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

421–430 of 438 posts

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

#421

Post by dragonwriter »

hundt wrote: post #420
Spooky23 wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's all data that the IRS either has already or can collect more simply. So, because 20 million households can't have a form auto-filled, we should forget about the other 100 million? The other upshot is that the expense and non-compliance from a tax perspective would probably drive more W-2 employees in situations where 1099 status is being abused. (ie. probably 40%)

> That's all data that the IRS either has already or can collect more simply. How can the IRS collect information on your filing status and family/dependent situation that would be simpler than just asking you to file a tax return? It's not just a matter of who lives where, you know. They could always implement something like TurboTax. That's a reasonable option, but a far cry from "pre-filled forms." > So, because 2…

> They could always implement something like TurboTax. That's a reasonable option, but a far cry from "pre-filled forms."

Something “like TurboTax” that also precompleted information that was tied to forms that are already filed directly by third parties with the IRS would be essentially equivalent to pre-filled forms for a very large number of filers.

> How can the IRS collect information on your filing status and family/dependent situation that would be simpler than just asking you to file a tax return?

Filing status and dependent information is a small fraction of the information content of a tax return, so having you file just that would itself be simpler than asking you to file a tax return; additionally, it is information that changes infrequently, so once you've filed it once, they could prepopulate it and require updated filings of that information only if changes occurred.

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

#422

Post by hundt »

dragonwriter wrote: post #421
hundt wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's all data that the IRS either has already or can collect more simply. How can the IRS collect information on your filing status and family/dependent situation that would be simpler than just asking you to file a tax return? It's not just a matter of who lives where, you know. They could always implement something like TurboTax. That's a reasonable option, but a far cry from "pre-filled forms." > So, because 2…

> They could always implement something like TurboTax. That's a reasonable option, but a far cry from "pre-filled forms." Something “like TurboTax” that also precompleted information that was tied to forms that are already filed directly by third parties with the IRS would be essentially equivalent to pre-filled forms for a very large number of filers. > How can the IRS collect information on your filing status and f…

> Filing status and dependent information is a small fraction of the information content of a tax return, so having you file just that would itself be simpler than asking you to file a tax return

True, although that was just one example. Another example is the credit for education expenses. Here are the requirements for the American Opportunity Credit, the best one:

* Be pursuing a degree or other recognized education credential

* Be enrolled at least half time for at least one academic period beginning in the tax year

* Not have finished the first four years of higher education at the beginning of the tax year

* Not have claimed the AOTC or the former Hope credit for more than four tax years

* Not have a felony drug conviction at the end of the tax year

The IRS + the schools could theoretically figure out only three of those five requirements. I guess four if all states reported felony convictions to the IRS.

If you don't meet those requirements, there is another one available with different rules for which expenses qualify.

This is not an uncommon tax situation! I helped a lot of lower/middle-class taxpayers prepare their returns through a free IRS service a few years ago, and this came up all the time.

> once you've filed it once, they could prepopulate it and require updated filings of that information only if changes occurred

But changes occur all the time. So the information would not be accurate for long, and you have no way of knowing when it has become wrong. In the case of the education credits, a common occurrence is that the student ceases to be a dependent of the parent (an issue which depends on how much support the parent gives the child, something the IRS has no way of knowing), meaning who is entitled to the credits changes.

Even for simpler things, like which of your children qualify for the child tax credit, changes are not extremely rare.

It's not that hard to guess when changes might have happened based on additional information. But this basically requires the IRS to reimplement TurboTax, or at least a crappy version of it that kicks people out of scope whenever things are not trivial. Without those types of inquiries I think the confidence that a given return is correct would be extremely low, absent a serious simplification of the tax code.

Edit in response to your edit:

> Something “like TurboTax” that also precompleted information that was tied to forms that are already filed directly by third parties with the IRS would be essentially equivalent to pre-filled forms for a very large number of filers.

Yeah, that would be awesome! I definitely agree that a "TurboTax lite" that was synced with the government info and allowed you to click through a bunch of screens confirming various things would be a pretty good experience. Although I actually think the real TurboTax is pretty close to this for simple situations, because they can import your information from major payroll providers, brokerages, etc.

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

#423

Post by Camillo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #387
dangjc wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not a red herring. California tried to do this, and its a Democratic state, not swayed by Grover Norquist, but Intuit blocked it. https://www.npr.org/2017/03/29/521954033/stanford-professor-...

> California [...] a Democratic state, not swayed by Grover Norquist The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association is one of the most powerful political groups in the state and has been doing the same schtick as Norquist (though, when Jarvis was alive, under a different name), since Norquist was still in college.

California wasn't always pure blue. But the effort the parent described is from 2004, so what matters are the politics of modern CA.

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

#424

Post by cortesoft »

dyarosla wrote: post #156
cortesoft wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about how people drive. People don't look at a speed limit and then drive 15 over; they drive the speed they feel comfortable with, regardless of the speed limit. Studies have shown this: Q. Wouldn’t everyone drive faster if the speed limit was raised? A. No, the majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed l…

I don’t think dismissing the parent comment based on a study is fair. Anecdotally, I drive the way the parent describes, and several comments also corroborate with that. Likely that a non negligible portion of the population drive this way.

If you look at the studies, they actually show this. There is a small percentage of drivers (something like 5-15%) that always try to drive at the speed limit, even if that is lower than the speed they would naturally drive at.

This is one of the reasons experts argue that you NEED to set the speed limit at the natural speed people will drive at; otherwise, you will have a big speed difference between the majority who drive at the comfortable, faster, speed, and the 15% who are driving slower at the speed limit. You want the two groups to drive at the same speed.

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

#425

Post by jriot »

mrunkel wrote: post #399
jriot wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't have a right or wrong opinion, its just an opinion.

Of course you can. It's a matter of perspective. From your viewpoint, someone else that has an opposing opinion has the "wrong" opinion. That's what GP was saying. Maybe it would have been clearer if they said "position" instead?

It appears your opinion on the matter is wrong.

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

#426

Post by mjevans »

mindslight wrote: post #347
mjevans wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've thrown out quite a number of different topics, and some of the questions you're asking might also lead anyone who can contribute to a discussion about speed limits being set at safe speeds to admit to having committed what is currently a crime because of an incorrectly calibrated "limit". With respect to the engineering safety of the sudden 30mph sign (which I assume is in a rural area on an otherwise small hi…

My examples are pointing out possible edges of feeling safe equals safe envelope. And I don't think cops hang out on HN looking for anecdotes of speeding to investigate, nor are you going to get a black mark on your permanent LexisGoogle record from admitting that you have sped. There are plenty of towns large enough for highway bypasses and traffic lights. The ones I'm talking about have one good road, maybe two if…

The only reason they do it with a single sign instead of many is because the town is a speed trap funded city.

If there was not revenue generation, if the fines were required to go only in to the state or federal general budget, I believe the situation would shift towards one of the safe engineering solutions I outlined above instead of the revenue generating status quo you see today.

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

#427

Post by phil21 »

the_gastropod wrote: post #287
phil21 wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. People currently had any idea what they were spending on taxes Taxes include all the things. Not just Federal income tax. It gets frustrating comparing tax rates to say - European nations - when they typically will be quoting all-in tax rates other than sales tax (VAT) - where the US number will almost invariably list only the federal income tax rate which tells not even half the story in many cases. social secu…

> Programs like social security and medicare are re-distributive in nature and indistinguishable from taxes I do think the distinction is relevant: The expected result is that you will get every dime you put into social security and medicare back. And then some. They're required savings accounts. Taxes spent on interstates, debt repayment, and the military, however, are truly expenses.

Fair point. This comment put me on a night of research for EV on SS/Medicare and it was enlightening. Thanks!

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

#428

Post by tptacek »

ransom1538 wrote: post #216
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…

It is a straightforward answer: This is because the IRS would make less money. It is like a poker game. Their number can only be smaller than yours. If you go under their number they penalize you. If you go over their number they keep the difference.

On more than one occasion I have gotten help from the IRS that reduced the amount of money the IRS ended up collecting from me. I do not think this first-principles reasoning about the IRS is as dispositive as you think it is.

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

#429

Post by dang »

masklinn wrote: post #402
dang wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe so, but you've crossed into attacking and name-calling, which is a violation of the site guidelines no matter how right you are. Moreover it's unsubstantive to just declare "nonsense" without explaining anything to the reader. Please don't post like this to HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Maybe so, but you've crossed into attacking and name-calling Calling a declaration patent nonsense is not "name-calling". Stuff which is "attacking and name-calling" however include: * insinuating that the IRS rejects pre-filling declaration because they "would make less money" despite them having supported that effort * declaring that tax declaration is "like a poker game" and that it's "just a fact" is * insultin…

It is name-calling in the sense that the HN guidelines use the term, and you need to follow the rules here regardless of how badly someone else is breaking them.

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

#430

Post by dragonwriter »

Camillo wrote: post #423
dragonwriter wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> California [...] a Democratic state, not swayed by Grover Norquist The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association is one of the most powerful political groups in the state and has been doing the same schtick as Norquist (though, when Jarvis was alive, under a different name), since Norquist was still in college.

California wasn't always pure blue. But the effort the parent described is from 2004, so what matters are the politics of modern CA.

> California wasn't always pure blue.

It's not pure blue, now, either, and more to the point, the Democrats in the California electorate are not a hive mind of stereotypes.

> But the effort the parent described is from 2004, so what matters are the politics of modern CA.

The Norquist-before-Norquist Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association is one of the most powerful political forces in modern California, too.

(Also, in 2004, California was less bright blue than modern CA; it had just recalled the Democratic governor and elected a Republican replacement, after all.)

Post reply on HN