5 ms·
> Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), an accountant and senior member of the House Financial Services Committee, told Axios in April that he wants to go "way beyond D
by CharlieDigital 2y ago
> Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), an accountant and senior member of the House Financial Services Committee, told Axios in April that he wants to go "way beyond Direct File," calling for a "self-populating form."
>
> "Why in the heck should you have to fill out your return when the government has all the information. They know what's on your W-2 form before you do. They know what's on your 1099 … Do you know how many mistakes people make?"
Yes. Please.
Now fix Workday, too.
- jjcm 2y agoThis was one of my favorite things about living in Australia as an American. Taxes were clicking a checkbox and saying, "I agree". It was incredible how simple it was.
- barbazoo 2y agoPretty much the same in Canada at this point for many people. Your tax software, and there are lots of free ones, pull the data from CRA and populate your whole return.
- codegeek 2y agoI lived in HongKong for about 2 years a while ago. It was the same there. They calculate everything and you just have to sign it.
- spiderice 2y agoThis works against the governments interest, as they'll lose revenue from all the fines they give to people who accidentally fuck up their tax return.
- Sohcahtoa82 2y ago> all the fines they give to people who accidentally fuck up their tax return. You only get fined if you deliberately (and fraudulently) fuck up. If you make a mistake, they give you a chance to correct it before fining you. I forgot a W-2 once (I switched jobs 4 weeks into the year and the first employer gave me my W-2 late) and filed without it. My return was rejected and I got a letter telling me why and requested an amended return. I amended, re-filed, got accepted, and got my refund. No fines. And certainly no jail time like a lot of memes like to suggest.
- CharlieDigital 2y agoThe point of the government isn't to make a profit; it's to serve the people.
- mrangle 2y ago[flagged]
- mrangle 2y agoThe people who are downvoting my "disagree" are likely assuming that I am speaking philosophically. I'm not. Philosophically, sure: the purpose of the government is to serve the people. A philosophy written specifically for the consumption of people. But now I'm speaking about its practical purpose. What a system produces is always its purpose.
- plorkyeran 2y agoThe US Government operates at a massive deficit, so clearly the purpose of it is not to turn a profit.
- mrangle 2y agoThere is no such conscious entity as "the US government". Said entity is a legal vehicle. It can't consciously seek to profit, nor does it care whether or not it profits. However, the point of legal vehicles is to benefit people. My point is that I disagree with the characterization that the primary benefit is "for the people".
- g15jv2dp 2y agoIt's also possible that people downvoted because a one-word comment doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- barbazoo 2y agoWhat about on the other hand saving all that effort associated with auditing, re-filing/amending a return, etc.
- bombcar 2y agoIt does work against the government's stated interest, but not in the way you think. Tax policy is the government's strongest tool to change personal behavior, and if the system is simple and automated it doesn't do that at all.
- op00to 2y ago> Tax policy is the government's strongest tool to change personal behavior, and if the system is simple and automated it doesn't do that at all. I'm not sure I agree. For example, I used to pay city wage tax to one municipality, and I decided I did not want to pay that city tax anymore so I took a job in another area that no longer had the city wage tax. I would be due the wage tax no matter what, and I was aware of exactly how much the wage tax was by looking at my pay stub every two weeks. Having my taxes prepared for me doesn't really change that.
- bombcar 2y agoIt's all the various deductions you can take, both above and below the line. It is possible to do the same societal effect in other ways, but the US does a done at the federal level via taxes. Go look sometimes at the list of things you can claim in various cases. It's even more explicit when you look at business tax returns and schedules.
- vundercind 2y agoWhy… not? If anything it’s a great opportunity to put personalized suggestions for how to reduce one’s taxes (=change behavior) directly in front of the eyeballs you want to see it. Put it directly on the page where you click “looks good to me” on the automatically-filled-in tax form. “Looks like you’ve never used your one-off solar panel federal tax credit. Click here for information on how to save up to $xx,xxx on next year’s taxes, while also reducing your energy bill!”
- mminer237 2y ago1. It surely costs way more in employee expenses to monitor, correct, and collect such small fines. Plenty of times they'll just let a $200 fine go because it's not worth the effort to collect. 2. Taxes are a means to an end, as is the government. There's no benefit to fining people for clerical mistakes besides encouraging them to not make them. There's no value created by fines. There's no shareholder greedily pocketing the revenue. If they can avoid mistakes for people, that benefits government employees by having to waste less time on stupid stuff, the taxpayers by not having to waste time on stupid stuff and avoiding fines, and the people at large by not having to waste public money on paying people to fix stupid stuff on people's returns.
- spiderice 2y ago1. citation needed 2. In an ideal world, yes. In practice, citation needed.
- lesuorac 2y ago1. Citation is really needed. EITC makes up 36% of all audits and its for people making below 20k. https://www.propublica.org/article/earned-income-tax-credit-irs-audit-working-poor https://www.propublica.org/article/earned-income-tax-credit-...
- kbolino 2y agoThat revenue isn't even a drop in the bucket. The issue is and always has been parasitic jobs: you wouldn't need anywhere near as many IRS employees and tax accountants.
- spiderice 2y agoAgree. I love the idea.
- xp84 2y agoMost returns are not audited, and most screw-ups don't result in fines. The kind of thing that (sometimes) gets big fines is sophisticated shenanigans done by rich people, and completely preparing such a complex return is (imho) way out of scope for the 'tax automation' we are speaking about here, where a basic 1040A or 1040EZ (simple forms which a massive plurality of Americans are eligible to use) can be populated entirely from IRS-known data.
- rqtwteye 2y agoThat's the way it should be. Even the anti-tax people should be for this because it allows people to see what the IRS already knows. That would allow them to request changes as needed. I know people where the IRS had wrong 1099s and it was hard for them to figure out the problem and correct it.
- kindatrue 2y agoAnti-tax people like Grover Norquist and Republicans who have made his pledge have long been concerned that if paying taxes were easy, then the American people might not despise taxes anymore. So making paying taxes painful is part of the plan. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax-fought-free-simple-tax-filing https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax...
- Laaas 2y agoI’d rather have them not know than automatic taxes.