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

Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 438 posts

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#291

Post by paulcole »

kalleboo wrote: post #200
paulcole wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Inuit and Quicken subsequently lobbied to end those programs and even bar the IRS from running similar programs... Is this true or an urban legend?

https://www.propublica.org/article/filing-taxes-could-be-fre...

How do you tell which bills were targeted with their lobbying dollars?

In 2016 Intuit's revenue was something like $4.7 billion. And they spent $2 million lobbying against bills that threaten the fundamental nature of their business?

That seems absurdly low to me.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#292

Post by DontGiveTwoFlux »

avar wrote: post #288
maxxxxx wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flat tax doesn't even simplify anything. The problem with taxes is to determine what the taxable income is. Figuring out the tax rate is trivial once you have that, no matter what the curve is. Flat tax is just another attempt to give big tax breaks to higher incomes.

> Flat tax doesn't even simplify anything. Yes it does, depending on the implementation. There's a 2005 Economist article which does a good job of summarizing why[1]. BEGIN QUOTE Fewer brackets are simpler to administer, but one bracket is simplest of all. Under a pure flat tax, the taxman takes the same cut from the last dollar you earn that he took from the first. The appeal to high earners is obvious. But the admi…

The parent's comment still applies. If the progressive brackets were just swapped for a flat tax, the tax man still needs to know how much each employee had as deductibles, e.g. number of dependents, donations to charity, mortgage interest, etc.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#293

Post by jejones3141 »

froindt wrote: post #133
rb808 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lower taxes? In France the bracket for a family for €104,120 to €279,132 is only 30%. Sure if you live in Oaklahoma you might pay less than that but CA/NY state taxes plus property taxes, plus fewer investment tax free options, I think US taxes are now similar or higher. Ie 28% federal + 10% state + 10% property taxes equals nearly 50%. Sure sales tax is lower. Plus - you still have to pay for your medical care, and…

> ...I think US taxes are now similar or higher. Ie 28% federal + 10% state + 10% property taxes equals nearly 50%. You can't just add the percentages up like that since federal and state taxes are marginal rates. You'd have to add the effective tax rates. > Lower taxes? In France the bracket for a family for €104,120 to €279,132 is only 30%. This range is $118,000 to $318,000 USD. At the federal level for a family $…

"Interestingly, Iowa, which people on the coasts would probably lump together with Oklahoma as low cost of living flyover states, has very high state taxes. 8.98% on earnings above $70,785."

True, though so far, at least, I think that's still balanced by being able to deduct federal income tax when figuring what you owe the state. I recall that there's a move to get rid of that deduction.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#294

Post by lowercased »

ryanianian wrote: post #121
stephengillie wrote: post #3

I'm annoyed that there is no simple system for the IRS to tell me what I owe, and let me pay or dispute. Instead, we play this game where the IRS provides a bunch of complicated documents, I guess which ones to fill out and submit, then wait 3 years to see if I was randomly chosen to see if I was correct. So it's very easy to make a mistake for dozens of years, then suddenly be penalized at random. It's the worst kin…

> The IRS have all the data Not..entirely true. My 2016 taxes were professionally done, but we somehow forgot to include one of the something-something-1099 forms from a brokerage firm. The brokerage reported some RSU stock-sells to the IRS but didn't report the cost-basis, and so the IRS assumed the cost-basis was $0 and thus taxed the full sale as income (effectively double-taxing all the RSUs). They just sent a ta…

> The brokerage reported some RSU stock-sells to the IRS but didn't report the cost-basis, and so the IRS assumed the cost-basis was $0 and thus taxed the full sale as income

Similar, yet ... stupider...

Did some standard stock buy/sells in a year, and the brokerage reported all the sales as full income, and no original cost, so they'd reported that I'd had something like $120k in 'income' ... No penalties for them for filing bad data, but it took me a while and some CPA time to respond accordingly. :/

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#295

Post by grkvlt »

volkk wrote: post #181
Coding_Cat wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Set extremely low speeds that don't make sense on highways. Allow most people to go 10-15 above. I doubt people really speed because the limits have been set too low and the people know better what is an ideal speed limit. I think people_think_ they know better what the speed limit is, and/or reason "well if 60mph is okay, 75 mph can't be that bad, I'm barely speeding and I'm in a rush". At least, that's the attitud…

Anecdotally speaking, I've driven a lot and 75-80 is ideal speed for me. When I drove in texas where in certain areas, the speed limit is 80-85, I still drove around 80. Once you hit 85/90, a car just becomes too shaky/unstable feeling.

I think Ferrari, Porsche, et al would beg to differ. Most high end Mercedes, Audi or BMW cars are limited to 155 mph but you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in ride quality between the top 50 mph of the range and the bottom 50. If your car gets shaky and unstable when you hit 90 mph then I'm sorry but you just don't have a very good vehicle.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#296

Post by chimeracoder »

DontGiveTwoFlux wrote: post #292
avar wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Flat tax doesn't even simplify anything. Yes it does, depending on the implementation. There's a 2005 Economist article which does a good job of summarizing why[1]. BEGIN QUOTE Fewer brackets are simpler to administer, but one bracket is simplest of all. Under a pure flat tax, the taxman takes the same cut from the last dollar you earn that he took from the first. The appeal to high earners is obvious. But the admi…

The parent's comment still applies. If the progressive brackets were just swapped for a flat tax, the tax man still needs to know how much each employee had as deductibles, e.g. number of dependents, donations to charity, mortgage interest, etc.

> The parent's comment still applies. If the progressive brackets were just swapped for a flat tax, the tax man still needs to know how much each employee had as deductibles, e.g. number of dependents, donations to charity, mortgage interest, etc.

No, because the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate most or all of those deductions, the same way they've already been eliminated for people who pay AMT instead of normal income tax.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#297

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

cortesoft wrote: post #132
kartan wrote: post #51

I have paid taxes in Sweden and Spain. In both countries, I get a preliminary tax form with all my data. If I don't want to change anything I just need to go online. Click Accept. And pay with my credit card the difference between what my employer pays to the government monthly and the total, around 100$. It is very efficient. I have the feeling that apart from lobbying USA loves to hate taxes. To make paying taxes o…

This is certainly true. In particular, Americans for Tax Reform (the group founded by Grover Norquist) lobbies against any attempt at making paying taxes easier for this reason. Their argument is that people should be constantly aware of how much they are paying in taxes, and making it too easy would hinder this. These groups, combined with tax preparation companies, prevent any meaningful attempt to make paying taxe…

I agree to a point. It's common for Europeans to forget about VAT since it's included in the final price consumers see, for example.

You often see income tax comparisons between the US and European countries, when in reality if you actually spend your money you are paying a 20+% tax.

With our tax system, you can see clear as day how much money you are losing out on for social security, medicare, and standard income tax.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#298

Post by closeparen »

Coding_Cat wrote: post #92
volkk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the worst kind of selective enforcement - random enforcement. Very similar to the way police behave w/ regards to speeding tickets. Set extremely low speeds that don't make sense on highways. Allow most people to go 10-15 above. But then also sometimes choose random people to screw over when it's the end of the month and they need to hit their quotas.

>Set extremely low speeds that don't make sense on highways. Allow most people to go 10-15 above. I doubt people really speed because the limits have been set too low and the people know better what is an ideal speed limit. I think people_think_ they know better what the speed limit is, and/or reason "well if 60mph is okay, 75 mph can't be that bad, I'm barely speeding and I'm in a rush". At least, that's the attitud…

Many speed limits were set at a particular percentile of observed speeds early in the road’s life, then lowered in the 1970s to conserve fuel. Safety-oriented calibration is less common than you’d think.

Drivers mostly go the speed they are comfortable with, which is a function of the roadway’s design and conditions. Traffic engineers are learning that you can’t just slap a 30mph limit sign on something that feels like an interstate highway, but must instead use the road’s physical characteristics to slow drivers down.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#299

Post by lowercased »

dionidium wrote: post #281
jjeaff wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They really don't have even close to all the data. The irs will generally have income numbers, as those generally must be reported through 1099k, 1099, and w2, etc. But they have no information on your expenses, depreciation, etc. So they only know your revenues, not your expenses. And this applies for business as well as personal.

This is like when people say, "I don't know anybody who voted for the other party!" Lots and lots and lots of people don't have any expenses. They don't itemize. They don't want, have, or need any of the stuff you're protesting about. They have a job. And that job reports their income to the IRS. End of story. Case closed. That's it. That's their entire situation. You're imagining another kind of person, but I'm not…

To put it another way, there's little reason to not (extremely) simplify something for, say, 60% of the population, just because it's going to remain complicated for the remaining 40%.

Re: Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)

#300

Post by bmm6o »

chimeracoder wrote: post #296
DontGiveTwoFlux wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parent's comment still applies. If the progressive brackets were just swapped for a flat tax, the tax man still needs to know how much each employee had as deductibles, e.g. number of dependents, donations to charity, mortgage interest, etc.

> The parent's comment still applies. If the progressive brackets were just swapped for a flat tax, the tax man still needs to know how much each employee had as deductibles, e.g. number of dependents, donations to charity, mortgage interest, etc. No, because the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate most or all of those deductions, the same way they've already been eliminated for people who pay AMT instead of norma…

True in theory, but virtually every mainstream "flat tax" that actually gets to the stage of having a concrete proposal acknowledges the need for deductions. I don't recall ever seeing a true flat tax.
Post reply on HN