Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 405 posts

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#181

Post by GauntletWizard »

justabystander wrote: post #140

Honestly, I think it'd be better to start a non-profit that releases tax software, first. It could compete with tax software, like from Intuit & H&R Block, as most of the needed services are rather simple. It would either charge just enough to cover costs, or be completely free, if donations for the year was sufficient. The tax software support could be done on a contract basis, where people certified people could lo…

Absolutely. But don't think that you'll have an easy time of it. Expect that 501c(3) status won't come, because ultimately it's the IRS that makes that call, and they've already been suborned or cowed to the pressure of the tax preparers.

Expect your credentials to be challenged. You need a license to prepare taxes for other people - And I expect they'll try to say every developer who touches a line of code must have one. Expect character assasination, and every mistake to be amplified. Buzzfeed will run "10 dangers of using open source software to do your taxes". The forms will become even more of a moving target than they are now, and APIs will absolutely not be public.

But it's a fight that should be fought. This is the kind of thing that makes better government, kicking and screaming.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#182

Post by quadrangle »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #169
joshuaheard wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's also akin to the withholding tax. If people had to write a check every year, there would be outrage to the amount people are actually paying. Instead, they are grateful for the government "giving" them a tax refund!

I don't think so. 45% of Americans pay zero income tax, even accounting for withholding.

Yeah, zero FEDERAL income tax but most of those pay for SS, Medicare, and state taxes. Those in a lump sum vs withholdings would still be a different experience.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#183

Post by CogitoCogito »

riemannzeta wrote: post #68

I wish there were more information about what, specifically, the pilot program included. The main detail I got from the story is that the tax returns were pre-filled with income information. I think that's useful, but I see no reason to expect a priori that the government would end up doing a better job with that than the private companies (like Intuit and H&R Block) whose revenue depends on doing that well. The comm…

> I think that's useful, but I see no reason to expect a priori that the government would end up doing a better job with that than the private companies (like Intuit and H&R Block) whose revenue depends on doing that well.

Intuit and H&R Block could of course _still_ provide their services if they happen to be so accurate. In the past, I've used Turbotax only to receive corrections from the IRS (and by the way, the IRS was right). Certainly would have saved me time to have access to that info from the beginning.

> The comments that suggest that Intuit and H&R Block were lobbying to keep the tax code complex don't make sense to me. Maybe they are, but that's not what they were lobbying for in lobbying to defeat this particular, reform is it? Rather, they were lobbying to keep the pre-filling process private.

Of course that keeps it more complex. It means that it's harder for your average tax payer to input information (starting from scratch is always harder than starting from some partially filled point). It unquestionably increases the amount of work required since tax payers have to do work the government has already done (at a much more efficient scale). So yeah basically by lobbying against this, those companies are essentially economic parasites.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#184

Post by fattire »

tempestn wrote: post #162
slg wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this system is so popular, why can't it be introduced as a proposition in California? Take the lobbyist and politicians out of the equation and it should win easily.

It was popular among people who got to try the pilot program. That doesn't necessarily mean it would be popular among the general public, especially opponents campaigning heavily against it.

It doesn't necessarily mean that, but it's the strongest evidence I could possibly imagine that it would.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#185

Post by acranox »

avar wrote: post #110

This whole thread is full of comments from people who obviously haven't read the article / listened to the podcast in question[1]. Joseph Bankman proposed ReadyReturn in California, which is the kind of tax return pretty much the entirety of the rest of the western world uses. I.e. instead of an empty return, it's pre-filled in with the details the government knows anyway. This vastly simplifies things for most peopl…

Thanks for giving me yet another reason to hate Grover Norquist. Ugh.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#186

Post by megablast »

hnal943 wrote: post #48
keithnz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In new zealand, we got rid of having to do tax returns for salaried/wage earners a number of years ago. Makes life easy for a vast majority of people. You can still do a return if you want to though. For the tax department it cuts down on how much infrastructure they need.

I think that's optimizing the wrong thing; people should be aware of the amount they are paying in taxes.

Why?

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#187

Post by CogitoCogito »

whyenot wrote: post #80

California has the initiative system that means ultimately the voters can make changes to the system without involving a recalcitrant or corrupt legislature. For better or worse, many of the big changes in government in the state were enacted through this process. For example, proposition 13, which drastically changed property taxes, proposition 14, which moved the state to a "top two" primary system, proposition 11…

I'm pretty sure the problem would be that the second someone like Grover Norquist came out against it, you'd lose a huge amount of support. The fact that those very same people would love the system if they tried it (as the 99% approval of the system attests) is irrelevant.

That said, it would be interesting to see it put to a vote.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#188

Post by fattire »

ryandrake wrote: post #95

The problem I have with the popular "simplify" US tax proposals is that they mostly do it by repealing whole sections of the tax code, ending up super regressive and/or hurting the poor and middle class and helping the already rich. Flat tax @ a high rate: Neutral or slightly helpful to the rich, crushing to the poor and middle class Flat tax @ a low rate: Windfall to the rich, the resulting gutting of government pro…

Listen to the podcast. THis has nothing to do with changing what taxes are paid. It's about simplifying the tax-paying process, which is unnecessarily a pain in the ass for the benefit of a few software companies.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#189

Post by rsync »

undersuit wrote: post #43
bmajz wrote: post #29

I was pretty surprised to see Zoe Lofgren's name pop up as an anti tax filing simplification advocate. She's the rep from CA's 19th District which covers San Jose (but not the rest of Silicon Valley) and generally a straight down the line liberal. This is not even Intuit's core district -- that would Anna Eshoo's 17th (previously 14th) district which covers Mountain View and Palo Alto. As a resident of this district,…

According to open data[1] the largest contributor to her campaign is Intuit and it's employees. [1] https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N000...

"According to open data[1] the largest contributor to her campaign is Intuit and it's employees."

And without even looking, I am going to guess it's some shockingly low number ... let's take a look ...

Ding!

$30k. That's all it took.

Should we have some fun and see if $31k is enough for (whoever this lady is that nobody has ever heard of) to tattoo "rsync.net" on her forearm ?

$32k ? What should our offer be ?

Maybe she can help councilman Ben Kallos pull the rickshaw.[1]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13972360

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#190

Post by toomuchtodo »

quadrangle wrote: post #182
toomuchtodo wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think so. 45% of Americans pay zero income tax, even accounting for withholding.

Yeah, zero FEDERAL income tax but most of those pay for SS, Medicare, and state taxes. Those in a lump sum vs withholdings would still be a different experience.

That's not withholding though (as the parent referred to; withholding towards your federal income tax bill); as you mention, that's payroll taxes, which you're going to get in retirement back as entitlements.

Consider what would happen if the IRS was efficient enough (through these automated tax accounting systems) to not get an interest free loan from working America for an entire year (ie dynamically modifying every pay period how much was collected in federal tax withholding based on estimated total year tax liability); the federal government would have to be more judicious about its cash flow.

You'd think that's something Republicans and small government advocates could get behind. Go figure. "Fiscal conservatives" in name only.

EDIT: For the pedantic: s/IRS/US Treasury/ in my comment.

Post reply on HN