I would argue that having to file taxes through a 3rd party accountant or service is not only forced commerce but also broken glass economics. Looks like it helps the economy by creating jobs but the job is redundant and does not create anything of value. Where are crimes more likely to occur, a city with 10,000 or 1 million? Where are financial crimes more likely to occur, people that make $10,000 a year or people t…
Of course that's precisely why "people" (Republicans) want to defund the IRS.
Note that it's also totally incompatible with their idea that the government should be run more like a business... so you're going to strangle the one part of it that actually generates revenue?
It's not even correct - the IRS wants to follow their rules as closely as they can. I have had the IRS unprompted send me an additional refund because of a mistake I made on my forms, and they caught. (They also included a letter saying that if I thought my mistake was right, I could fight the refund, or file a new amended form and go for a bigger one.)
To be fair, that's also the kind of thing Intuit would love to catch since it will make them look good (as they bill people for the privilege of filing taxes, of course).
The taxes had been filed via TurboTax - I had fatfingered some data entry (so it's not really Intuit's fault they didn't catch it). The IRS had the data from other sources.
> How volatile is this to the political winds? Very. Had the GOP won the senate in 2022, this would have probably been cut already. Depending on how this November goes the policy could definitely be reversed. > Something like this, in order to be permanent, needs congressional approval. This program did come from Congress. It was apart of the inflation reduction act.
It's a huge problem that when the opposition comes into power, they immediately try to revert and undermine what the previous party did. Not because of merit, but just because of partisanship. So you end up with a lot of programs that get started and after a while get repealed or maintained badly. This costs the country a lot of money. The ACA is a classical example. Instead of improving it or proposing a real replac…
Please provide examples of Democrats undoing good policy/legislation just because it was passed by a prior Republican administration.
This works against the governments interest, as they'll lose revenue from all the fines they give to people who accidentally fuck up their tax return.
That revenue isn't even a drop in the bucket. The issue is and always has been parasitic jobs: you wouldn't need anywhere near as many IRS employees and tax accountants.
> How volatile is this to the political winds? Very. Had the GOP won the senate in 2022, this would have probably been cut already. Depending on how this November goes the policy could definitely be reversed. > Something like this, in order to be permanent, needs congressional approval. This program did come from Congress. It was apart of the inflation reduction act.
It's a huge problem that when the opposition comes into power, they immediately try to revert and undermine what the previous party did. Not because of merit, but just because of partisanship. So you end up with a lot of programs that get started and after a while get repealed or maintained badly. This costs the country a lot of money. The ACA is a classical example. Instead of improving it or proposing a real replac…
You're totally right that it's especially bad with e-branch stuff, but it's not necessarily limited to that. Most programs established by congress will be given an expiration date beyond which it would require another act of congress to reauthorize. I think it's mandatory for anything that costs money, basically. I can see the basic rationale that if something is not popular enough to be reauthorized, why keep doing it, but it sure does contribute to instability not knowing if you can depend on something important continuing to exist.
It's a huge problem that when the opposition comes into power, they immediately try to revert and undermine what the previous party did. Not because of merit, but just because of partisanship. So you end up with a lot of programs that get started and after a while get repealed or maintained badly. This costs the country a lot of money. The ACA is a classical example. Instead of improving it or proposing a real replac…
Perhaps people should stop treating the president like a king, and you know, actually pass laws the way our government was designed to work...
Your company fucked up by not taking withholding from the bonus.
I do get a 20% bonus at this company and I think it is attributed to that. It was my first time getting that bonus. What do I even do here? Talk to HR? I don't think I can do anything and just suck it up and pay it and expect it next year? I dunno.
Yes, you got a big bonus and it wasn't taxed when you got it. I don't know why you would be confused as to why your liability went up?
I have had the IRS charge me tax and accuse me of lying to them over a UTMA withdrawal used to pay for tuition even though the fund running the account refused to send me the paperwork because the account is in my parent's name first instead of mine. It is a massive organization filled with uncoordinated people doing their level best to produce Brownian motion.
That sounds like you are agreeing with the post you are replying to: the IRS is trying very hard to stick to their rules. You have a deduction that neither you nor the IRS have paperwork for (since the fund is not acknowledging it as a covered expense), so they are following the rules. I can understand how you are frustrated about the situation, but this does not seem to me to be random behavior, but rather straightf…
If following the rules looks like there are no rules, what is the purpose of the rules?