The absolute last thing I want in the filing of my taxes is non-determinism.
Intuit has a pretty broad financial software portfolio, not just a tax company. Also, yes the actual arithmetic at the end should be handled by deterministic code. I doubt anyone, including Intuit, thinks otherwise. But there's a ton of uses for LLMs before you get to 2+2 = 4, explaining concepts, document extraction, understanding the full financial picture, etc. Kind of feels like you're criticizing a cartoonish id…
Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
61–70 of 205 posts
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#62The absolute last thing I want in the filing of my taxes is non-determinism.
I asked an LLM (Gemini) about a calculated field in my taxes that was wrong but I couldn’t figure out why and every time it tried to tell me something like “It’s a common glitch for tax software to calculate like this.” When I did figure out what was wrong and asked if that made sense, it told me I was absolutely right though. I think people are lucky the IRS fired all their employees this day and age so this work is…
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#63N ext year I'll basically feed in my W2, 1099s, fidelity forms, insurance, maybe 20-30 documents, and ask for my completed 1040 and related forms. The LLMs already have the data extraction capability, vast tax knowlege, large enough context for personal taxes. We don't need another year to make tax software obsolete.
Actually I'll try a test first, easymgiven I have my 2025 input docs and TurboTax outputs, see howma few models do.
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#64> In its fiscal second quarter ended January, Intuit reported revenue of $4.65 billion, a 17% increase, and net profit of $693 million, a 48% improvement compared to a year earlier. So profits are up 50% YOY and the CEO got a $30M package, but they're cutting 3000 employees.
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#65Why are other outlets quoting the CEO as having said that the layoffs have "nothing to do with AI"? Is TC distinguishing between using AI versus building AI products? > "None of it had to do with AI," Goodarzi told CNBC's Jim Cramer on "Mad Money." "Everything was about how do we become more effective." https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/20/intuit-ceo-says-companys-17p...
vs.
> Goodarzi told CNBC's Jim Cramer on "Mad Money."
Reality vs. PR BS
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#66Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#67The more I hear about companies shifting to focus on AI the more it makes me want to start a direct "successor"/"competitor" company that does what the original company did without shifting to AI. As a bet on the AI enshittifying the original company so much that they either cannot develop the software any more and have to start anew, or that they create so many errors and chaos that they get fined & sued into oblivi…
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#68This was the last year for me and my wife to use Turbo Tax, it's been ok for 15 years but I know AI will do it all for us next year, for free. Gemini was very helpful with questions and some skills building this year, I should have tried more. N ext year I'll basically feed in my W2, 1099s, fidelity forms, insurance, maybe 20-30 documents, and ask for my completed 1040 and related forms. The LLMs already have the dat…
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#69The absolute last thing I want in the filing of my taxes is non-determinism.
Boy, do I have bad news for you. Edit: To be clear, as a sibling post said, the basic arithmetic is easy enough. It's the tax opinion stuff that is absolutely not deterministic. If your situation is even moderately complex, there's a vast number of ways to describe your deductions, each with different tax implications and multi-year requirements. I'm not talking about being Jeff Bezos, either. Is your spouse an indep…
Those questions all have discrete answers, including the much-misunderstood home office. The correct tax outcomes are very much deterministic, in the sense that the same inputs always result in the same outputs. It's simply that there are a lot of options to change the inputs (for example, choosing FIFO vs LIFO for stock sales, using an S-corp vs a sole proprietorship for a personal business).
For example, the home office deduction is only available to individuals who have a home office that is used exclusively for their individual business, not as an employee for someone else's business (the only exception being for flow-through entities where the taxpayer is a shareholder/partner). The "exclusive use" is meant in the all-or-nothing sense. Use your office computer after hours for games? The home office deduction no longer applies. Uses the office space to store personal documents, or really any other activity except for the business activity? The HOD no longer applies. Don't have any income from that business activity you claim are doing in the home office? The HOD no longer applies.
It's simply that enforcement is not deterministic, so people think they get away with a lot of positions that do not survive actual audits. Talk to an IRS agent that handles audits and you'll learn that a failed home office deduction claim is the #2 adjustment to the tax returns of white collar professionals.[1] At a relatively recent tax mixer, IRS agents from the Los Angeles branch office could only recall about a dozen cases in which the home office deduction actually survived an audit, out of thousands, and those taxpayers were extremely rigorous about following the rules to the letter (to the extent that all of them locked their home offices when they were not being used for work).
[1] The #1 reason for adjustments to the tax returns of white collar professionals is attempting to claim business expense deductions without matching business income to deduct against. Technically, the home office deduction is one of these deductions, which is why it is #2 and not #1.
Re: Intuit to lay off over 3k employees to refocus on AI
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's a very common misconception among programmers that the law is a sort of natural language 'program' where you can consistently deduce that x input generate y output.
It sort of is, except that the entire law isn't defined in one place. "Hey, do I have a home office?" Well, "home" is defined over in this regulation, and "home office" is defined over there in that other regulation, and "having a home office" would normally mean this except for this case law that says it can also mean that when these other circumstances apply, and... These things are knowable, but unless you've spen…
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2011.07966.pdf
Most law generally is non-monotonic. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-monotonic_logic) The French tax code is one of the few exceptions.