11 ms·
Calls to investigate tax sites for sharing financial information with Meta
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y agoWhy is Google not included in the title ?
- edgyquant 3y agoThis is a ridiculous breach of privacy and nothing will come of it. They claim to have removed the pixel after it came out.
- ProllyInfamous 3y ago"Sorry we got caught."
- carlossouza 3y ago“Don’t be evil” + “Move fast and break things” culture at its finest… What the heck did these companies become!?
- tru3_power 3y agoWhy would this be a Google and Meta problem? The tax sites willingly shared the data they originally collected.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Why would this be a Google and Meta problem? They collected and profited off the data. If you're building and optimizing tools being used by criminals, you bear some culpability.
- ta988 3y agoEspecially if you willingfully used data that they shouldn't have shared to you in the first place.
- deeth_starr_v 3y agoSame reason it’s an issue for an auction site to trade stolen goods
- JohnFen 3y agoAll are at fault here. Companies giving this data to Google/Meta/etc., and Google/Meta/etc. for being so eager to hoover up data by hook or by crook.
- shortcake27 3y agoThey didn’t willingly share the data. The default behaviour of these pixels is (or was) to gobble up every bit of data on the page, including the values of all form fields. However, this was _not_ common knowledge at the time and certainly not communicated when implementing a pixel. It was negligence that lead to this data being leaked, but the silent default behaviour of tracking all form values is insane. Most people would opt out if given the option up-front, so the fact this was silently enabled by default and hidden away until you actively looked for it at least partially shifts the blame to Meta. They obviously knew what they were doing.
- Hikikomori 3y agoAnd here taxable income and other information is public.
- kramerger 3y agoWait, why would Meta & Google even want your tax data?? Peeking at your credit cards purchase historic I can understand, as it tells them your shopping habits and helps them target you better. But tax data?? Why??
- mikece 3y ago> why would Meta & Google even want your tax data?? The more they know the better of a profile they can build about you which is something they can sell. It's surveillance capitalism, plain and simple.
- robertlagrant 3y agoIs this actually what's happening, or are you just guessing? E.g. if the tax return companies install Hotjar and it starts sending screenshots of tax returns to Hotjar servers, that's not Hotjar trying to grab tax returns.
- JohnFen 3y agoIt's not Hotjar specifically trying to grab tax returns, true, but if Hotjar is using the data sent to it for its own purposes, then it doesn't actually matter if they intended to get tax returns specifically or not. They're still doing wrong.
- robertlagrant 3y agoIs there evidence that Meta used the information?
- JohnFen 3y agoI don't know. But they certainly obtained it, and it would be out of character for Meta not to capitalize on it. I think the assumption they used it is a reasonable one, given their history.
- mikece 3y agoI don't like the word "share" in this context: these financial companies didn't simply give away info, they got something in return and I would like more info about what they got.
- kevin_thibedeau 3y agoData miners pay for any and all profiling data that they can add to their panopticon. All the better to send you targeted ads.
- pierat 3y agoIf you think its JUST ads, boy, do I have a bridge to sell you. 1. Data sold to Natsec/FBI/CIA/NSA etc 2. Data sold to IRS 3. Data sold to state tax authority 4. Data sold to police agencies 5. Data sold to *churches* ( https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/catholic-group-buying-data-to-out-gay-priests ) "If you give me six datapoints generated by the devices of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." ... to bastardize Cardinal Richelieu's quote
- ta988 3y agoAnd everybody working for ad companies is complicit.
- marketingtech 3y agoThe financial companies got higher performing ads delivered to the right people, as well as the ability to measure the actions taken from the ads. In exchange, they gave away your data for free. Every company running ads on the internet is making this value exchange, but these financial companies screwed up by pouring protected data into Google's and Meta's dumb pipes.
- Xelbair 3y ago>The financial companies got higher performing ads delivered to the right people, as well as the ability to measure the actions taken from the ads. In exchange, they gave away your data for free. It seems like we have a name for such transaction. Where one party gives something to get something else from second party. It's called sale. Not sharing.
- Dowwie 3y agoThe Senate report: https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Attacks%20on%20Tax%20Privacy_Final.pdf https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Attacks%20on%20T...
- slashdev 3y agoThey didn't share financial information, they used meta and google analytics on their sites, which can leak financial information by showing what page the user was on (e.g. pages specific to certain deductions or benefits.) Most people here in the comments clearly didn't read the article. It's not like meta was buying up people's tax returns. Just negligence on the part of these tax sites.
- gopuck16 3y agoIts on tax companies to do the due diligence on the users part to make sure they do not leak any taxpayer information. Its private information! And meta and google analytics means there is data exchange, why do they want to do any "analytics" on people's personal data? Remove any and all analytics on tax websites. Why are you straight up attacking the people by saying "Most people here in the comments clearly didn't read the article". They clearly did, understand and have full right to ask questions.
- slashdev 3y agoAnalytics is normal practice in any web application. However, using third party analytics in sensitive web applications is a bad idea. It is leaking private information, as you correctly point out. > Why are you straight up attacking the people by saying "Most people here in the comments clearly didn't read the article". They clearly did, understand and have full right to ask questions. At the time I wrote this comment, most people had clearly not read the article. Currently it still seems like a huge number of people still haven't since they're talking about things like the sale of tax information to meta, or why meta would want your tax information. There was no sale, meta likely didn't even know they had this information. It was just negligence. That's not attacking people, it's calling a spade a spade, which I will do without trepidation or remorse.
- lukeschlather 3y ago> There was no sale Maybe, maybe not. I think it merits investigation. Even if this was accidental I think it is still criminal negligence and should be prosecuted.
- tagyro 3y agooff-topic (or not): the newly launched Threads app has over 100 million users already
- PhazonJim 3y agoI don't reckon that is super on-topic unless you are trying to relate this article to the amount of people willing to hand over their personal info via Threads/Meta. But that seems like an aggressive reach.
- tagyro 3y agoA leopard can't change its spots.
- PhazonJim 3y agoOf course not, I just didn't see how the number of Threads users relates to tax sites selling your data.
- tagyro 3y agoTax sites are selling data because there is demand for that data, in this case from Meta (or Facebook/Instagram/Threads/WhatsApp etc). This is not the first time they (Meta et all) were caught with their hands in the cookie jar and still, over 100 million people thought it's a good idea to give them even more access to their information. It's sad and disheartening to realise, again and again, that the "regular" user couldn't care less. And based on the downvotes I received, neither do the hn users. Besides some imaginary internet points, more importantly, I'm loosing faith we will ever open our eyes and see the cancer that are these data stealing corporations. </rant>
- PhazonJim 3y agoI think you were downvoted because your comment wasn't substantive and perceived to not be on topic. If anyone cares about their data privacy I would expect HN users to be on the frontlines.
- crowcroft 3y agoI would be curious to know what data they're sharing exactly. Are they actually sharing any financial information, or are they just passing a counter back to Meta saying that person X filled out a form/visited a page. Not to say any tracking is 'good' but this might not be quite so obviously bad.
- SoftTalker 3y agoI've always assumed they share everything. That's why I do my taxes on paper and mail them in.
- crowcroft 3y agoNot a bad assumption to be fair. Even if they don't actively share specific financial data, there isn't a good way to be able to verify and audit what exactly a Meta 'page counter' pixel is doing (and what Meta is doing with that data). Regardless of the details it's an area that needs A LOT more regulatory scrutiny.
- TheCleric 3y agoThis should be the reason why these sites should no longer exist. The IRS should have this as a built-in service. Or better yet, return-free filing like most other large economy countries.
- ta988 3y agoIt would be easier if the tax code was simplified, oh wait the tax-prep companies are also lobbying against that. Maybe we should dismantle them, take their money away and use that to pay lawyers and tax specialists to simplify the tax code and create a nice and easy filing interface.
- TheCleric 3y agoThat is a huge part of it, but I've heard one of the other major barriers are people who are just plain anti-tax since they think anything more centralized would just give the government an excuse to sneak in new taxes.
- starcraft2wol 3y agoI am somewhat sympathetic to the argument you are describing. Imagine if income tax was not automatically deducted from your paycheck, but required you to save and physically send money to the IRS (like most 1099 contractors have to do). I think the overall feeling about tax for the bottom 60% of earners would be a little different, whereas now they see getting back some forced savings as a little reward. The government is highly incentivized to automate and disguise that activity further.
- landemva 3y agoThere was no employer withholding originally. People wrote a check each year, which made the amounts very visible to each person. Employer withholding keeps it quiet and low-key so few resist the takings. "Current Tax Payment Act of 1943" https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/191355 https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/191355
- ChatGTP 3y agoI feel like Americans are blinded by these companies. They’re just scum but we keep putting up with it. Why ?
- JohnFen 3y agoBecause these companies have a ton of power, and no individual can stand against that. We have to act collectively, and getting there is slow and difficult process.
- dogman144 3y agoPixel, Google tag manager and Bluekai (?, that one from Oracle) are in a lot of sites and mobile apps. I’m happy to see this getting visibility around a privacy use case that’ll reach normal folks and politicians more clearly. I’m also happy to see the “this is bad” comments far outnumbering the “well why is this Metoogle’s fault” comments that many (properly RSU’d incentivized) engineers always seem to fall back on to absolve themselves of any responsibility for the social impacts of the products they build and personally profit from.
- strict9 3y agoYet it's impossible for me see my own prior tax returns from a product I already paid for. I can't contact support for help without paying additional money to turbotax. I realize this article doesn't match turbotax specifically but the entire industry is rotten to the core and shouldn't exist in the first place.
- clintonb 3y ago> Yet it's impossible for me see my own prior tax returns from a product I already paid for. I get what you're saying, but is there a reason you don't download the PDF and store it in your own records?
- JKCalhoun 3y agoYep. And then also printed and squirreled away.
- filoleg 3y agoI am not sure what they meant about "paying additional money to Turbotax" either. I just checked my account, and I have the ability to download final pdfs of my filled out tax returns for all the prior years I filed with Turbotax. No extra payments needed.
- travisporter 3y agoIf you used the free TurboTax they will charge you to pull prior years.
- strict9 3y agoClicking the link for past records redirects me to a landing page to purchase turbotax products. I haven't used them in years.
- dang 3y agoRelated: Tax-filing websites have been sending users financial info to Meta - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33753058 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33753058 - Nov 2022 (20 comments) Tax filing websites have been sending users’ financial information to Facebook - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33705532 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33705532 - Nov 2022 (74 comments)
- johnea 3y agoI keep reading these articles. They say that tax sites "shared" or "gave" user data via active pixels, but is that really true? Don't these companies receive money to host the pixels? Didn't these companies actually sell user data? "Giving" and "sharing" are not the same as "selling", yet not one article I've read indicated whether the tax prep compaies received payment for the user data. Does anyone know?
- jacquesm 3y agoThis is the sort of thing why you really want to block 3rd party JS. There are plenty of JS blockers out there, get one and very selectively enable the stuff that you need.
- IG_Semmelweiss 3y agofreetaxusa.com doesn't seem to be doing this based on their privacy policy here: https://www.freetaxusa.com/privacy https://www.freetaxusa.com/privacy But they are not one of the majors.
- mellavora 3y agoThis is one more reason why we need to move to a single-tax system. No tax on labor, because we want more labor and you should keep what you make. No tax on capital, because we want more investment so that labor is more effective. Tax land. Land is not capital nor is it labor. Land ownership only allows rent-seeking behavoir. Land ownership is an artificial right granted by the government. Google "single tax movement" to learn more. Or try this:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism
- stainablesteel 3y agoso if i have this right, you're saying to only tax land? i'm only ok with this if we restrict voting rights to land owners
- mellavora 3y agoLook, I'm at work and don't have time to dive deep into economic theory. If you read the source articles you'll see it has a 100 year plus history and is well grounded in basics of economics, in fact has more accurate base terms than most theories-- it is the first one to recognize that land and capital are separate concepts. You also seem to be surprised that your ownership of land is a right granted by the government. Go ask your favorite law school professor about this, they will confirm that I am right. Historically all land belonged to the sovereign. The US didn't like the idea of kings, so under our common law all land belongs to the US government. And you get your rights to your piece of it because the law recognizes that you should have and deserve to have monopoly rights. But if it wasn't fundamentally the property of the US federal government, where would the government get the legal jurisdiction to enforce the monopoly rights it has granted you? The US government will not enforce any property rights you may think you have in Mexico. See, I'm not questioning private property, I want you to be able to own land. I'm looking at it in its proper full legal context. Now you want to restrict voting rights to land owners, probably thinking some variant of "no taxation without representation", right? But recall that the fundamental owner is "we the people", not "we the individual to whom the people have granted a monopolistic usage of what we the people own". So yes, since every citizen is in fact the land owner, then the single tax principle by default meets your criteria of restricting voting rights to land owners. And since I've met your criteria, welcome to the movement. We are glad you are here.
- jononomo 3y agoThere should be only one tax site, it should be operated by the IRS, and, as US citizens, we should not be required to disclose our financial information to any private company in order to efficiently file our taxes.
- kart23 3y agoUse your brain on this stuff. Think about how many billions of requests are being sent from pixels every day. Facebook is not looking through hundreds of millions of unique URLs and form data to find some obscure user data that their Ad systems aren't trained for. And just look at the docs if you want to find out what pixel exactly does: it doesn't collect form data unless the developer explicitly specifies it. https://developers.facebook.com/docs/meta-pixel/ https://developers.facebook.com/docs/meta-pixel/
- pixl97 3y agoMeta: Of course we don't look at at billions of unique URLS for obscure data to sell better ads. clicking off switch in AI enabled application at Meta that does exactly that
- jxi 3y agoI feel like anyone with half a brain would realize that it’s very easy and fruitful for Meta to data mine the billions of requests they receive.