Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing • Hacker News Board

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#671

Post by cascom » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 8:10 PM UTC

jason_slack wrote: post #602

cascom wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not saying I don’t commiserate - but it kind of makes sense - you underpaid us during the course of the year by $4,600, assuming you make the same again next year, we need you to pay us quarterly to make up the estimated shortfall - if it turns out you overpaid we’ll true you up (via a refund)

But again, if I am a person who see's a refund each year, why doesn't the government give me a refund up front and trust me to pay it back if my circumstances change? You see, they expect me to accommodate them, when it is convenient for them, but they would not accommodate the reverse because it doesn't accommodate them.

my guess is there response would be that if you see a refund each year you should adjust your withholding amount...

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#672

Post by fwn » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 8:22 PM UTC

msl wrote: post #667

conanbatt wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't heard an anti-tax argument in this topic, but this is a main argument between economists and statists. Economists will always say that the tax should be explicit, and it should be placed for the people that ultimately pay for it. But pro-taxes people, mainly the government, want higher revenues first, which means putting a tax wherever you can, and that is about what is politically feasible, not about what…

> Other countries, like europe, hide the VAT taxes, so it looks like you are not paying taxes at all. That is not true at all. In all European countries that I can think of you get to see the whole price, including VAT so that, you know, you can actually tell how much the product is going to cost you. The composition of that price is then shown, often in smaller font. This is true of price stickers, receipts and invo…

Parent did not say that it is misleading.

The claim was that the tax caused price increase is hidden in the overall price.

And while the reasons for that can be plentiful (even consumer protection, if wanted) one effect is certainly and obviously that it hides the amount of sales tax you pay.

The VAT is usually declared somewhere in the bill.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#673

Post by thfuran » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 9:19 PM UTC

basseq wrote: post #605

conanbatt wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not done because the IRS doesn't have the power to enforce its tax system, and if it reported the information it had to the people, the people could know they can slip away with not paying anything that wasnt properly reported. First, a transparent system of the IRS would lower revenue. Second, the deductibles system is very complex for the IRS to pre-calculate it, so they are unable to do it.

You didn't cover the most important—and political—reason: it would delay refunds . 2019 deadlines for 1099-INT/DIV (i.e., the forms you get from your bank or brokerage) are April 1st. The IRS filing window opened January 29, with 90% of tax returns processed within 21 days. Since the IRS can't reliably pre-populate a tax return without all the required information, it would delay filing (and refunds) by 8 weeks. As t…

>The IRS can't reliably pre-populate a tax return without all the required information

Neither can I.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#674

Post by Dig1t » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 10:14 PM UTC

gowld wrote: post #326

Dig1t wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you're right that people in that camp are unlikely to review their tax filings from their 3rd party. However there is an incentive for that 3rd part tax company to save their customer as much as they possibly can. The bigger the refund, the happier the customer and the more likely they are to come back next year and give you more money. In the Planet Money episode they spoke with the Republican dude and his bigg…

If complicated taxes are a Republican anti-tax strategy, why did Reagan and the 1980s republicans pursue a strategy of vastly simplifying the tax code? Doing taxes is a tax -- in hours and fees. Only the wealthiest people who can spend $10K on tax prep to save $100K via loophole deductions, oh.

The idea is not to make the taxes deliberately complex, it is more about the notion of who is telling whom what is owed. A system where the citizen says "hey government, I think I owe you this much in tax because x" is fundamentally different than a system where the government says "hey citizen, you owe me this much in taxes, here's your bill".

In the second situation, the average (complacent) citizen will not look twice at the bill, but rather just pay it and get on with their life. In the former situation, the citizen is forced to have a 3rd party create a statement that says "I owe you this much because x" and because of natural incentives, the company will try to claim the maximum number of [incentives, loopholes, deductions, whatever you want to call them] so that the client saves the most amount of money. Of course the company takes its cut and I'm not arguing that greedy companies are the perfect solution. I'm just saying that there is more to the argument than simply it being a matter of lobbyists getting their way.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#675

Post by basseq » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 10:25 PM UTC

thfuran wrote: post #673

basseq wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You didn't cover the most important—and political—reason: it would delay refunds . 2019 deadlines for 1099-INT/DIV (i.e., the forms you get from your bank or brokerage) are April 1st. The IRS filing window opened January 29, with 90% of tax returns processed within 21 days. Since the IRS can't reliably pre-populate a tax return without all the required information, it would delay filing (and refunds) by 8 weeks. As t…

>The IRS can't reliably pre-populate a tax return without all the required information Neither can I.

The difference is that you know whether you have all your required information. The IRS doesn’t know until it has everything.

Example: your only bank sends your 1099-DIV on February 15, so you file your return. You know that no other bank is going to send you a 1099-DIV because you don’t have any other bank accounts.

The IRS doesn’t know this. The IRS only knows that you didn’t get any other 1099-DIVs after they’ve received all 1099-DIVs and no more are yours.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#676

Post by u801e » Wed, Apr 10, 2019, 11:51 PM UTC

magduf wrote: post #648

u801e wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wouldn't that be Wouldn't that be regressive, in the sense that richer people spend a lower proportion of their income? The paycheck credit I proposed should address that. Plus rich p eople definitely spend a lot more compared to others. > Plus they have the means to spend their earnings abroad While that's true, they certainly could be taxes on major purchases. For example, I could buy souvenirs abroad without pas…

There's a couple of big problems here: 1) Rich people spend a lot of their money on real estate, so unless you're going to come up with a good way of taxing that (which we don't do now; property taxes are local), rich people aren't going to be paying much in taxes, and 2) Rich people spend a lot on foreign vacations and travel, which is untaxable domestically for obvious reasons. Sure, they still have to pay titling…

> Rich people spend a lot of their money on real estate, so unless you're going to come up with a good way of taxing that

The same thing can apply to real estate as it does for cars. That is, a sales tax you pay when you purchase the home. And the sales tax doesn't have to be a flat amount. It could be a greater percentage of the value of the home for homes that are valued at several million dollars as opposed to those that are worth only several hundred thousand dollars.

> rich people aren't going to be paying much in taxes

Isn't that the case currently (compared to what they could be paying due to all the loopholes in the current tax code)? If we focused on taxing transactions as opposed to possessions and income, then the rich could be taxed far more. Invest in stocks? Then you can be taxed when you buy them. Invest in real estate? Then you can be taxed when you buy property, etc.

> Rich people spend a lot on foreign vacations and travel, which is untaxable domestically for obvious reasons.

That is true, but it seems that the US is one of the few nations in the world that states that you have to pay taxes on income you earn outside the country (assuming you don't pay taxes on it in the other country). That said, I think that we should focus on the majority of tax payers in terms of making how they pay taxes easier and hopefully more fair.

> there's a reason that no other developed nation taxes this way, and they all have income taxes. And all those other nations manage to have relatively simple taxes for most taxpayers that don't require paying H&R Block to file for them.

I don't pay anyone for filing taxes, but it takes days to read through all the instructions for the 1040 form and other associated forms to see what applies to me and what doesn't. Personally, if I was able to take care of my tax obligation by just buying various things throughout the year and getting my full paycheck, then I would certainly be happier and not have to essentially waste several days every year figuring my taxes.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#677

Post by eridius » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 12:30 AM UTC

basseq wrote: post #675

thfuran wrote: post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The IRS can't reliably pre-populate a tax return without all the required information Neither can I.

The difference is that you know whether you have all your required information. The IRS doesn’t know until it has everything . Example: your only bank sends your 1099-DIV on February 15, so you file your return. You know that no other bank is going to send you a 1099-DIV because you don’t have any other bank accounts. The IRS doesn’t know this. The IRS only knows that you didn’t get any other 1099-DIVs after they’ve…

The IRS could develop a system where they list what information they've received already, and you can then validate that this represents the complete set of expected information and request that they go ahead and process taxes now without waiting.

If they then receive more information later that would affect your taxes, they can bill you, or otherwise just go through the same process they would if you filed your taxes incorrectly under the current system.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#678

Post by xtracto » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 1:22 AM UTC

fsloth wrote: post #25

Oh man, I've had government provided automatic filings for ages now (Finland). US is really odd how it emphasizes the benefit of the middleman over the benefit of the individual citizen (it seems). Or have I completely misunderstood what's going on here?

This makes me laugh a lot, even down here in Mexico have automated, electronic, government provided tax filings.

My tax filing is as easy as: Login, verify, click a button.

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#679

Post by peteforde » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 1:43 AM UTC

chronolitus wrote: post #554

peteforde wrote: post #398

One thing I don't understand (possibly as a Canadian, possibly just as a conscious person) is how little it costs to bribe your highest-ranking politicians. The article suggests that tax filing is an $11B industry and that companies spend ~$6M lobbying your corrupt senators. The chair of the Ways and Means committee received ~$16k in donations from Intuit/H&R. Wait, what? Never mind how inexcusably transactional this…

Maybe we can't comprehend it, the same way that I can't comprehend, say prostituting myself for money. If I consider the prospect, it would have to be for ridiculous sums. Yet everyday people are selling themselves for - from my point of view - a pittance. I guess, if you're in the business of selling your principles (corrupt politician), you're suddenly competing with a wide pool of equally corrupt people, probably…

There's many different kinds of sex work, but the movie Indecent Proposal taught me that everyone has a price. My first question, if someone solicited me for prostitution, would be to clarify not how much but what would you like me to do? If you want me to sleep with your hot wife, my price is within reach. If you want me to be gangbanged in a public park, you probably can't afford it. All semantics aside, while I don't know anything about you, my gut tells me that most people would turn to prostitution with far less trauma both faster and more consistently than you might expect. In fact, it's really only the culture in the west that gets really uptight about pretending many romantic relationships aren't highly transactional.

Plus, my hope is that good citizens would make money selling sex long before they sell the trust of their electorate. It's only a morally bankrupt crime that could in some cases be treasonous if you get caught, right?

Re: Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free Online Tax Filing

#680

Post by randallsquared » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 1:45 AM UTC

hrktb wrote: post #469

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will say, vote with your dollars. If you don't like Intuit's lobbying, please don't feed the beast and use their services.

I might be getting old, but more and more I see “vote with your XXXXX” to be the litmus test for situations there is no decent solution left anymore. It’s not even an advice in the end, just a reminder the customer lost the battle, and the only alternative is to leave the field with what’s left on their posession to go roam the desert.

Where government is concerned, you’re completely correct. However, voting with your dollars does work well for markets, e.g. grocery stores and the like.