7 ms·

This is exactly where we're at. The CBO has estimated that every additional dollar spent on IRS enforcement would yield an average $2 of additional revenue, inc

by tdeck 9y ago

This is exactly where we're at. The CBO has estimated that every additional dollar spent on IRS enforcement would yield an average $2 of additional revenue, increasing to over $6 by 2018 [1]. But certain political factions (can you guess which ones?) have, as a matter of policy, intentionally starved the IRS of funding to prevent them from enforcing compliance and collecting taxes. [1]: Page 32, https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-2016/presentation/51699-presentation.pdf https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-...

microcolonel 9y ago
I mean, AFAIK technically taxes are voluntary. Is the IRS really under mandate to "enforce" taxation?
- clock_tower 9y ago
  "Voluntary" is an old-fashioned term of art; it means "you volunteer your version of events to the information to the IRS" rather than "the IRS sends you what they know".
- dpark 9y ago
  > AFAIK technically taxes are voluntary. You are incorrect as a large number of would-be tax avoiders can attest. e.g. Mr. Snipes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Snipes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Snipes
  - microcolonel 9y ago
    Wasn't it the falsified returns which generated the charges though?
    - dpark 9y ago
      No. He was convicted of failing to file returns.
      - tdeck 9y ago
        Furthermore, he produced videos instructing the viewer on how he avoided paying income tax [1], then sold those videos. For income. That he didn't report. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL-F4-RDNz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL-F4-RDNz4
  - tdeck 9y ago
    Or my personal favorite, Kent Hovind, who actually maintains those taxes were voluntary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind
    - seanp2k2 9y ago
      Wow, what a read. There are two certainties in this life: death and taxes. Some people try to unsuccessfully avoid one or both :)
      - devoply 9y ago
        Well income tax was magically mandated without any sort of discussion so there's that. In the end the question is a question of hard power. If you have none, you are in no position to bargain. IMO giving government taxes that are used for purposes that may not agree with your personal sense of responsibility and morality may itself be immoral, for instance if the government uses your taxes to start wars you want nothing to do with. For infrastructure and education though they are fine regardless. They are always tooting the horns of voting with your dollars, in this case where is the voice of voting with your dollars as to what gets done with your money. /rant.
        caf 9y ago
        That seems redundant when you can vote with your... vote. (Also: the sixteenth amendment?)
        devoply 9y ago
        When you vote, you are not voting for anything or anyone substantial. Party A and Party B have the exact same policies with simply different political tones and groups of elites that they support. The 16th amendment was adopted on February 3, 1913. Good to read its history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_Uni... and how controversy still stands despite a century of litigation.
  - dahoraTSUNAMI 9y ago
    You are confusing practice, or customary, with technical (constitutional law), which I would include political philosphy and the unalienable rights of man as identified by Rosseu. If I cannot choose to not pay taxes, then I have been denied the right to choose, then it is a forced subjugation of my free will. Correct would be to give my taxes voluntarily, according to my disposition and agreement with the government. If you are profoundly 'contra' what the government is doing, then how can you be forced to help with activities that you believe to be deeply detrimental to the well-being of yourself, others, and all life on earth and beyond? Tolstoy argues this point very well in his book "The Kingdom of God is Within You." He essentially says that if we pay taxes to a government that kills innocents or tortures Arabs their blood is on our (the taxpayers') hands. If the government is doing something that I find to be deplorable then I have the moral obligation to find a way to avoid contributing to such array of horrors.
    - jrochkind1 9y ago
      No, you are confusing philosophy with law.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - croon 9y ago
      > If you are profoundly 'contra' what the government is doing, then how can you be forced to help with activities that you believe to be deeply detrimental to the well-being of yourself, others, and all life on earth and beyond? Because you participate in society and its infrastructure and services, paid for by taxes. I'm sure there are uninhabited tundras where no one will bother you.
- notyourwork 9y ago
  I guess you can say lots of things are technically voluntary. I suppose you can say if you choose not to volunteer there may be consequences.
24gttghh 9y ago
And also from that presentation: >CBO projected a drop in the ROI after 2018 as taxpayers found new ways to evade taxes. I mean, damn.
antognini 9y ago
I guess the thing that worries me is how would I know that the increased enforcement budget would actually go towards the ultra-rich? I make a middle-class income, not enough that it really makes sense to hire an accountant. The tax code is complicated enough that I'm sure I screwed up somewhere doing my taxes --- I just try to muddle my way through it as best I can year after year. I'm sure the IRS could get more money harassing thousands of people like me instead of a single ultra-wealthy individual since we don't have the resources to fight the IRS but the ultra-wealthy do.
- tdeck 9y ago
  Agreed, I know the feeling well. It's a crazy mess of a system where people with very straightforward sources of income and deductions end up unsure every year whether they've done their tax returns right. This is why other countries just fill them out for you.
  - saiya-jin 9y ago
    which countries? I haven't heard about a single one here in europe for example... we all have to fill in returns
- croon 9y ago
  I really understand your frustration and uncertainty, and to be frank; you don't know for sure that the IRS would chase after rich people. But let me float this: Guess which parties/party wanted the tax code that complicated to begin with? The first step to fixing it would be to not align yourself with the ones who caused the issue. Simpler tax code would make it less worrysome for regular plebs (us) to fill out our taxes, meaning the lower/middle class that pays their taxes would ensure they weren't in danger, and IRS would have an easier time chasing down tax avoiders. The people who complicated the tax codes and also wants to uninsure tens of millions of people to save a few bucks for rich people won't help you.
  - ethbro 9y ago
    The problem I have with the tax simplification folks is that they're generally disingenuous about the fact that they're proposing moving from a progressive to a much flatter tax code. Or at least ignorant about the differences. I'm sure a lot of the language and ideas they're parroting are coming from conservative talk radio, hence the blind spots. But it really soured me on the US tax simplification debate.
zeveb 9y ago
Do you have any faith that an IRS with more funding wouldn't just target foes of the party currently in power?

by tdeck 9y ago

microcolonel 9y ago

I mean, AFAIK technically taxes are voluntary. Is the IRS really under mandate to "enforce" taxation?

clock_tower 9y ago
"Voluntary" is an old-fashioned term of art; it means "you volunteer your version of events to the information to the IRS" rather than "the IRS sends you what they know".
dpark 9y ago
> AFAIK technically taxes are voluntary. You are incorrect as a large number of would-be tax avoiders can attest. e.g. Mr. Snipes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Snipes https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Snipes
- microcolonel 9y ago
  Wasn't it the falsified returns which generated the charges though?
  - dpark 9y ago
    No. He was convicted of failing to file returns.
    - tdeck 9y ago
      Furthermore, he produced videos instructing the viewer on how he avoided paying income tax [1], then sold those videos. For income. That he didn't report. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL-F4-RDNz4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jL-F4-RDNz4
- tdeck 9y ago
  Or my personal favorite, Kent Hovind, who actually maintains those taxes were voluntary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind
  - seanp2k2 9y ago
    Wow, what a read. There are two certainties in this life: death and taxes. Some people try to unsuccessfully avoid one or both :)
    - devoply 9y ago
      Well income tax was magically mandated without any sort of discussion so there's that. In the end the question is a question of hard power. If you have none, you are in no position to bargain. IMO giving government taxes that are used for purposes that may not agree with your personal sense of responsibility and morality may itself be immoral, for instance if the government uses your taxes to start wars you want nothing to do with. For infrastructure and education though they are fine regardless. They are always tooting the horns of voting with your dollars, in this case where is the voice of voting with your dollars as to what gets done with your money. /rant.
      - caf 9y ago
        That seems redundant when you can vote with your... vote. (Also: the sixteenth amendment?)
        devoply 9y ago
        When you vote, you are not voting for anything or anyone substantial. Party A and Party B have the exact same policies with simply different political tones and groups of elites that they support. The 16th amendment was adopted on February 3, 1913. Good to read its history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_Uni... and how controversy still stands despite a century of litigation.
- dahoraTSUNAMI 9y ago
  You are confusing practice, or customary, with technical (constitutional law), which I would include political philosphy and the unalienable rights of man as identified by Rosseu. If I cannot choose to not pay taxes, then I have been denied the right to choose, then it is a forced subjugation of my free will. Correct would be to give my taxes voluntarily, according to my disposition and agreement with the government. If you are profoundly 'contra' what the government is doing, then how can you be forced to help with activities that you believe to be deeply detrimental to the well-being of yourself, others, and all life on earth and beyond? Tolstoy argues this point very well in his book "The Kingdom of God is Within You." He essentially says that if we pay taxes to a government that kills innocents or tortures Arabs their blood is on our (the taxpayers') hands. If the government is doing something that I find to be deplorable then I have the moral obligation to find a way to avoid contributing to such array of horrors.
  - jrochkind1 9y ago
    No, you are confusing philosophy with law.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - croon 9y ago
    > If you are profoundly 'contra' what the government is doing, then how can you be forced to help with activities that you believe to be deeply detrimental to the well-being of yourself, others, and all life on earth and beyond? Because you participate in society and its infrastructure and services, paid for by taxes. I'm sure there are uninhabited tundras where no one will bother you.
notyourwork 9y ago
I guess you can say lots of things are technically voluntary. I suppose you can say if you choose not to volunteer there may be consequences.

24gttghh 9y ago

And also from that presentation: >CBO projected a drop in the ROI after 2018 as taxpayers found new ways to evade taxes. I mean, damn.

antognini 9y ago

I guess the thing that worries me is how would I know that the increased enforcement budget would actually go towards the ultra-rich? I make a middle-class income, not enough that it really makes sense to hire an accountant. The tax code is complicated enough that I'm sure I screwed up somewhere doing my taxes --- I just try to muddle my way through it as best I can year after year. I'm sure the IRS could get more money harassing thousands of people like me instead of a single ultra-wealthy individual since we don't have the resources to fight the IRS but the ultra-wealthy do.

tdeck 9y ago
Agreed, I know the feeling well. It's a crazy mess of a system where people with very straightforward sources of income and deductions end up unsure every year whether they've done their tax returns right. This is why other countries just fill them out for you.
- saiya-jin 9y ago
  which countries? I haven't heard about a single one here in europe for example... we all have to fill in returns
croon 9y ago
I really understand your frustration and uncertainty, and to be frank; you don't know for sure that the IRS would chase after rich people. But let me float this: Guess which parties/party wanted the tax code that complicated to begin with? The first step to fixing it would be to not align yourself with the ones who caused the issue. Simpler tax code would make it less worrysome for regular plebs (us) to fill out our taxes, meaning the lower/middle class that pays their taxes would ensure they weren't in danger, and IRS would have an easier time chasing down tax avoiders. The people who complicated the tax codes and also wants to uninsure tens of millions of people to save a few bucks for rich people won't help you.
- ethbro 9y ago
  The problem I have with the tax simplification folks is that they're generally disingenuous about the fact that they're proposing moving from a progressive to a much flatter tax code. Or at least ignorant about the differences. I'm sure a lot of the language and ideas they're parroting are coming from conservative talk radio, hence the blind spots. But it really soured me on the US tax simplification debate.

zeveb 9y ago

Do you have any faith that an IRS with more funding wouldn't just target foes of the party currently in power?