> Per their own sentence, the poor and rich are audited at the same rate yet they go on to label this "disproportionate". That makes no sense. 60% of 1000 is l

> Per their own sentence, the poor and rich are audited at the same rate yet they go on to label this "disproportionate". That makes no sense. 60% of 1000 is less than 60% of 2 million. The cost/benefit of auditing the poor is likely inverted at a small scale. At a large scale, it's the right call. It makes sense, from a particular point of view.