you advice on obscure sections of the tax code or helping you with the legal practice of tax avoidance. Their business is built on getting paid to do what any literate American can do for him/herself.
OTOH, I guess putting them out of business isn't the worst thing for government to do.
Re:
Score:
by
chiguy
( 522222 )
writes:
I agree, no business has the right to survive. It's a free market argument (that is, free markets should decide which businesses survive) that few large businesses espouse because they are powerful enough to create carve-outs in the code and capture control of regulators. It's a hypocrisy that many people can't see.
How about removing filing entirely for most?
Score:
, Insightful)
by
Todd Knarr
( 15451 )
writes:
on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @10:07PM (
#59575286
Homepage
The IRS has W-2 information for almost all employees. How about at the end of January, around the time W-2s are sent out, the IRS mails all taxpayers they have records on a form showing the taxes owed based on W-2s on file and standard deductions/exemptions along with a return slip and envelope. If the information is complete and correct, just check the corresponding box on the return slip, sign it and return it. If you had a refund due, it'll be processed immediately, If you owed, you have until April 15th to pay (you can include payment with the return slip). If the information isn't correct or complete, check the box on the return slip for "I need to file a full return.", send it back and file a regular tax return by April 15th. If you do nothing, on April 15th the information on file will be assumed correct and your refund processed or amount owed billed as appropriate. That should cover the majority of working adults without any complex paperwork for the taxpayer.
If you don't have any W-2s on file, you get a return slip with a note indicating that you have no income information on file and you need to either fill out a full return or certify that you had no taxable income. Check the appropriate box on the return slip and send it back, and file a regular tax return if necessary.
Share
Re:
Score:
by
mydn
( 195771 )
writes:
Many people have income that is not related to a W2. Or they have many more deductions that were on their W4. Either way, waste of time.
Re:
Score:
by
account_deleted
( 4530225 )
writes:
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Re:
Score:
by
toddestan
( 632714 )
writes:
Then you check the box that says "[X] I need to file a full return" and do that.
There's a lot of people who work a W2 job as their only source of income, and take the standard deduction. The IRS can start with this simple but common case, and then start tackling the more complicated cases.
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
And those with taxes that simple file a 1040EZ where they transfer the numbers from their W2 from their employer to the Tax form do the simple addition or subtraction and send the form to the IRS stating the amount they are due for a refund or that they owe and a check for the amount owed. Or they can fill out a standard 1040 form claim the standard deduction and do the same.
In this scenario the government doesn't have to pay for postage, or printing and handling all the "slips". This way is cheaper for
Re:
Score:
by
Mspangler
( 770054 )
writes:
If the government would give up using the tax code for social engineering purposes what you propose might work, but in the last 20 years I think I qualified for the short form twice. And only three of those years did I itemize deductions. Extra credit for energy efficiency? Long form. Capital gain? Long form. Moving credit? Long form.
And now I have an inherited IRA, and I can't even file electronically. I have send in the paper forms. Eleven sheets last year. Hopefully less this year.
And just to ruin your d
Re:
Score:
by
chiguy
( 522222 )
writes:
The IRS has W-2 information for almost all employees. How about at the end of January, around the time W-2s are sent out, the IRS mails all taxpayers they have records on a form showing the taxes owed based on W-2s on file
I've thought a little about this and I think a big benefit of the government NOT doing this is they want you to actually declare income that they DON'T know about. If they told you what they knew about but missed some income then you just go "check, you got it, haha".
Also, sending out all this information is a bit of a security nightmare (lost mail, moved, etc)
Re:
Score:
by
Kjella
( 173770 )
writes:
I've thought a little about this and I think a big benefit of the government NOT doing this is they want you to actually declare income that they DON'T know about. If they told you what they knew about but missed some income then you just go "check, you got it, haha".
They had this concern in Norway too but it turned out to be pretty much a non-issue. Those who had other income didn't report anything more or less just because the government listed the standard sources. If you get paid under the table both sides generally agree to that, if you expected it to show up on your taxes and it doesn't it's probably an error that'll get fixed. If you're not trying to cook the books it's a simple integrity check to see if the sum paid in wages - that they can ask for as part of th
Re:
Score:
by
jwdb
( 526327 )
writes:
California tried this, in a pilot program by the name of "ReadyReturn". Sounds like it worked quite well, until the tax-preparation companies and the anti-tax groups got together and killed it.
Re:
Score:
by
clovis
( 4684 )
writes:
Big Brother already knows when I take a shit and what I ate for dinner last night. Surely Big Bro can figure out how much tax I owe.
I thought that too. But it occurred to me that we are confusing Facebook, Google, Amazon (Alexa), etc with the government.
The government hasn't got a clue about what Americans are up too, else we would be posting from prison.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Score:
by
msauve
( 701917 )
writes:
The prohibition on the IRS creating its own system was the focus of years of lobbying by Intuit.
Why? Some government created website would certainly drive people to commercial software, if they value their time in the least.
I suspect Intuit doesn't have to worry...
Score:
by
JoshWurzel
( 320371 )
writes:
...for a long time. I say this as a long time user of Turbotax who would very much like to stop paying for tax prep. Turbotax is fairly easy to use for my tax situation and has continued to improve year over year. It's not a bad product for me. It's just really annoying having to pay extra just to figure out how much to send the government each year.
Freakonomics had an episode a few weeks ago in which they discussed the tax gap, the gap between what's owed and what's collected. IRS estimates the gap fo
Re:
Score:
by
93 Escort Wagon
( 326346 )
writes:
Today, free file is only available if you make less than $69k.
Well, yes and no.
The "free file" where you get to use Intuit's or TaxAct's friendly web walk-through are only available if you make under $69K. But anyone at any income level can use "Free Fillable Forms", which basically provides online versions of most of the IRS's paper tax forms (and offers free electronic filing, to boot).
Free Fillable Forms is linked from the IRS website, so I won't bother to provide a link here. But I've used it for the past several years to file my taxes. There's no guidance other t
Re:
Score:
by
dwillden
( 521345 )
writes:
Try TaxAct and others. I too was a reliable TurboTax user for years. Then last year on a whim I ran my numbers through TaxAct as well and they found more deductions and increased the size of my refund. As neither service charges until you are ready to file you can see when one does better than the other.
I'm looking forward to the IRS's program. The biggest weakness I see is that there is no motivation for the IRS to build State tax return calculation and filing software into their program, leaving us to
Sickening
Score:
by
BrendaEM
( 871664 )
writes:
It's bad enough that the U.S. tax system is so complicated that you need software, but to pick out a company to throw a monopoly at makes me want to wretch.
Re:
Score:
by
uncqual
( 836337 )
writes:
Very few individuals "need" software to do their personal income taxes in the US. The IRS has instructions for every form most individuals file. One does need to be able to do arithmetic (with the aid of a calculator if they choose), but that's about it. The IRS even accepts hand filled out forms for every form the vast majority of individuals need to file -- just as the IRS always has.
That said, I have been using tax software for about 30 years (starting with AMTAX) because I'm willing to pay a little mone
Of course some countries...
Score:
by
DrXym
( 126579 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @05:40AM (
#59575778
...such as the UK and Ireland taxes are deducted at source. e.g. the employer deducts any taxes related to wages / benefit in kind on the payslip. VAT is also included in the price of goods and services. etc. That means for the majority of people they don't have to file
anything
which in turn means there aren't so many accountants or auditors required for the system to function.
Share
Ob Planet Money Podcast
Score:
by
MMC Monster
( 602931 )
writes:
I replied to an individual earlier with a link to this podcast, but I don't want it buried.
[npr.org]
Basically showed what happened when the state sent pre-filled tax forms to people.
Re:
Score:
by
clovis
( 4684 )
writes:
Here's a link to a text version.
[priceonomics.com]
Tried a government UI lately?
Score:
, Interesting)
by
groobly
( 6155920 )
writes:
on Wednesday January 01, 2020 @01:19PM (
#59576410
Anyone who has had the pleasure of trying to interact with government websites knows that Intuit's fears are paranoid. While TurboTax's UI is quite bad, and has actually been made worse over the years, once the government makes its own for more complex situations, Intuit's business will start booming.
Share
Re: Just wait until
Score:
, Informative)
by
Typhoid supreme
( 6471954 )
writes:
Well here's the funny thing about facts.

Trump appointed Charles Rettig and Michael J. Desmond so he's in fact responsible for steering the ship away from 20 years of anti citizen behavior.

But go ahead and be a hater.
Re:
Score:
by
Bourdain
( 683477 )
writes:
You're assuming he listens to those he appoints, "Science Panel Staffed With Trump Appointees Says E.P.A. Rollbacks Lack Scientific Rigor"
link -->
[nytimes.com]
Re:
Score:
by
blindseer
( 891256 )
writes:
the orange man hears about this. "What, let poor people file their taxes for free? What about all the jobs that will be lost at Intuit? I'm issuing an executive order on this one! So SAD."
You want to see the IRS go away? You want Intuit to go out of business? Then have the Democrats keep going to court looking to get access to Trump's tax returns from his lawyers and accountants.
Trump has no love for how complex the federal income taxes have become. I fully expect him to make the tax code simpler, if only to keep the Democrats from trying to use tax records against him and his friends.
Trump is likely to be the most conservative POTUS we've seen, perhaps since Reagan, perhaps in all of US
Related Links
Top of the:
day
week
month
393
comments
Americans Are Leaving the US in Record Numbers
381
comments
Scott Adams, Creator of the 'Dilbert' Comic Strip, Dies at 68
359
comments
'America's Elite Universities Have Lost Their Way'
341
comments
A Hellish 'Hothouse Earth' Getting Closer, Scientists Say
339
comments
The US Is Flirting With Its First-Ever Population Decline
next
How the On-Demand Economy Reshaped Cities
21
comments
previous
Trump Signs Traced Act Into Law in Bid To Help Put an End To Robocalls
60
comments
Slashdot Top Deals
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts."
-- Bertrand Russell
Close
Working...