3 ms·
If they don't know automatically, it's only a failure of automation or lack of interfacing with credit agencies and state records. They certainly have the powe
by harshreality 8y ago
If they don't know automatically, it's only a failure of automation or lack of interfacing with credit agencies and state records. They certainly have the power to know all those things, and they will find all that out, if they choose to audit you.
But forget about the IRS automatically collecting what could possibly be relevant from everyone. If some of that stuff isn't automatically reported, there's no reason to force reporting, The IRS would operate as it already does, choose a percentage to audit and get those records from that percentage (0.6% of total filers or 933k people, including 15% of people who make over $15mil) anyway. (That panopticon you're worried about? Don't worry, it's only watching approximately a million people per year, no big deal, right? I realize 1 million is not 327 million, but I have difficulty getting upset about broader financial surveillance (you could even make it optional, so only people who think they're likely to get audited would opt in) when 1 million people per year already get that treatment, plus harassment (granted some of them brought it on themselves, but many did not and just made stupid errors that a better system would have avoided completely, or didn't make any errors and the IRS is just fishing)
The vast majority of people only end up reporting stuff the IRS already knows about (W-2, 1099, marital status and children that were already reported for the last N years, etc.) What good does it do to have people manually file the same information employers and financial institutions already file? If the IRS is not getting some information, and someone's going to lie and tell them it's all good when they get a summary and tax bill, they're going to lie on their taxes even if they're preparing them manually.
All the current system is, is a hand-out and make work scheme for tax preparation people and companies.
- kazinator 8y agoI.e. a failure to implement a surveillance state in which the government knows every move you make, financial or other, so there is no need to claim anything and provide receipts: they have that already, and more.
- rayiner 8y agoI’m pretty sure the federal government tracking details about where people live and what they spend in daycare is one of the signs of the antichrist. (No, seriously, the federal government doesn’t track this information about you. It can use its police powers to get that information if necessary, but that’s different.)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- ohazi 8y ago> is one of the signs of the antichrist. Can you cut the fucking hyperbole? In this thread you're being obstinate and snarky about what the IRS can't possibly know about you. You're demonstrably wrong about some of them (e.g. mortgage interest), and half a dozen people are suggesting practical ways for the IRS to learn about some of the other things, or for you to correct them. Enough.
- arcticbull 8y agoIndeed, especially as the US legal system gives strong protections in this area. For instance, if you sell illegal narcotics you’re required to buy tax stamps from your local tax office. Due to the illicit nature of the transactions, they have to sell them to you in total anonymity. The IRS only cares about receiving your taxes, not snitching, and there’s no reason for this to change.