10 ms·

Finally, something is being done. Paying taxes should be free for most people. Especially if you only have to deal with the standard deductions.

chad_strategic 3y ago
I came here to say the above. But let me add the following… Intuit is a criminal lobbying organization.
- mulmen 3y ago
  What laws have they broken?
  - lmm 3y ago
    Well, apparently they've been putting out deceptive advertising.
    - jrockway 3y ago
      Is there any non-deceptive advertising?
      - mulmen 3y ago
        Yes. I bought a cheeseburger once and got a free coke, just like the sign said. There’s certainly a line because some advertising is illegal and some isn’t.
    - mulmen 3y ago
      The claim is that Intuit is a “criminal lobbying organization” so what lobbying laws were broken? Or was lobbying meant to be a verb instead of an adjective?
      - chad_strategic 3y ago
        You are absolute correct, no laws have been broken. (yet) There are also a lot of Senators and Representatives that have a larger re-election campaign fund now as well. But that's not illegal either. There are probably elected officials on the IRS committee. They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Verbs or adjective, your grammar doesn't matter. All you have to do is follow the money.
        mulmen 3y ago
        > You are absolute correct, no laws have been broken Ok so why did you say Intuit broke lobbying laws? > (yet) When does Intuit plan on breaking lobbying laws? Which laws? And how do you know this? > There are also a lot of Senators and Representatives Which ones? How many? > that have a larger re-election campaign fund now as well. Who contributed? How much did they contribute? Was it illegal? > There are probably elected officials on the IRS committee. Do you mean the United States Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation? Because by definition yes, only members of congress would be on a congressional committee. But the Joint Committee on Taxation isn’t the IRS, whose employees are not elected, because it’s a government agency, not part of congress. > They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Right but acting on inside information would be illegal. > Verbs or adjective, your grammar doesn't matter. In this case your grammar matters a lot. If Intuit broke lobbying laws that would be a big deal. > All you have to do is follow the money. I don’t have to do anything. You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you. If congress is really in Intuit’s pocket then that should be easy to demonstrate. Otherwise you are needlessly undermining faith in our institutions with tired apathetic cliches. “Follow the money” is lame because profit alone is no evidence of wrongdoing. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Without that you are just perpetuating toxic rhetoric. I’m no fan of Intuit but so far your comments have contributed nothing but cliche unfounded anti-government negativity.
        chad_strategic 3y ago
        Your comments suggest you have significantly more time to spare than I do. (However, I understand this is just my interpretation.) I'm entitled to my opinion on INTU and the government, regardless of whether it's factual or not. You're interpreting my views as anti-government negativity, which I don't agree with. Additionally, I wasn't aware that writing a research paper with proper citations was part of the conversation. To conclude, it seems your primary interest lies in debate. > They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Right but acting on inside information would be illegal. You're 100% incorrect on that last point. Although not a formal legal document this article makes it pretty clear Senators and Representatives have a loophole in regards to trading on stocks. https://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459 https://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459 I will no longer respond to this thread as it's now reached the point of no return. In the meantime have a great day!
- financypants 3y ago
  I guess they’re not doing a great job then? Because of the auto-filing/IRS-backed filing system being developed?
  - grigri907 3y ago
    They've successfully managed to delay it for decades
ijhuygft776 3y ago
Our documents should not be sent automatically to the IRS if the IRS won't figure out our taxes.
- mulmen 3y ago
  Can they figure out our taxes without our returns? For simple stuff like paychecks maybe. What if you are self-employed? What if you are a contractor? What if you barter or pay cash?
  - ijhuygft776 3y ago
    of course it would not cover all cases... but I'm guessing that it would cover most people... why would I want them to have my files if all they are going to do is use them against me anyways?
    - mulmen 3y ago
      > but I'm guessing that it would cover most people... Do you have any reason to believe that? Are they your documents? Can you accrue taxes independently?
      - ijhuygft776 3y ago
        > Do you have any reason to believe that? just from my personal experiences... either way, the IRS has that info, if they assume people are honest... not sure why it isn't public.
        mulmen 3y ago
        Well, they might have all the info sometimes but we don't know how often or if they even do. How would the IRS know if they know everything? What evidence do they have of absence? There are 36 countries that manage to do return-free taxes. They seem to have a base rate that covers most (~64% in the UK) people. The US tax code is way more complicated than one base rate for everyone. It's unclear to me how anything other than income tax is handled in these countries. Does the UK have a capital gains tax? Tax deductions?
ghaff 3y ago
If you're standard deduction and just have a few simple sources of income, filing is easily free. Should it be electronic and pre-filled? Yes. But this idea that you need an accountant or tax prep software if you have a W-2 and a 1099 just isn't true. The forms are free.
- ok_dad 3y ago
  Awesome, let's do better and have the IRS fill out your form in Feb or March, mail it to you, and if you disagree you can still file yourself. That way, 95% of cases are covered and don't have to even deal with taxes.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    By all means. Though I think it's considerably less than 95%. A lot of people probably have something non-standard. I have no problem with pre-filled forms that explicitly only cover certain types of transactions.
  - anticensor 3y ago
    > mail it to you, Corrected it for you: email it to you at your personal @gov.us email (I know it is not a thing yet).
- cj 3y ago
  Half of the allure of turbo tax is figuring out if the standard deduction is more or less favorable than itemized. Maybe the IRS should start by building a tool that points you in the right direction before it tries to build a TurboTax clone.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    I assume that information exists. It's mostly just totaling up some numbers. I know these days, for me, standard deduction works unless I have some outlier charitable/investment thing going on which I'm going to talk to my accountant about anyway. I assume there are other alternate energy credits and the like but not sure how they work and again aren't in play for most people in a given year.
kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
They've always been no more then the cost of a stamp.
- munk-a 3y ago
  That's extremely disingenuous and ignores the amount of labor required to self-file in the US. Most of the information you send to the IRS they already know - they just can't tell you because Intuit wants to justify their existence.
  - ghaff 3y ago
    If your taxes are complicated, certainly, you'll probably be prudent to use an accountant. (Which I do.) A basic filing like most people have is pretty straightforward (though there should still be a pre-filled out form whether you choose to use it or not). There's this perpetuated myth that filing taxes is really complicated even if you just have a W-2 as is the case for many. And it's simply not true.
dehrmann 3y ago
A 1040EZ covers that case and filing it is the cost of the stamp and envelope.
- Guvante 3y ago
  The federal government can do a 1040EZ for you. Intuit has blocked government attempts to do that by offering free taxes for half of Americans (that was the deal). Of course they decided to renegade and only do 37% per their advertising. Hilarious since they had the "federal is free but you need to pay for state" scam going already.
- plus 3y ago
  My understanding is that if a 1040EZ is appropriate for you, then TurboTax will also be free. It's only if you have a more complex filing situation that they charge. Please correct me if I'm wrong, though.
  - al_borland 3y ago
    It’s only free for federal, then they change you for state. I’m sure if they charged for both the final cost would be the same. They jack up the price of the state tax filing to cover the “free” federal taxes. This is how pretty much every “free” tax program works.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  And an understanding of tax law
  - ghaff 3y ago
    I know the tax code has probably gotten more complicated, but when did people start to get the idea that even super-straightforward taxes (like just a W-2 or maybe a 1099) requires an accountant, tax software, or a degree in tax law? My taxes have been pretty complicated for a while but I don't get the perceived need for TurboTax for even the simplest of returns. Now maybe you miss out on some deductions if you just transfer a few numbers to the forms. But the standard deduction is going to cover most people until you get into big mortgages or charitable writeoffs.
mock-possum 3y ago
Paying taxes should be free for everyone imo.
andirk 3y ago
Isn't a 1040-EZ free and takes 10 minutes? My tax situation is kind of complicated and costs me like $150 for all of the things TurboTax finds, figures out, calculates, submits, and all in a nice UI. Can someone please explain to me what is so horrible about paying a reasonable fee to figure out some complicated stuff that amounts to 80+ pages of filing docs? And free if it's EZ? And free if low income?
- Caligatio 3y ago
  The tax code is deliberately complicated because, in part, of the lobbying by Intuit and H&R Block. They're creating an artificial market for their $150 services and convinced the populace this is reasonable.

chad_strategic 3y ago

I came here to say the above. But let me add the following… Intuit is a criminal lobbying organization.

mulmen 3y ago
What laws have they broken?
- lmm 3y ago
  Well, apparently they've been putting out deceptive advertising.
  - jrockway 3y ago
    Is there any non-deceptive advertising?
    - mulmen 3y ago
      Yes. I bought a cheeseburger once and got a free coke, just like the sign said. There’s certainly a line because some advertising is illegal and some isn’t.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    The claim is that Intuit is a “criminal lobbying organization” so what lobbying laws were broken? Or was lobbying meant to be a verb instead of an adjective?
    - chad_strategic 3y ago
      You are absolute correct, no laws have been broken. (yet) There are also a lot of Senators and Representatives that have a larger re-election campaign fund now as well. But that's not illegal either. There are probably elected officials on the IRS committee. They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Verbs or adjective, your grammar doesn't matter. All you have to do is follow the money.
      - mulmen 3y ago
        > You are absolute correct, no laws have been broken Ok so why did you say Intuit broke lobbying laws? > (yet) When does Intuit plan on breaking lobbying laws? Which laws? And how do you know this? > There are also a lot of Senators and Representatives Which ones? How many? > that have a larger re-election campaign fund now as well. Who contributed? How much did they contribute? Was it illegal? > There are probably elected officials on the IRS committee. Do you mean the United States Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation? Because by definition yes, only members of congress would be on a congressional committee. But the Joint Committee on Taxation isn’t the IRS, whose employees are not elected, because it’s a government agency, not part of congress. > They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Right but acting on inside information would be illegal. > Verbs or adjective, your grammar doesn't matter. In this case your grammar matters a lot. If Intuit broke lobbying laws that would be a big deal. > All you have to do is follow the money. I don’t have to do anything. You made the claim. The burden of proof is on you. If congress is really in Intuit’s pocket then that should be easy to demonstrate. Otherwise you are needlessly undermining faith in our institutions with tired apathetic cliches. “Follow the money” is lame because profit alone is no evidence of wrongdoing. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Without that you are just perpetuating toxic rhetoric. I’m no fan of Intuit but so far your comments have contributed nothing but cliche unfounded anti-government negativity.
        chad_strategic 3y ago
        Your comments suggest you have significantly more time to spare than I do. (However, I understand this is just my interpretation.) I'm entitled to my opinion on INTU and the government, regardless of whether it's factual or not. You're interpreting my views as anti-government negativity, which I don't agree with. Additionally, I wasn't aware that writing a research paper with proper citations was part of the conversation. To conclude, it seems your primary interest lies in debate. > They also might own shares of INTU... Even that is not criminal. Right but acting on inside information would be illegal. You're 100% incorrect on that last point. Although not a formal legal document this article makes it pretty clear Senators and Representatives have a loophole in regards to trading on stocks. https://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459 https://blogs.luc.edu/compliance/?p=4459 I will no longer respond to this thread as it's now reached the point of no return. In the meantime have a great day!
financypants 3y ago
I guess they’re not doing a great job then? Because of the auto-filing/IRS-backed filing system being developed?
- grigri907 3y ago
  They've successfully managed to delay it for decades

ijhuygft776 3y ago

Our documents should not be sent automatically to the IRS if the IRS won't figure out our taxes.

mulmen 3y ago
Can they figure out our taxes without our returns? For simple stuff like paychecks maybe. What if you are self-employed? What if you are a contractor? What if you barter or pay cash?
- ijhuygft776 3y ago
  of course it would not cover all cases... but I'm guessing that it would cover most people... why would I want them to have my files if all they are going to do is use them against me anyways?
  - mulmen 3y ago
    > but I'm guessing that it would cover most people... Do you have any reason to believe that? Are they your documents? Can you accrue taxes independently?
    - ijhuygft776 3y ago
      > Do you have any reason to believe that? just from my personal experiences... either way, the IRS has that info, if they assume people are honest... not sure why it isn't public.
      - mulmen 3y ago
        Well, they might have all the info sometimes but we don't know how often or if they even do. How would the IRS know if they know everything? What evidence do they have of absence? There are 36 countries that manage to do return-free taxes. They seem to have a base rate that covers most (~64% in the UK) people. The US tax code is way more complicated than one base rate for everyone. It's unclear to me how anything other than income tax is handled in these countries. Does the UK have a capital gains tax? Tax deductions?

ghaff 3y ago

If you're standard deduction and just have a few simple sources of income, filing is easily free. Should it be electronic and pre-filled? Yes. But this idea that you need an accountant or tax prep software if you have a W-2 and a 1099 just isn't true. The forms are free.

ok_dad 3y ago
Awesome, let's do better and have the IRS fill out your form in Feb or March, mail it to you, and if you disagree you can still file yourself. That way, 95% of cases are covered and don't have to even deal with taxes.
- ghaff 3y ago
  By all means. Though I think it's considerably less than 95%. A lot of people probably have something non-standard. I have no problem with pre-filled forms that explicitly only cover certain types of transactions.
- anticensor 3y ago
  > mail it to you, Corrected it for you: email it to you at your personal @gov.us email (I know it is not a thing yet).
cj 3y ago
Half of the allure of turbo tax is figuring out if the standard deduction is more or less favorable than itemized. Maybe the IRS should start by building a tool that points you in the right direction before it tries to build a TurboTax clone.
- ghaff 3y ago
  I assume that information exists. It's mostly just totaling up some numbers. I know these days, for me, standard deduction works unless I have some outlier charitable/investment thing going on which I'm going to talk to my accountant about anyway. I assume there are other alternate energy credits and the like but not sure how they work and again aren't in play for most people in a given year.

kevin_thibedeau 3y ago

They've always been no more then the cost of a stamp.

munk-a 3y ago
That's extremely disingenuous and ignores the amount of labor required to self-file in the US. Most of the information you send to the IRS they already know - they just can't tell you because Intuit wants to justify their existence.
- ghaff 3y ago
  If your taxes are complicated, certainly, you'll probably be prudent to use an accountant. (Which I do.) A basic filing like most people have is pretty straightforward (though there should still be a pre-filled out form whether you choose to use it or not). There's this perpetuated myth that filing taxes is really complicated even if you just have a W-2 as is the case for many. And it's simply not true.

dehrmann 3y ago

A 1040EZ covers that case and filing it is the cost of the stamp and envelope.

Guvante 3y ago
The federal government can do a 1040EZ for you. Intuit has blocked government attempts to do that by offering free taxes for half of Americans (that was the deal). Of course they decided to renegade and only do 37% per their advertising. Hilarious since they had the "federal is free but you need to pay for state" scam going already.
plus 3y ago
My understanding is that if a 1040EZ is appropriate for you, then TurboTax will also be free. It's only if you have a more complex filing situation that they charge. Please correct me if I'm wrong, though.
- al_borland 3y ago
  It’s only free for federal, then they change you for state. I’m sure if they charged for both the final cost would be the same. They jack up the price of the state tax filing to cover the “free” federal taxes. This is how pretty much every “free” tax program works.
calvinmorrison 3y ago
And an understanding of tax law
- ghaff 3y ago
  I know the tax code has probably gotten more complicated, but when did people start to get the idea that even super-straightforward taxes (like just a W-2 or maybe a 1099) requires an accountant, tax software, or a degree in tax law? My taxes have been pretty complicated for a while but I don't get the perceived need for TurboTax for even the simplest of returns. Now maybe you miss out on some deductions if you just transfer a few numbers to the forms. But the standard deduction is going to cover most people until you get into big mortgages or charitable writeoffs.

mock-possum 3y ago

Paying taxes should be free for everyone imo.

andirk 3y ago

Isn't a 1040-EZ free and takes 10 minutes? My tax situation is kind of complicated and costs me like $150 for all of the things TurboTax finds, figures out, calculates, submits, and all in a nice UI. Can someone please explain to me what is so horrible about paying a reasonable fee to figure out some complicated stuff that amounts to 80+ pages of filing docs? And free if it's EZ? And free if low income?

Caligatio 3y ago
The tax code is deliberately complicated because, in part, of the lobbying by Intuit and H&R Block. They're creating an artificial market for their $150 services and convinced the populace this is reasonable.