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

FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 610 posts

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#551

Post by noduerme »

adwww wrote: post #544
noduerme wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, really it's progressive if it only taxes stuff you don't need to buy . Here's what I think: Fuel and food, no tax. School supplies, shoes, clothing, any item under $100, no tax. Over $100, ramp it up. Diamond rings, 100% tax. Alcohol and cigarettes, 20-30%. Used cars, no tax. New cars, 10% up to 100%. Credits if they're electric or extremely fuel-efficient. Playstations, high end sneakers, Smart TVs, iPhones, r…

So low earners are allowed to eat basic food, but pay astronomical taxes for any luxuries in their life. Which you and I could easily afford.

Well, that's a very glass-half-empty way of looking at it. I'm saying that high earners have to help subsidize lower earners the more luxuries they accrue in their life. It's not the earning after all that makes the difference between rich and poor; that's why the wealthiest people in America pay no income tax. They're not earning anything, officially. But boy do they spend. So maybe, I don't know, if you're really concerned about people getting that one luxury in life then there could be an exemption, like if you make under $50k a year you get refunded the VAT on $2k of luxury purchases. Ok? But it has to be small enough to prevent the ultra-wealthy from using it as a loophole.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#552

Post by nerdawson »

adwww wrote: post #534
denton-scratch wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The U.S is unique in forcing its citizens to waste countless hours It may be unusual, but it's certainly not unique; I have to fill in a tax-return every year, because I receive rental income. Anyone in the UK that receives income that isn't taxed at source by their employer has to complete one. The last one I completed was 21 pages long, with notes for each page; a lot of the time I spent was scrabbling through my…

Even rental income has a fairly generous allowance before you need to file a full tax assessment. The first £1,000 is tax free (presumably the cost of admin makes it easier to let that go). And up to £2,500 you just have to phone / email HMRC.

The various allowances are certainly helpful but £1,000 doesn’t really factor in when you’re dealing with rental income. Almost every landlord will cross that threshold and should expect to fill a return in.

Hearing about how taxes work in other countries makes me grateful for the system we have here.

Most people never have to file a return. The people that do have a more complicated arrangement and probably need to summarise expenses, etc.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#553

Post by washadjeffmad »

deathanatos wrote: post #236
washadjeffmad wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1090ez, or any of a dozen free-file options? State returns are cheap if not free almost everywhere. The vast majority of the people who qualify for free tax filing have nothing to audit. The government makes enough money off their deductions, not to mention what they generate having to spend >50% of their income to stay afloat, to overlook a few unreported tips or sneaker sales.

Do you mean the 1040ez, which was discontinued, & no longer a form? (I agree with the rest of your comment. While I disagree with the parent's perspective, I think the FTC's here is that Intuit's advertising leads people towards their not-free products, instead of the actually free stuff that does exist. I don't think most people have the self-confidence to do the 1040 by hand.)

You're correct, I did mean the 1040ez and was unaware of it's discontinuation.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#554

Post by [deleted] »

legalcorrection wrote: post #466
dguest wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know people who have optimized this: - they fill out their taxes with rough estimates, - the IRS helpfully corrects their errors, and sends the form back - they sign the corrected form, send it back - the IRS accepts the second round. This is basically the same "pre-filled" workflow as every other developed country. The difference is that we have a first round where you put in a semi-plausible effort to placate the…

Beware: if you owe the government money due to your mistakes, you will have to pay penalties and interest.

[deleted]

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#555

Post by lokar »

anamax wrote: post #364
UncleMeat wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was. And the consequence of this ruling was nearly unlimited amounts money being spent on the reelection campaigns of various lawmakers by corporations, with the obvious intent being to install friendly legislators.

Yup, every major newspaper and TV/Cable network is a corporation. If the NYT can push candidates, why not Sears?

Sears is free to say what they want on their website or distribute leaflets. That's not the same thing as donating cash.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#556

Post by cptskippy »

jaguar1878 wrote: post #244
tombert wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About two weeks ago, I got a letter from the IRS telling me that I owe an extra eight-thousand dollars from my 2020 return, with a $1000 fine and $200 interest as a result. [1] I'm not mad about owing the money, but what annoys me is if they have enough information to know that I underreported, then why am I part of this equation to begin with? Clearly they have enough of my tax data to know I screwed up, so why don'…

As others have noted, the IRS doesn't know everything, and some things may be to your advantage to report to them. They could send you a bill and ask you to fix it, but many people wouldn't know where to look to find mistakes. For example: RSUs and NQSOs (employee stock grants) are in my experience handled extremely poorly by default. If I have RSUs vest when the stock is worth $10 a share, then I pay income tax that…

> They could send you a bill and ask you to fix it, but many people wouldn't know where to look to find mistakes.

The overwhelming majority of people do not have complicated taxes. That is the exception and as others have pointed out, they could hire an accountant just like they do today.

Having the IRS mail out your bill would eliminate the need for most people to purchase accounting software each year, which is exactly what Intuit doesn't want.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#557

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

azemetre wrote: post #536
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was referring to the complexity of the tax code, not the filing system itself.

Complexity of the tax code is just part of the system Intuit wants. If taxes were simple you wouldn't have to pay for unique software right?

While I absolute believe that Intuit and others are responsible for the lack of (1) free, highly functional e-filing and (2) response filing, the complexity in the US tax code is beyond their purview and precedes their existence.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#558

Post by noduerme »

alistairSH wrote: post #539
noduerme wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no. I'm just explaining why it's more efficient for the IRS to do it this way. I'd personally like to abolish income tax and only tax sales, with up to 100% tax on luxury goods and no tax on food, etc.

I don't by the "more efficient" argument. The IRS could generate online forms (or snail mail) with what they know and let us add deductions and other income. They should know salary/wages, they could know investment income (not sure if broker report to the IRS, or just send forms to filers). Even if the filer has to manually enter deductions, credits, etc, doing it on an IRS site has several benefits... no $50+ fee f…

No, I mean, the efficiency is partly amplified by keeping people in constant fear. It costs them less and it increases compliance. Like, those fuckers just put a question about crypto on the front page this year and I just decided not to lie on a sworn document, and basically spent 2 months figuring out what the fuck ridiculous chain of events led to me selling some bitcoin in 2021, to be on the right side of 'em. And they probably never would have known. But it's the fear that they might've known, you see, that makes them so efficient.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#559

Post by cmutel »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #516
cmutel wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since we're having the semi-annual "how do taxes work in other countries" thread, here is my experience as an American living in Switzerland. Though I have been here a while, I still find it interesting and a little weird. At the beginning of the year, you get a bill for that year based on what they think you will owe. This bill is due on October 31, i.e. you need to pay your estimated income tax before you have earn…

Which canton? As I recall, Zug is near Zürich and has very low tax rates. Many highly paid professionals make the daily commute.

Aargau, normally considered higher tax, but we have four kids at home.

Re: FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax “free” filing campaign

#560

Post by mywittyname »

paxys wrote: post #255
mywittyname wrote: post #77

I found out from a friend that she paid $600 to have her taxes done because (presumably) she falls for the dark patterns that TurboTax uses. She's a low paid service worker whose tax return can probably be done for free. And it is a sizable portion of her income because of things like Earned income tax credits, child tax credits, etc. Fuck these companies.

TurboTax's dark patterns charge people $50, not $600. How exactly did she end up paying that much?

Not sure, but I saw a screenshot of her return. (looking it up now) It was $539.

The sad part: she didn't think anything of it, and thought that's how it was. The reason for the screenshot is because last year, her daughter's dad basically stole her child tax credit. So she was celebrating getting her return accepted before he could pull the same thing.

For reference, her return was also five figures. I'm guessing these companies aim for a % of the total return. So perhaps a "$149" upgrade was $249 because of her return size. Like how online retailers bump up the price for goods based on zip code. I'm speculating though.

Post reply on HN