10 ms·

The IRS Really Needs Some New Computers

70 points by arbuge 9y ago

pcunite 9y ago
Quote from the article: Today, the average taxpayer has one chance in 200 of getting audited. The downward trend has led to concerns that the IRS needs more funding to do its job correctly and competently. That’s true ... Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. If you need more auditors, perhaps you're doing it wrong. Imagine a "Revenue Service" that actually helped companies increase their revenue instead of being a parasite. A one page form, simple questions, simple tax code. Make tax day a celebration instead of a confusing trick of loopholes.
- davidw 9y ago
  The IRS just runs things; they don't make the rules, that's on congress. And yes, it's a good thing to have a well-run, competent bureaucracy that ensures that the rules are applied to everyone, fairly.
- dec0dedab0de 9y ago
  I wish there was only a corporate tax, and maybe a sales tax. Only because I don't want to have to do this paperwork every year.
- azhenley 9y ago
  I've always wondered: Is the tax code kept complex because large accounting firms lobby for it? Much profit (and many jobs) would be lost if it was simplified.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    In case you missed the thread about H&R Block on here the other day, the do lobby for it. It may not be entirely that though - there's also plenty of political capital to be had by pushing for special loopholes for special people.
  - redbeard0x0a 9y ago
    The tax-prep industry is active in lobbying to keep the tax system from becoming too simple. Think H&R Block and Intuit, not Pricewaterhouse Coopers (however I'm sure they are just as involved, but have less on the line compared to the retail companies since companies will always need accountants).
  - bluGill 9y ago
    That is one factor. Another factor is the tax code does drive behavior. People with month who are considering doing one of two things will add preference to the cheaper one, the more complex tax code can make something cheaper after taxes are considered. Companies can deduct R&D money because the the country doesn't want to risk falling behind if the short term "bean counters" win and stop doing R&D. By making R&D cheaper the argument for doing it is stronger.
  - topkai22 9y ago
    It's not just the accountancies. Planet Money did a bit about how right leaning organizations like Grover Norquist's "Americans for Tax Reform" opposed pre-filed income tax returns because they believed that making tax compliance less painful would lead people to be less opposed to taxes generally (I can't say they are totally wrong there). Special interest groups (including some thay aren't so special, like anyone with childcare costs) on both sides love "their" special tax deductions. The accounting firms aren't campaigning for simplification, but they are joined by a legion of others opposing it in various ways as well.
  - leeter 9y ago
    Yes, but not that's not the whole problem. There are plenty of special interests that want their carve out. But honestly that's not even the major source of cost. The major source of cost is processing returns at all. If the IRS was allowed to do return free filing then it would massively simplify the majority of people's taxes because they don't have anything that requires the full 1040 for. That means only people who have significant and complex finances actually need to file a return.
- dastbe 9y ago
  Simplifying the tax code is a win for everyone including the IRS because it will drastically cut down on the number of people who accidentally get taxes wrong, but you still need some entity to audit for fraud.
- jgmmo 9y ago
  It's a big racket to give free money to accountants and TurboTax. No reason we need any of this craziness, just let me pay a flat rate and do my taxes on a postcard.
  - josefresco 9y ago
    Based on what I've read, this is the reason why we don't have meaningful change. I remember Paul Ryan showing the "postcard" tax return form on TV - of course we all knew/know that was complete BS.
- mu_killnine 9y ago
  Good? Meh. Necessary? Probably. No one likes paying taxes and, given the chance, people will either willfully or accidentally take advantage of the system. There needs to be a system in place to keep people and companies honest so that the system is fairly applied. I think that's a subject entirely independent from the simplicity of the tax system. It needs to be as straightforward as legislators can make it.
- jjeaff 9y ago
  Simplifying the tax code won't negate the need for auditors. People will still try to cheat. Additionally, if the alternative to auditors is a tax code that seruptitiously and automatically collects taxes, then I would much prefer auditors. Citizens should feel the true pain of paying taxes, so that they can think long and hard before allowing a politician to raise them. Which is actually why I prefer the American system of adding sales tax after the fact. As opposed to many other countries that just hide the tax in the price of the product.
  - powvans 9y ago
    I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I think GP's frustration is with the pain of the process and not the pain of paying. Think about, there are two pains occurring here: 1) the pain of parting w/ money 2) the pain of preparing taxes and fearing you made a mistake The pain of preparation is caused in large part by the complexity of the code. Nothing in the American system is deterring politicians from adding new rules and more complexity. In fact, creating loopholes in the tax code is one of their biggest sources of lobbying dollars.
    - bluGill 9y ago
      it isn't just lobbying dollars. Loopholes are created to drive behavior. An example, if you want to do something about global warming you need to get people/companies to buy efficient things, but such things have a higher up front cost (in many cases the difference is not repaid if you invest the difference). One thing you can do to encourage the behavior of buying more efficient things is to make the tax code encourage it. There are of course many other options, and each will get a different class of people to change behavior. Debating which is best is a side discussion you may have.
- froindt 9y ago
  I'm all for simplification of taxes, though there will always be some degree of people evading taxes. Having no deterrent factor allows people to cut corners and not get caught. There's a good chance the waiter/waitress you tipped in cash is not reporting it, particularly if you went to a small non-chain restaurant. I believe there are people who work hard in construction, factories, and restaurants, and that people should pay taxes on what they earn whether it's paid in cash or not. It benefits the restaurants to not fully properly report it because they need to pay their portion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The ROI for the IRS conducting audits is very high, estimated to be 7x in 2012. [1] [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/national-taxpayer-advocate-delivers-2012-annual-report-to-congress https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/national-taxpayer-advocate-deli...
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  >Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? I do. >The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. How? What exact, concrete steps would you take to simplify the tax code that would not be extremely regressive, would not be easily game-able, and would bring in close to the same amount of revenue?
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? Maybe. > The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. Simplification might be good, but I'd the focus is on tipping the system more in favor of capitalists, probably not. But you still need the IRS; The complexity of the tax code is not their issue, anyhow, it's Congress's. > If you need more auditors, perhaps you're doing it wrong. Undefunding compliance monitoring is “doing it wrong”,yes. > Imagine a "Revenue Service" that actually helped companies increase their revenue instead of being a parasite. Even if you have an office designed to promote returns on domestic capital to reinforce the wealth of the domestic capitalist class (and we do have several agenciy with this overt purpose in the US government, including the Office of the US Trade Representative and the Department of Commerce, among others) you still need an office dedicate to assuring that the funding to support that effort comes in as required. > A one page form, simple questions, simple tax code. The main lobby against a one page form with simple questions, which given the requirements for information to be submittes to the IRS separate from tax filing can be done with the existing tax code, is business owners—specifically, owners of businesses that make their money selling tax preparation software and services.
TallGuyShort 9y ago
>> The downward trend (in audits) has led to concerns that the IRS needs more funding BULLSHIT. There have been numerous threads on HN about private tax services lobbying for complex tax processes. The amount of time and the level of caution I have to go to to fill out IRS forms about income that the government already knows about is ridiculous. The number of people getting audited shouldn't be a linear measure of effectiveness. If anything it's the opposite.
justadudeama 9y ago
How do you think the IRS should go about updating? Do you thing something like AWS is stable and safe enough fro something this important?
- losteric 9y ago
  Why not? AWS builds airgapped datacenters for spooky government agencies. The Pentagon wanted to migrate before Oracle stepped in with lobbying. Those private DCs are rock solid. As a side note, I think that's just amazing. The ultimate IaaS: your own private AWS.
- kylek 9y ago
  It's good enough for the CIA. Why couldn't it handle a glorified spreadsheet?
  - tonysdg 9y ago
    Easy -- U.S. citizens don't care about who their government spies on/if the spies get hacked. But the notion of some Russian/North Korean/Chinese/Choose-Your-Favorite-Bad-Guy hacker messing with your money? Unacceptable!
- neffy 9y ago
  Start with really simplifying the tax code, and then do a complete rewrite. Or wait until the whole mess collapses, and start with really simplifying...
  - neolefty 9y ago
    That's what's tough about public service. You have to cope with what is already there.
  - s73v3r_ 9y ago
    So how, exactly, would you simplify the tax code? And make sure it brings in the same amount of revenue, and isn't extremely regressive? And make sure it isn't trivially game-able?
LethargicStud 9y ago
> Today, the average taxpayer has one chance in 200 of getting audited. Does this mean 1/200 people get audited, or of the people who meet the conditions to be audited, only 1/200 of them will be audited? The article doesn't differentiate between whether people today should be audited but are not due to the systems in place, or perhaps that simply less people today meet the criteria to be audited and the computers are still doing their job just fine.
- Mtinie 9y ago
  A good question. 145,070,000 tax returns were processed through September 2017[1]. If the rate was one return out of every two hundred, there would have been ~725,000 audits conducted. Multiple sources I found online reported “just over 1 million audits were conducted in 2016” (~1/120) but the number was expected to go down in 2017 due to budgetary reasons. It is reasonable to extrapolate this value and find it in line with the original “1/200 returns”, out of the total population of filed returns. [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-season-statistics-for-week-ending-september-1-2017 https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-season-statistics-for-we...
- jandrese 9y ago
  What does it even mean to meet the criteria to be audited? I got a letter this year saying that my refund would take an extra 6-8 weeks due to some extra scrutiny on the IRSes part, but they never asked for the receipts or for me to come in so what happened? As far as I know there wasn't anything especially fishy about my taxes. I did file early (first week of Feb) because we needed the refund, but that alone seems like a poor reason to audit someone's taxes. I guess the other new thing was that they made me verify my address and bank account numbers to verify that I'm not some scammer trying to steal someone else's refund, but that made little sense because it is the same account I've had the refund deposited in for the past 18 years and my address has not changed in 9. All it did in the end was add an extra month and a half to the refund.
Liquix 9y ago
We talk about scaling a lot, but rarely look past "more traffic" or "ten years from now". This is becoming an issue for the first time because the concept of "massively complex computer system at the core of a business" has only been around for half a century or so. Every year it gets more and more expensive (in terms of both people-hours and $$$) to rebuild, refactor, or even improve the system. People who make decisions see the gigantic pricetag on fixing something that already works and opt for patches instead, which is understandable - why fix something that isn't broken (yet), especially when it would cost that much? But as the article describes, when it comes down to the wire and a ground-up refactor is necessary for a system which is 30-60 years old, there may not be enough people who understand the hardware/software, those people are too important to reallocate to the project, or there's simply not enough time/money left to make it happen. I would imagine this new dilemma will start to become much more common in the next 10 years as legacy systems age beyond feasible maintainability.
- bluGill 9y ago
  Are you one of the people who bring up https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-... ? The big re-write seems to be what you are proposing...
Lionsion 9y ago
The IRS already nearly developed a system to automatically translate their mainframe assembler logic into Java and check its correctness, but the main developer was hired on some special kind of program (to bypass the government salary structure) which could not be renewed before the project was completed. Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 (The IRS’s Effort to Convert Its Assembly Codebase to Java) https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/irs-clutches-its-modernization-holy-grail/ https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/ir...: > Now, IRS is on the verge of solving this problem. The solution was engineered by a group of about eight people. And not under a multi-hundred-million-dollar systems integration contract. A leader of the group was Jian Wang, a Chinese emigre who is now a naturalized citizen. Wang told me his solution isn’t a silver bullet but rather a carefully worked-out methodology. It has three components so potentially powerful the IRS has filed patent applications for them. > I say “was” because he’s left the agency, and the status of the project is dark. > Wang was working under streamlined critical pay authority the agency has had since its landmark 1998 restructuring. It gave the IRS 40 slots under which it could pay temporary, full-time employees higher than GS rates. Former Commissioner John Koskinen pointed out Congress did not re-up this authority in 2013, despite his entreaties to former Congressman Jason Chaffetz’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. > “The last one ran out this past summer,” Koskinen said. The departures included Wang. He says he applied to become a GS-15 or Senior Executive Service member so he could see through the assembler-to-Java project. But his approval didn’t come through until a week before his employment authority expired. By then he’d accepted another job. Wang says he had a house to pay for, kids to educate. Koskinen confirms the agency wanted to convert Wang. But the process of approval from Treasury headquarters and the Office of Personnel Management simply took too long.
- RhodesianHunter 9y ago
  We can't have a government agency go and be efficient now. That would break decades of "everything should be privatized because government can't do it well" brainwashing. Doubly so for the IRS.
  - Lionsion 9y ago
johnklos 9y ago
The article made no real case for the replacement of the IRS' computers. Sure, there's a case for updating their software, but this isn't the same thing as what the title says. I think people seem to forget that newer does NOT mean better, and that an old, slow computer which is reliable is infinitely better than a new, fast computer which is either unreliable or idiosyncratic (or both). Contemporary IT seems to have forgotten some wonderful things about mainframes. Most projects to "modernize" working computing systems are just about companies grabbing contract money, and if a proper job happens to get done, it's more or less incidental. This is why we could go to the Moon in a decade but can't build a replacement for the Space Shuttle in that time. If we had to rebuild the Hoover Dam or the Empire State Building these days, there's no possible way it'd ever be done in the timeframes of the original projects. It's a bit sad, really.
- patentatt 9y ago
  I think the real problem here is that the mainframe assembler codebase is undocumented, and decades of idiosyncratic corner-cases and bug fixes are only present in the source code. If the system was fully documented, it could be trivially re-implemented in any language or platform of choice. That's why I think this kind of "modernization" project can be really useful, because it forces the organization to define its requirements. Edit: Just to take this concept a little but further, I'd argue that "software" is an illusion. Most software, and nearly all 'enterprise' or 'business' software should be able to be fully defined and written on paper, by humans, before a single developer is engaged to translate those requirements to something a computer can run. The exceptions would be more elaborate things like video games, AI stuff, and things that rely on computers to do what they do. Anything that is automating what humans do (like the IRS here) should be written on paper first, code second. All too often non-technical management doesn't understand this, as it's boring and hard. It's easier to throw money at 'consultants' to pry the requirements out of them and then complain at how expensive the "software" is - while the real expense is just asking your business people what they actually do.
  - taborj 9y ago
    > Most software, and nearly all 'enterprise' or 'business' software should be able to be fully defined and written on paper, by humans, before a single developer is engaged to translate those requirements to something a computer can run. This was literally day one of my systems architecture class in college, over 20 years ago. It's probably done more often than you think, but the problem is the workflows change slightly over time, and rather than go back to the drawing board each time, they just tweak the systems software. The result, though, is a mess.
twunde 9y ago
This was recently discussed in https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/irs-clutches-its-modernization-holy-grail/ https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/ir... HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329
yssrn 9y ago
The IRS has a $11,526,389,000 budget. Their Information Services division has a $2,237,659,000 budget, and 6,089 employees. So the issue isn't a lack of funding or personnel, it's bureaucratic incompetence.
- um_ya 9y ago
  This is the only case in which I'm okay with bureaucratic incompetence.
  - monocasa 9y ago
    You still owe them the same amount; their delay is just an adds uncertainty to the process.
  - decebalus1 9y ago
    Yes! Because paying taxes is so un-American /s
  - neolefty 9y ago
    Incompetence here creates an un-level playing field where the unscrupulous and wealthy can game the system to their own benefit. As non-intuitive as it sounds, you really do want competence here.
- patentatt 9y ago
  Your comments includes a logical non-sequitur. You have to prove that those numbers are sufficient, large absolute numbers don't necessarily mean anything in isolation. I'm not sure how to do that, but just pointing to large numbers doesn't make an argument.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- dbatten 9y ago
  Wow. That's larger than the budget of many US states... let that sink in for a minute.
segmondy 9y ago
The IRS is so behind. To receive data from the IRS, I have 3 options. CD Tape! TAPE! 70's style Tape Paper.
- justjash 9y ago
  Yeah, my friend works for a decent sized company that writes banking software. He mentioned that some of the larger clients send a person everyday by plane with a tape for their daily data load. Seems strange in today's world.
  - madengr 9y ago
    No, it guarantees a physical backup not connected to any system. Tape is very reliable.
  - bolasanibk 9y ago
    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum Depending on the amount of data and time of travel etc, it might be more economical/reliable to do this than do it over the wire.
  - gruez 9y ago
    private couriers aren't a thing? surely it must be cheaper than paying $200 for plane tickets every day.
bsvalley 9y ago
I think this article doesn't cover the actual problem. Majority of the people who work for the IRS are above 45 years old. We're looking at a pick around 50-55 years old. So if they change their system, they might have to get rid of a lot people at the same time. Which they can't or if they could, it would cost them way more than just electronics and electricity. source: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-age-of-people-working-at-the-U-S-Department-of-the-Treasury https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-age-of-people-work...
- pbhjpbhj 9y ago
  The USA treasury can't do redundancies? Or indeed have their personnel reskill?
- reaperducer 9y ago
  The tech industry (especially in SV) is the only place in America where people and companies openly ignore the fact that age discrimination is illegal.
whb07 9y ago
Another strong reason to implement the concept of a simple flat tax, without the pages and pages of magic accounting trickery. It really shouldn’t be that complicated: Salary wages * tax rate Investment delta * tax rate Why does that take thousands of lines on a tax return ?
- vonmoltke 9y ago
  "[T]housands of lines"? Really? How many private citizens have ever had a return that long? The base form is two pages. Schedule A for itemized deductions is one page. Schedule B for dividends and interest is one page. Schedule D for capital gains is two pages. So, six pages total for your situation. Barely qualifies as hundreds, particularly since many don't even need to be filled out. US tax code is definitely more complicated than it needs to be, but the repeated assertions here that this complication extends to the simple case are bullshit.
  - jandrese 9y ago
    Stocks can get hairy in a hurry, especially when you have a partial sale of a tech stock (happens commonly in mergers when they liquidate partial shares) that was a former baby bell you inherited from your grandmother's AT&T options. What's the strike price? Who knows? The tax code is hairy but for the most part all of that complexity has a good reason for being there. A lot of it is closing loopholes that fat cats used to dodge taxes. The flat tax people want to open them all back up again and start from scratch. I mean right off the bat the grandparent's post falls victim to a scheme where you are paid a $0.01 salary, but simply get an enormous cash "holiday" gift every year. Tax Dodge 101. But the gp will say "oh, then you just need to declare gifts as income as well", and he's starting down the road to the big bloated tax code we have now.
  - whb07 9y ago
    Have you ever done a 990? I don’t mean “paid for one” but I mean truly sat down and did it? It’s ridiculous and each ridiculous line has more baggage attached to each. So to you, I tell you that the tax code for the US is significantly bigger than the tax return a private individual like yourself files yearly [0]. Tax liabilities should be a simple event and should not require a tax professional and other accounting tricks to lessen the burden. In the current environment, those who pay top dollar for tax lawyers and accountants are able to maximize their taxes. The small business and individual is left a higher regulatory burden and are forced to eat the costs. A regular person should be able to properly pay taxes in a quick, clear and efficient manner. It shouldn’t require a professional who’s job it is to deal with the gross mismanagement of government. [0]:https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-words-are-tax-code/ https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-words-are-tax-code/
voidmain 9y ago
I doubt a lack of "new computers" is the problem, but https://directpay.irs.gov/directpay/payment https://directpay.irs.gov/directpay/payment currently reads: Direct Pay This service is temporarily unavailable. We are working to resolve the issue. Please come back later and try again, or you can visit the Make a Payment page for alternative payment methods. We apologize for any inconvenience. Note that your tax payment is due although IRS Direct Pay may not be available.
a-b 9y ago
I'm wondering if it is possible to make this code open source.
hulton 9y ago
The IRS really needs to be shutdown. It is a toxic cancer.

70 points by arbuge 9y ago

Quote from the article: Today, the average taxpayer has one chance in 200 of getting audited. The downward trend has led to concerns that the IRS needs more funding to do its job correctly and competently. That’s true ... Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. If you need more auditors, perhaps you're doing it wrong. Imagine a "Revenue Service" that actually helped companies increase their revenue instead of being a parasite. A one page form, simple questions, simple tax code. Make tax day a celebration instead of a confusing trick of loopholes.

davidw 9y ago
The IRS just runs things; they don't make the rules, that's on congress. And yes, it's a good thing to have a well-run, competent bureaucracy that ensures that the rules are applied to everyone, fairly.
dec0dedab0de 9y ago
I wish there was only a corporate tax, and maybe a sales tax. Only because I don't want to have to do this paperwork every year.
azhenley 9y ago
I've always wondered: Is the tax code kept complex because large accounting firms lobby for it? Much profit (and many jobs) would be lost if it was simplified.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  In case you missed the thread about H&R Block on here the other day, the do lobby for it. It may not be entirely that though - there's also plenty of political capital to be had by pushing for special loopholes for special people.
- redbeard0x0a 9y ago
  The tax-prep industry is active in lobbying to keep the tax system from becoming too simple. Think H&R Block and Intuit, not Pricewaterhouse Coopers (however I'm sure they are just as involved, but have less on the line compared to the retail companies since companies will always need accountants).
- bluGill 9y ago
  That is one factor. Another factor is the tax code does drive behavior. People with month who are considering doing one of two things will add preference to the cheaper one, the more complex tax code can make something cheaper after taxes are considered. Companies can deduct R&D money because the the country doesn't want to risk falling behind if the short term "bean counters" win and stop doing R&D. By making R&D cheaper the argument for doing it is stronger.
- topkai22 9y ago
  It's not just the accountancies. Planet Money did a bit about how right leaning organizations like Grover Norquist's "Americans for Tax Reform" opposed pre-filed income tax returns because they believed that making tax compliance less painful would lead people to be less opposed to taxes generally (I can't say they are totally wrong there). Special interest groups (including some thay aren't so special, like anyone with childcare costs) on both sides love "their" special tax deductions. The accounting firms aren't campaigning for simplification, but they are joined by a legion of others opposing it in various ways as well.
- leeter 9y ago
  Yes, but not that's not the whole problem. There are plenty of special interests that want their carve out. But honestly that's not even the major source of cost. The major source of cost is processing returns at all. If the IRS was allowed to do return free filing then it would massively simplify the majority of people's taxes because they don't have anything that requires the full 1040 for. That means only people who have significant and complex finances actually need to file a return.
dastbe 9y ago
Simplifying the tax code is a win for everyone including the IRS because it will drastically cut down on the number of people who accidentally get taxes wrong, but you still need some entity to audit for fraud.
jgmmo 9y ago
It's a big racket to give free money to accountants and TurboTax. No reason we need any of this craziness, just let me pay a flat rate and do my taxes on a postcard.
- josefresco 9y ago
  Based on what I've read, this is the reason why we don't have meaningful change. I remember Paul Ryan showing the "postcard" tax return form on TV - of course we all knew/know that was complete BS.
mu_killnine 9y ago
Good? Meh. Necessary? Probably. No one likes paying taxes and, given the chance, people will either willfully or accidentally take advantage of the system. There needs to be a system in place to keep people and companies honest so that the system is fairly applied. I think that's a subject entirely independent from the simplicity of the tax system. It needs to be as straightforward as legislators can make it.
jjeaff 9y ago
Simplifying the tax code won't negate the need for auditors. People will still try to cheat. Additionally, if the alternative to auditors is a tax code that seruptitiously and automatically collects taxes, then I would much prefer auditors. Citizens should feel the true pain of paying taxes, so that they can think long and hard before allowing a politician to raise them. Which is actually why I prefer the American system of adding sales tax after the fact. As opposed to many other countries that just hide the tax in the price of the product.
- powvans 9y ago
  I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but I think GP's frustration is with the pain of the process and not the pain of paying. Think about, there are two pains occurring here: 1) the pain of parting w/ money 2) the pain of preparing taxes and fearing you made a mistake The pain of preparation is caused in large part by the complexity of the code. Nothing in the American system is deterring politicians from adding new rules and more complexity. In fact, creating loopholes in the tax code is one of their biggest sources of lobbying dollars.
  - bluGill 9y ago
    it isn't just lobbying dollars. Loopholes are created to drive behavior. An example, if you want to do something about global warming you need to get people/companies to buy efficient things, but such things have a higher up front cost (in many cases the difference is not repaid if you invest the difference). One thing you can do to encourage the behavior of buying more efficient things is to make the tax code encourage it. There are of course many other options, and each will get a different class of people to change behavior. Debating which is best is a side discussion you may have.
froindt 9y ago
I'm all for simplification of taxes, though there will always be some degree of people evading taxes. Having no deterrent factor allows people to cut corners and not get caught. There's a good chance the waiter/waitress you tipped in cash is not reporting it, particularly if you went to a small non-chain restaurant. I believe there are people who work hard in construction, factories, and restaurants, and that people should pay taxes on what they earn whether it's paid in cash or not. It benefits the restaurants to not fully properly report it because they need to pay their portion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The ROI for the IRS conducting audits is very high, estimated to be 7x in 2012. [1] [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/national-taxpayer-advocate-delivers-2012-annual-report-to-congress https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/national-taxpayer-advocate-deli...
s73v3r_ 9y ago
>Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? I do. >The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. How? What exact, concrete steps would you take to simplify the tax code that would not be extremely regressive, would not be easily game-able, and would bring in close to the same amount of revenue?
dragonwriter 9y ago
> Does anyone here believe that the IRS is a good thing? Maybe. > The tax code could be greatly simplified helping business owners to boost the economy. Simplification might be good, but I'd the focus is on tipping the system more in favor of capitalists, probably not. But you still need the IRS; The complexity of the tax code is not their issue, anyhow, it's Congress's. > If you need more auditors, perhaps you're doing it wrong. Undefunding compliance monitoring is “doing it wrong”,yes. > Imagine a "Revenue Service" that actually helped companies increase their revenue instead of being a parasite. Even if you have an office designed to promote returns on domestic capital to reinforce the wealth of the domestic capitalist class (and we do have several agenciy with this overt purpose in the US government, including the Office of the US Trade Representative and the Department of Commerce, among others) you still need an office dedicate to assuring that the funding to support that effort comes in as required. > A one page form, simple questions, simple tax code. The main lobby against a one page form with simple questions, which given the requirements for information to be submittes to the IRS separate from tax filing can be done with the existing tax code, is business owners—specifically, owners of businesses that make their money selling tax preparation software and services.

TallGuyShort 9y ago

>> The downward trend (in audits) has led to concerns that the IRS needs more funding BULLSHIT. There have been numerous threads on HN about private tax services lobbying for complex tax processes. The amount of time and the level of caution I have to go to to fill out IRS forms about income that the government already knows about is ridiculous. The number of people getting audited shouldn't be a linear measure of effectiveness. If anything it's the opposite.

justadudeama 9y ago

How do you think the IRS should go about updating? Do you thing something like AWS is stable and safe enough fro something this important?

losteric 9y ago
Why not? AWS builds airgapped datacenters for spooky government agencies. The Pentagon wanted to migrate before Oracle stepped in with lobbying. Those private DCs are rock solid. As a side note, I think that's just amazing. The ultimate IaaS: your own private AWS.
kylek 9y ago
It's good enough for the CIA. Why couldn't it handle a glorified spreadsheet?
- tonysdg 9y ago
  Easy -- U.S. citizens don't care about who their government spies on/if the spies get hacked. But the notion of some Russian/North Korean/Chinese/Choose-Your-Favorite-Bad-Guy hacker messing with your money? Unacceptable!
neffy 9y ago
Start with really simplifying the tax code, and then do a complete rewrite. Or wait until the whole mess collapses, and start with really simplifying...
- neolefty 9y ago
  That's what's tough about public service. You have to cope with what is already there.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  So how, exactly, would you simplify the tax code? And make sure it brings in the same amount of revenue, and isn't extremely regressive? And make sure it isn't trivially game-able?

LethargicStud 9y ago

> Today, the average taxpayer has one chance in 200 of getting audited. Does this mean 1/200 people get audited, or of the people who meet the conditions to be audited, only 1/200 of them will be audited? The article doesn't differentiate between whether people today should be audited but are not due to the systems in place, or perhaps that simply less people today meet the criteria to be audited and the computers are still doing their job just fine.

Mtinie 9y ago
A good question. 145,070,000 tax returns were processed through September 2017[1]. If the rate was one return out of every two hundred, there would have been ~725,000 audits conducted. Multiple sources I found online reported “just over 1 million audits were conducted in 2016” (~1/120) but the number was expected to go down in 2017 due to budgetary reasons. It is reasonable to extrapolate this value and find it in line with the original “1/200 returns”, out of the total population of filed returns. [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-season-statistics-for-week-ending-september-1-2017 https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/filing-season-statistics-for-we...
jandrese 9y ago
What does it even mean to meet the criteria to be audited? I got a letter this year saying that my refund would take an extra 6-8 weeks due to some extra scrutiny on the IRSes part, but they never asked for the receipts or for me to come in so what happened? As far as I know there wasn't anything especially fishy about my taxes. I did file early (first week of Feb) because we needed the refund, but that alone seems like a poor reason to audit someone's taxes. I guess the other new thing was that they made me verify my address and bank account numbers to verify that I'm not some scammer trying to steal someone else's refund, but that made little sense because it is the same account I've had the refund deposited in for the past 18 years and my address has not changed in 9. All it did in the end was add an extra month and a half to the refund.

Liquix 9y ago

We talk about scaling a lot, but rarely look past "more traffic" or "ten years from now". This is becoming an issue for the first time because the concept of "massively complex computer system at the core of a business" has only been around for half a century or so. Every year it gets more and more expensive (in terms of both people-hours and $$$) to rebuild, refactor, or even improve the system. People who make decisions see the gigantic pricetag on fixing something that already works and opt for patches instead, which is understandable - why fix something that isn't broken (yet), especially when it would cost that much? But as the article describes, when it comes down to the wire and a ground-up refactor is necessary for a system which is 30-60 years old, there may not be enough people who understand the hardware/software, those people are too important to reallocate to the project, or there's simply not enough time/money left to make it happen. I would imagine this new dilemma will start to become much more common in the next 10 years as legacy systems age beyond feasible maintainability.

bluGill 9y ago
Are you one of the people who bring up https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-... ? The big re-write seems to be what you are proposing...

Lionsion 9y ago

The IRS already nearly developed a system to automatically translate their mainframe assembler logic into Java and check its correctness, but the main developer was hired on some special kind of program (to bypass the government salary structure) which could not be renewed before the project was completed. Related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 (The IRS’s Effort to Convert Its Assembly Codebase to Java) https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/irs-clutches-its-modernization-holy-grail/ https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/ir...: > Now, IRS is on the verge of solving this problem. The solution was engineered by a group of about eight people. And not under a multi-hundred-million-dollar systems integration contract. A leader of the group was Jian Wang, a Chinese emigre who is now a naturalized citizen. Wang told me his solution isn’t a silver bullet but rather a carefully worked-out methodology. It has three components so potentially powerful the IRS has filed patent applications for them. > I say “was” because he’s left the agency, and the status of the project is dark. > Wang was working under streamlined critical pay authority the agency has had since its landmark 1998 restructuring. It gave the IRS 40 slots under which it could pay temporary, full-time employees higher than GS rates. Former Commissioner John Koskinen pointed out Congress did not re-up this authority in 2013, despite his entreaties to former Congressman Jason Chaffetz’s Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. > “The last one ran out this past summer,” Koskinen said. The departures included Wang. He says he applied to become a GS-15 or Senior Executive Service member so he could see through the assembler-to-Java project. But his approval didn’t come through until a week before his employment authority expired. By then he’d accepted another job. Wang says he had a house to pay for, kids to educate. Koskinen confirms the agency wanted to convert Wang. But the process of approval from Treasury headquarters and the Office of Personnel Management simply took too long.

RhodesianHunter 9y ago
We can't have a government agency go and be efficient now. That would break decades of "everything should be privatized because government can't do it well" brainwashing. Doubly so for the IRS.
- Lionsion 9y ago

johnklos 9y ago

The article made no real case for the replacement of the IRS' computers. Sure, there's a case for updating their software, but this isn't the same thing as what the title says. I think people seem to forget that newer does NOT mean better, and that an old, slow computer which is reliable is infinitely better than a new, fast computer which is either unreliable or idiosyncratic (or both). Contemporary IT seems to have forgotten some wonderful things about mainframes. Most projects to "modernize" working computing systems are just about companies grabbing contract money, and if a proper job happens to get done, it's more or less incidental. This is why we could go to the Moon in a decade but can't build a replacement for the Space Shuttle in that time. If we had to rebuild the Hoover Dam or the Empire State Building these days, there's no possible way it'd ever be done in the timeframes of the original projects. It's a bit sad, really.

patentatt 9y ago
I think the real problem here is that the mainframe assembler codebase is undocumented, and decades of idiosyncratic corner-cases and bug fixes are only present in the source code. If the system was fully documented, it could be trivially re-implemented in any language or platform of choice. That's why I think this kind of "modernization" project can be really useful, because it forces the organization to define its requirements. Edit: Just to take this concept a little but further, I'd argue that "software" is an illusion. Most software, and nearly all 'enterprise' or 'business' software should be able to be fully defined and written on paper, by humans, before a single developer is engaged to translate those requirements to something a computer can run. The exceptions would be more elaborate things like video games, AI stuff, and things that rely on computers to do what they do. Anything that is automating what humans do (like the IRS here) should be written on paper first, code second. All too often non-technical management doesn't understand this, as it's boring and hard. It's easier to throw money at 'consultants' to pry the requirements out of them and then complain at how expensive the "software" is - while the real expense is just asking your business people what they actually do.
- taborj 9y ago
  > Most software, and nearly all 'enterprise' or 'business' software should be able to be fully defined and written on paper, by humans, before a single developer is engaged to translate those requirements to something a computer can run. This was literally day one of my systems architecture class in college, over 20 years ago. It's probably done more often than you think, but the problem is the workflows change slightly over time, and rather than go back to the drawing board each time, they just tweak the systems software. The result, though, is a mess.

twunde 9y ago

This was recently discussed in https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/irs-clutches-its-modernization-holy-grail/ https://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2018/01/ir... HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16377329

yssrn 9y ago

The IRS has a $11,526,389,000 budget. Their Information Services division has a $2,237,659,000 budget, and 6,089 employees. So the issue isn't a lack of funding or personnel, it's bureaucratic incompetence.

um_ya 9y ago
This is the only case in which I'm okay with bureaucratic incompetence.
- monocasa 9y ago
  You still owe them the same amount; their delay is just an adds uncertainty to the process.
- decebalus1 9y ago
  Yes! Because paying taxes is so un-American /s
- neolefty 9y ago
  Incompetence here creates an un-level playing field where the unscrupulous and wealthy can game the system to their own benefit. As non-intuitive as it sounds, you really do want competence here.
patentatt 9y ago
Your comments includes a logical non-sequitur. You have to prove that those numbers are sufficient, large absolute numbers don't necessarily mean anything in isolation. I'm not sure how to do that, but just pointing to large numbers doesn't make an argument.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
dbatten 9y ago
Wow. That's larger than the budget of many US states... let that sink in for a minute.

segmondy 9y ago

The IRS is so behind. To receive data from the IRS, I have 3 options. CD Tape! TAPE! 70's style Tape Paper.

justjash 9y ago
Yeah, my friend works for a decent sized company that writes banking software. He mentioned that some of the larger clients send a person everyday by plane with a tape for their daily data load. Seems strange in today's world.
- madengr 9y ago
  No, it guarantees a physical backup not connected to any system. Tape is very reliable.
- bolasanibk 9y ago
  "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." -- Andrew S. Tanenbaum Depending on the amount of data and time of travel etc, it might be more economical/reliable to do this than do it over the wire.
- gruez 9y ago
  private couriers aren't a thing? surely it must be cheaper than paying $200 for plane tickets every day.

bsvalley 9y ago

I think this article doesn't cover the actual problem. Majority of the people who work for the IRS are above 45 years old. We're looking at a pick around 50-55 years old. So if they change their system, they might have to get rid of a lot people at the same time. Which they can't or if they could, it would cost them way more than just electronics and electricity. source: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-age-of-people-working-at-the-U-S-Department-of-the-Treasury https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-age-of-people-work...

pbhjpbhj 9y ago
The USA treasury can't do redundancies? Or indeed have their personnel reskill?
reaperducer 9y ago
The tech industry (especially in SV) is the only place in America where people and companies openly ignore the fact that age discrimination is illegal.

whb07 9y ago

Another strong reason to implement the concept of a simple flat tax, without the pages and pages of magic accounting trickery. It really shouldn’t be that complicated: Salary wages * tax rate Investment delta * tax rate Why does that take thousands of lines on a tax return ?

vonmoltke 9y ago
"[T]housands of lines"? Really? How many private citizens have ever had a return that long? The base form is two pages. Schedule A for itemized deductions is one page. Schedule B for dividends and interest is one page. Schedule D for capital gains is two pages. So, six pages total for your situation. Barely qualifies as hundreds, particularly since many don't even need to be filled out. US tax code is definitely more complicated than it needs to be, but the repeated assertions here that this complication extends to the simple case are bullshit.
- jandrese 9y ago
  Stocks can get hairy in a hurry, especially when you have a partial sale of a tech stock (happens commonly in mergers when they liquidate partial shares) that was a former baby bell you inherited from your grandmother's AT&T options. What's the strike price? Who knows? The tax code is hairy but for the most part all of that complexity has a good reason for being there. A lot of it is closing loopholes that fat cats used to dodge taxes. The flat tax people want to open them all back up again and start from scratch. I mean right off the bat the grandparent's post falls victim to a scheme where you are paid a $0.01 salary, but simply get an enormous cash "holiday" gift every year. Tax Dodge 101. But the gp will say "oh, then you just need to declare gifts as income as well", and he's starting down the road to the big bloated tax code we have now.
- whb07 9y ago
  Have you ever done a 990? I don’t mean “paid for one” but I mean truly sat down and did it? It’s ridiculous and each ridiculous line has more baggage attached to each. So to you, I tell you that the tax code for the US is significantly bigger than the tax return a private individual like yourself files yearly [0]. Tax liabilities should be a simple event and should not require a tax professional and other accounting tricks to lessen the burden. In the current environment, those who pay top dollar for tax lawyers and accountants are able to maximize their taxes. The small business and individual is left a higher regulatory burden and are forced to eat the costs. A regular person should be able to properly pay taxes in a quick, clear and efficient manner. It shouldn’t require a professional who’s job it is to deal with the gross mismanagement of government. [0]:https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-words-are-tax-code/ https://taxfoundation.org/how-many-words-are-tax-code/

voidmain 9y ago

I doubt a lack of "new computers" is the problem, but https://directpay.irs.gov/directpay/payment https://directpay.irs.gov/directpay/payment currently reads: Direct Pay This service is temporarily unavailable. We are working to resolve the issue. Please come back later and try again, or you can visit the Make a Payment page for alternative payment methods. We apologize for any inconvenience. Note that your tax payment is due although IRS Direct Pay may not be available.

a-b 9y ago

I'm wondering if it is possible to make this code open source.

hulton 9y ago

The IRS really needs to be shutdown. It is a toxic cancer.