4 ms·

This claim is not correct in several ways. The $80B was not earmarked for hiring agents; that was an additional $80B for the entire agency spread over 10 years.

by whakim 3y ago

This claim is not correct in several ways. The $80B was not earmarked for hiring agents; that was an additional $80B for the entire agency spread over 10 years. While some of that money might be used to hire additional agents, it will also be used to upgrade old technology (the IRS still uses software from the 1950s), make fixed capital investments that have been long-deferred, regulate third-party tax preparers, provide better customer service, crack down on tax evasion and improve enforcement. Additionally, this funding needs to be set in the context of an agency whose budget has shrank 20% over the last decade and whose staffing is set to further shrink through attrition and retirements. The IRS Commissioner testified that the IRS would have to hire 52,000 employees over the next 10 years just to keep staffing at current levels [1]. Finally, the Treasury has argued that this $80B investment would (conservatively) lead to an additional $700B in tax revenue over the next decade, so this spending ends up being entirely revenue-positive [2]. [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/written-testimony-of-charles-p-rettig-commissioner-internal-revenue-service-before-the-senate-finance-committee-on-the-filing-season-and-the-irs-budget https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/written-testimony-of-charles-p-... [2] https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/The-American-Families-Plan-Tax-Compliance-Agenda.pdf https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/The-American-Fami... Edit: since this is Hacker News, I thought it worth pointing out that most of the IRS' software is written in COBOL. I can't think of many things more inefficient and cost-ineffective than continually making bit-part upgrades to 60-year-old software written in a language almost no one knows anymore because of a lack of predictable (human and financial) resources needed to rewrite it.

a123b456c 3y ago
I appreciate your corrections and agree with all of them. Yet they do not imply IRS is operating efficiently, as efficiency is left undefined. If we're talking about social efficiency, the tax code appears massively inefficient to me. I believe the tax code should be redesigned to reduce that inefficiency. That may obviate many IRS needs for resources.
- tomnipotent 3y ago
  > yet they do not imply IRS is operating efficiently The IRS budget for 2020 was $11.5bln to support $3.42 trillion in tax receipts, so I'm not sure that's inefficient. Could it be more efficient? Sure, but it's not as bad as people like to paint it. For comparison, the Los Angeles Unified School District budget alone for that same year was $15bln.
- bfdm 3y ago
  It doesn't need to be "efficient" in terms of cost, that doesn't really matter. What matters much more is whether it is seen and being effective and fair in collection of taxes & enforcement of violators.
atombender 3y ago
A large part of the Individual Master File processing engine is also written in mainframe assembly language. But the broader issue seems to be that the IRS is really bad at planning, goal-setting, and managing its development lifecycle [1]. They've burned through $5.9B just on modernization projects since 1998, with very little to show for it. Many of those projects, including replacing IMF and CADE (which was supposed to be the modern system that would replace IMF, but which failed), have been paused indefinitely. Clearly replacing these legacy systems is time-consuming work, but any way you look at it, it should not take 30 years (that's how long it would have taken if they accomplish their current goal of retiring the IMF by 2028). It's not just that development is slow; this is holding back IRS from operating efficiently. IRS employees reportedly have more than a hundred internal applications they have to be trained in and switch between in order to accomplish basic tasks, and they have a huge backlog. [1] https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF12525.pdf https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF12525.pdf
- whakim 3y ago
  I don't think this issue is specific to the IRS; it has much more to do with how the government is funded - via a series of Continuing Resolutions which make it really difficult to achieve any sort of long-term planning or projects. In the case of BSM funding, your source cites fluctuations are truly wild and were likely enacted on very short timeframes (i.e. months or weeks), which makes it incredibly difficult to hire and retain the expertise or make capital investments you need for success. The debacle around the IRS funding in the Inflation Reduction Act (the subject of the now-deleted parent comment I replied to) highlights these issues - a bunch of funding was allocated, some of it was later clawed back through a budget deal between the White House and Congressional Republicans, and a likely deal this January may continue to reallocate funding. I don't want to lay all the blame for all the IRS' ills at the feet of the state of government funding, but I certainly think it makes it really, really hard to get significant multiyear projects completed.

by whakim 3y ago

a123b456c 3y ago

I appreciate your corrections and agree with all of them. Yet they do not imply IRS is operating efficiently, as efficiency is left undefined. If we're talking about social efficiency, the tax code appears massively inefficient to me. I believe the tax code should be redesigned to reduce that inefficiency. That may obviate many IRS needs for resources.

tomnipotent 3y ago
> yet they do not imply IRS is operating efficiently The IRS budget for 2020 was $11.5bln to support $3.42 trillion in tax receipts, so I'm not sure that's inefficient. Could it be more efficient? Sure, but it's not as bad as people like to paint it. For comparison, the Los Angeles Unified School District budget alone for that same year was $15bln.
bfdm 3y ago
It doesn't need to be "efficient" in terms of cost, that doesn't really matter. What matters much more is whether it is seen and being effective and fair in collection of taxes & enforcement of violators.

atombender 3y ago

A large part of the Individual Master File processing engine is also written in mainframe assembly language. But the broader issue seems to be that the IRS is really bad at planning, goal-setting, and managing its development lifecycle [1]. They've burned through $5.9B just on modernization projects since 1998, with very little to show for it. Many of those projects, including replacing IMF and CADE (which was supposed to be the modern system that would replace IMF, but which failed), have been paused indefinitely. Clearly replacing these legacy systems is time-consuming work, but any way you look at it, it should not take 30 years (that's how long it would have taken if they accomplish their current goal of retiring the IMF by 2028). It's not just that development is slow; this is holding back IRS from operating efficiently. IRS employees reportedly have more than a hundred internal applications they have to be trained in and switch between in order to accomplish basic tasks, and they have a huge backlog. [1] https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF12525.pdf https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF12525.pdf

whakim 3y ago
I don't think this issue is specific to the IRS; it has much more to do with how the government is funded - via a series of Continuing Resolutions which make it really difficult to achieve any sort of long-term planning or projects. In the case of BSM funding, your source cites fluctuations are truly wild and were likely enacted on very short timeframes (i.e. months or weeks), which makes it incredibly difficult to hire and retain the expertise or make capital investments you need for success. The debacle around the IRS funding in the Inflation Reduction Act (the subject of the now-deleted parent comment I replied to) highlights these issues - a bunch of funding was allocated, some of it was later clawed back through a budget deal between the White House and Congressional Republicans, and a likely deal this January may continue to reallocate funding. I don't want to lay all the blame for all the IRS' ills at the feet of the state of government funding, but I certainly think it makes it really, really hard to get significant multiyear projects completed.