8 ms·

Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes?

93 points by raldi 12y ago

grandalf 12y ago
The best way to simplify tax preparation is to simplify the tax code. The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small, as is the percentage who claim (or are eligible for) any of the more generous deductions. Doing taxes in the US feels like going through a garbage can of bad social program ideas, bureaucratic waste, etc. Then to make matters worse we get expensive wars...
- bonesmoses 12y ago
  The annoying part about all of this is that our taxes are already done. Due to various required forms for businesses, the IRS pretty much knows exactly what you make and how you did it. Banks file forms. Charities file forms. Employers file forms. They know how many kids you have, they know how old they are, they know if you own or rent, and how much your mortgage is and the interest being paid. They have info on your outstanding student loans. Except for the edgiest of edge cases, there really should be no surprises. Even a moderately powerful desktop should be able to precalculate the taxes for everyone in the country in less than a day. Why is filing taxes even a thing anymore? Hell, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if Facebook could do our taxes for us due to all of the info they have. Our tax system is stuck perpetually in 1960, and it's just sad to watch.
  - vonmoltke 12y ago
    As I said in the other posting of this, it is already done at some point. You get most of your tax forms before the IRS does, and you submit your tax return before the IRS processes most of them. They can't verify the information on your 1098s, 1099s, and W2s until the businesses that generated those forms submit their taxes and the IRS processes them.
    - bonesmoses 12y ago
      Yeah, I didn't see that there was a previous post; sneaky. In any case, that just accentuates my point, really. Were this more automated, the businesses wouldn't need to file either. If forms were handled more like an API, i.e. filed when expenses/income happens, it would all be live info. The government bitches about the digital age stealing their income, but they're not even trying to adapt. Nobody anywhere should have to "file" anything. The very act of buying and selling means it's already on file somewhere, and that means a live view is possible. Unless you're using computers from 1960...
    - gerbal 12y ago
      Many if not most businesses file taxes and tax forms on a monthly or quarterly basis. Between 75% and 100% of the relevant data is already in the IRS's hands. Businesses also generally don't wait until the deadline to file.
      - vonmoltke 12y ago
        Only businesses that withhold taxes from employees, and then only on the employees. Principals who are not classified as employees, those who qualify as "family employees", and 1099 contractors do not report anything until the end of the year.
- sbov 12y ago
  Anyone who bought a home in California in the last 10 years probably saves money by itemizing. Or any other high cost state with decently high income tax. It isn't huge but I wouldn't call it extremely small... Any tech worker probably saves money by itemizing in California too. State taxes and salaries are high enough for that.
  - grandalf 12y ago
    When I lived there I saved a tiny percentage by itemizing about half of the years, but then got hit by the AMT so it was all a massive waste of time. I could see that homeowners in CA would benefit by itemizing, however a simplified system could make something like mortgage interest much easier to factor in.
    - maxerickson 12y ago
      The stated purpose of making mortgage interest deductible is to make home ownership more affordable. We should take a careful look at whether it accomplishes that goal. My not well studied understanding is that people price homes based mostly on the monthly payment they will make, so the mortgage interest deduction tends to make them willing to pay more for a given home. Rising prices do not make housing more affordable.
      - sbov 12y ago
        People seem buy houses based upon how much money a lender will give them. Hence the whole housing bubble problem. I'm not sure if lenders factor in deductions or not.
        maxerickson 12y ago
        That has a very strong relationship with the monthly payment that they can manage.
        sbov 12y ago
- JoshTriplett 12y ago
  > The best way to simplify tax preparation is to simplify the tax code. That much I absolutely agree with. A flat tax would require a single tax form the size of a business card. > The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small, as is the percentage who claim (or are eligible for) any of the more generous deductions. Not true at all. Anyone who owns a home itemizes to deduct interest. Anyone who pays enough state taxes itemizes because you can deduct state tax payments on your federal taxes. I do agree that taxes should be drastically simplified, but in the process they would also need to be lowered so that the average person pays the same or less in taxes as they would have with today's high taxes and deductions.
  - Cshelton 12y ago
    Right, many people do put down their home interest, real estate taxes, medical expenses, sales tax on a new car, etc...but even then, most peoples' itemized expenses fall below the standard deduction, especially for married filling joint. So yes, a large percentage of people are just getting the standard deduction.
    - smackfu 12y ago
      Generally around 30-35% of taxpayers itemize. So a minority, but not an insignificant one.
  - taeric 12y ago
    Not necessarily anyone that owns a home deducts. Consider that the median home price is $188,900. If you have a loan of 4% (current rates), that puts the amount of tax you would pay at about 7k for the first year. If you are single, this is just over the standard deduction amount. If married, it is below. So, yes, plenty of people in the "we can afford expensive houses" category are in position to deduct. Majority of the nation? Not so much.
  - jbooth 12y ago
    A progressive tax would require the same size tax form, even a progressive tax that went negative at the lower incomes. Flat isn't the simplification -- elimination of the billion deductions is the simplification.
- Cshelton 12y ago
  Let's be honest, the tax code is used as the means to influence social/economic decisions, without having to impose any laws. Even take gay marriage as an example...many states do not allow it still, however; because the IRS has said you can file married filing joint as a gay couple...as long as you were married in a state that allows so, even if you re a resident of a state in which it's illegal, you're good to go. This by itself pretty much made gay marriage legal nation wide. This is just an example, not that gay marriage should or shouldn't have been made legal, but should it be done in this way... using the tax code instead of ratifying the actual laws. It's a long, dark road we have started down with this method, and something needs to be done about it.
  - eli_gottlieb 12y ago
    Is it really that dark a road to have the IRS pass a simple rule that simplifies tax filing and brings it closer to people's lived experience of keeping their finances as a family unit? They wanted to save themselves some paperwork by allowing people who cohabit as a family unit to file taxes as a family unit. How is that a long, dark road to having the IRS tell everyone how to live?
- thedufer 12y ago
  > The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small I don't know where you're getting that. The only number I can find on it is an unsourced assertion that more than 60% take the standard deduction [1], which still implies that on the order of 1/3 of taxpayers itemize. Hardly "extremely small". [1] http://abcnews.go.com/Business/tax-tip-choose-standard-deduction-itemizing/story?id=28873573 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/tax-tip-choose-standard-deduc...
kylec 12y ago
Yes
- cmdrfred 12y ago
  1
  - frostirosti 12y ago
    ^
    - lfowles 12y ago
      this
japhyr 12y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232
- sobkas 12y ago
  adding ?_r=0 at the end doesn't suddenly change the content of the article...
gfilice 12y ago
I would. But I'm sure YC techno-libertarians will find a reason it's a bad idea.
- mycroft-holmes 12y ago
  Maybe it's just me but I see a lot more liberal leaning comments on here than I do libertarian.
  - sophacles 12y ago
    It seems to be pretty even split IMO. It depends on your personal bias - if you lean in X direction, comments leaning in X direction will seem "reasonable", therefore not trigger your "oh crap this person is a Y" alarm. Since the human brain isn't really wired with an "all is as expected" alarm, it tends to not notice these things.
    - mycroft-holmes 12y ago
      But wouldn't "reasonable" comments trigger an "oh crap this person is like me" alarm?
      - dang 12y ago
        No, for the same reason that pain is more memorable than pleasure.
  - 15155 12y ago
    With the high localization of individuals in SF, NYC: you're probably not wrong.
FreakyT 12y ago
It's absolutely ridiculous that we can't get pre-filled tax forms here in the US. As the article notes, a large part of the reason for that stems from questionable behavior on the part of Intuit, which has been known to not only engage in lobbying [1] but also astroturfing, creating fake "grassroots" campaigns made up of "concerned citizens".[2] (I guess these "concerned citizens" just really enjoy spending time doing paperwork and buying tax software.) [1] http://capitolweekly.net/turbo-tax-maker-intuit-again-is-mired-in-political-turmoil/ http://capitolweekly.net/turbo-tax-maker-intuit-again-is-mir... (link from the article) [2] http://www.propublica.org/article/turbotax-maker-linked-to-grassroots-campaign-against-free-simple-tax-filing http://www.propublica.org/article/turbotax-maker-linked-to-g...
- grandalf 12y ago
  I used TurboTax this year and it's horribly buggy. I ended up having to print and mail two state returns due to TurboTax bugs. Not using it again.
  - eli 12y ago
    It's almost beside the point -- it would be a problem even if TurboTax worked perfectly -- but I agree, I've found the interface quirky enough that it makes me question if it's always doing the math correctly.
    - sbov 12y ago
      Turbotax has a view that lets you see all the forms and how they're filling it out. It's pretty easy to check the math there if you really want to. Depending upon how complicated your taxes are, it can also be easy to do them by hand. I only recently started using turbotax because I was tired of doing it by hand. My taxes are fairly simple though.
      - eli 12y ago
        It's a few years ago, but I had a slightly complex multi-state situation and found that the numbers TurboTax calculated changed based on the order in which I typed them into their interface. That really felt like a bug.
maratd 12y ago
> Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? No. Stop with these stupid stop-gap measures. Income taxes are inherently flawed on so many levels, it's absurd. They're difficult to calculate, easy to cheat on, don't tax swaths of people who don't have a traditional income, cause grief every year and untold resources to calculate, verify, audit, etc. Just stop. A national sales tax, property tax, or frankly, any other option, would be better by far.
- raldi 12y ago
  If you had read the article before posting, you'd have realized that what it's calling for would solve every problem you just raised.
  - maratd 12y ago
    Thanks, but I read the article before it was even posted to HN and it doesn't even come close to resolving anything for anyone who's self-employed or has their own business. It might resolve the problem for some people, in a marginal manner, but overall, it doesn't do much.
    - s73v3r 12y ago
      So because it doesn't help you, even though it would help the vast majority of people, we shouldn't do it.
      - maratd 12y ago
        Is that what I said? I think I said there are better options that would help everyone even more. We should explore those instead. Also, if the government has all the information necessary to do your income taxes properly, then it'll literally take you 5 minutes to fill out the form. You receive the same forms they do, just plug in the numbers. The PDF version will calculate everything for you. The problem is that the vast majority of people have DEDUCTIONS and the government has no idea what those are, so this wouldn't work for them.
golemotron 12y ago
It's funny that that the article lists Intuit as the primary opposition. Every company that does tax preparation and creative loopholing, as well as the people taking advantage of the loopholes is a likely opponent.
Karunamon 12y ago
Groups that call for lower taxes, like Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, say it is a “conflict of interest” for the government to both collect taxes and calculate how much people owe. I think there's some logic in this objection, but then again, I don't see these same complaints levied against the other "post-billed" taxes people deal with, like property, vehicle, and so forth. Really, there's no likeable side in this. The tax prep software people (never buy Intuit!) have a vested interest in keeping the tax code complicated, and decent portions of the government has a vested interest in same. The solution to both problems is a massive simplification of the income tax code - too many people opposed to it for that to ever happen, though.
- grandalf 12y ago
  > it is a “conflict of interest” for the government to both collect taxes and calculate how much people owe Doesn't the government do this anyway? Try claiming that you owe $0 and see how that goes over. The individual taxpayer has already had the money withheld and then submits paperwork after the fact just in case any of the business entities involved failed to submit their required documentation.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    In about 15 years in the labor force, I've never once had the withholding match up perfectly with the taxes owed. Either not enough is withheld or too much. Either way, I'm stuck filing the #($&ing paperwork.
    - raldi 12y ago
      The withholding is calculated by you and your employer, not the IRS.
      - grandalf 12y ago
        So how can I request $0 withholding?
thisone 12y ago
I let HMRC do it, and they've been good enough to even refund me when I was overpaying. So, yeah, I'd let the IRS do it if I moved back.
sophacles 12y ago
My understanding is that they already do. That is, I send in my tax documents, and they check the documentation against what they've already received from others. Then upon comparison, they decide, if things match up, I'm OK. If not, they send me a notice that they think I owe more or less than I think I do. It seems to me an altogether more sensible approach to have them make available the records they have for me, and I can check them, or ask someone to check them, or whatever. I'm tired of the fact that in 2015, I am still waiting until sometime in February to get that one piece of paper about my house mortgage before I can go off and pay someone to do a bunch of mindless redundant (see above) paperwork for me. I'd much rather my financial planner just pull up my information, and file adjustments on my behalf, etc, and go about my business.
- raldi 12y ago
  Everything you say in your comment was already said by the fifth paragraph of the piece.
  - sophacles 12y ago
    I did, I was agreeing. Sorry for annoying you - perhaps I should reread the commenting guidelines in case they added a "don't every restate things from the article" rule that I missed.... Oh it doesn't say that. However your comment is very similar to this guideline: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." Note also - the article doesn't mention any of my opinions or preferences in it. So no, not everything I sated was in the article by the fifth paragraph. edit - the parent originally started with something like: "I suggest you read the article before commenting". I'm leaving the above as is, because I don't think substantially changing a comment after people reply to it is good behavior.
- 15155 12y ago
  > It seems to me an altogether more sensible approach to have them make available the records they have for me http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript If the IRS has any documentation on you, it's available on the web. This includes notices, etc. sent out.
justinsb 12y ago
All the arguments against seem to stretch credulity. The IRS already computes your taxes, they are just not allowed to share that with you (thanks to Intuit's lobbying). Instead, you must repeat the computation, and hope that your computations match what the IRS has. If you don't match, then the IRS will either audit you or send you a proposed correction (along with penalties); i.e. once you fail to match, then the IRS is allowed to show you the correct calculations. This is an incredibly convoluted system.
- vinay427 12y ago
  Yes, it makes no sense at all. It's akin to a business which provides you services asking you to prepare an invoice yourself, then sending you an invoice along with a fine if you missed something. They already know everything relevant about you (except perhaps donations and such, which you can fairly easily tack on) so I don't see why anyone would prefer the current mess that we have to deal with. It doesn't help that state taxes are non-uniform and weirdness often results if you live in one state and work in another, for example.
- nsxwolf 12y ago
  Seems to be how many Federal forms work: Fill out this form accurately, under penalty of perjury. We already know all this information, but reserve the right to prosecute you if your answers don't match ours. Don't forget to sign.
  - SilasX 12y ago
    State too -- I remember when I did a defensive driving course in lieu of paying a ticket, you had to get a certified state copy of your driving record ... that the state already has.
- analog31 12y ago
  Since they compute your taxes for you, they should be required to share their source code. We own it.
  - 12y ago
vesinisa 12y ago
I live in Finland, and I have never filed a tax return. The tax office here has used pre-filled annual forms since the mid 1990s, and since 2006 the pre-filled form is automatically accepted if you take no action. For me, the information has always been 100% correct, and should there be an error you can correct it in an online service using two-factor e-banking login or a government-issued ID card with smartchip for authentication.
- masklinn 12y ago
  AFAIK, modulo the date where this was put in place that's the case in much of Europe.
- rinze 12y ago
  Very similar in Spain. We get our pre-filled forms and you only have to correct what's missing (typically, in my case, the annual rent I paid the landlord) using a secure on-line system. You then submit it on-line too. Done. Takes 30 minutes of your time in total or less.
  - Kurtz79 12y ago
    Yes, it does work quite well. In case of doubts, you can book (again, online, with a digital certificate) an appointment with the local "hacienda" branch on one of the available slots and have a clerk filing it for you. The last time I was there, the clerk had me deduct the rent, when I didn't know I was eligible. I have childhood memories of my parents being immersed in files and files of esoteric looking forms filled with numbers for days on end, and dreaded filing my first taxes. Progress!
- bonesmoses 12y ago
  And this is the way it should be. Our government seems to think computers are operated entirely via witchcraft. I doubt we'll get something like that before 2050.
  - adventured 12y ago
    The problem isn't primarily the government's thinking around computers or technology. It's the lobbying standing in the way. Obama could force Congress' hand via an executive order, to get the ball rolling on tax reform. They would dive in to begin fighting for their interests rather than be left behind. He won't do it because he's just as susceptible to lobbyists as any of the other major politicians in DC.
tvanantwerp 12y ago
This is certainly feasible from a technology standpoint. But so is backing up emails, and the IRS doesn't have a very good track record on that comparatively simple task. I'm no fan of filling out taxes each year, but it's reasonable to exercise skepticism when contemplating large US Government IT projects.
Sharlin 12y ago
The Finnish tax authority switched to prefilled tax forms years ago - I have literally never had to do my taxes unless I have wanted to report some extra deductions. Usually I don't bother. You don't even have to provide receipts for your deductible expenses, just store them for some number of years for the purposes of a potential audit (a mostly hypothetical scenario for a middle class private person.)
dankohn1 12y ago
Could I just call out David Williams, Intuit's Chief Tax Officer, for making statements that range from disingenuous to despicable. I mean, he may coach his kid's little league team and be a wonderful co-worker, but could you imagine having a job that required you to actively lie and make tens of millions of people worse off so that you can make more money? 'And rather than download people’s financial data from government sources — which Mr. Williams said might not be very secure — Intuit prefers to connect its systems to banks, employers and other private companies to obtain taxpayers’ information, he said.' David Williams knows perfectly well that every US taxpayer's tax transcript (showing W-2s, 1099s, etc.) are available online at http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript . Intuit is using security as a cover for their regulatory capture <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture> of the US tax paying system.
yc1010 12y ago
"Why are taxes not easier?" Because Revenue/Tax collection services in many countries operate on the principle of "guilty until proven innocent", they simply view every individual/company as being guilty by default and it is the job of that entity to prove they are not (hence lack of motivation in pre-filling forms as is suggested in article) The same line of thinking is also why the tax code is so complicated and seems to always get more complicated, it becomes almost impossible to become tax compliant for average person/company since there are so many caveats and loopholes and exceptions and so on, tho it also leads to employment for armies of accountants, advisors etc and of course the people working for Revenue/Tax entities themselves. Why would the give us simpler tax codes and procedures when it can put them out of job? Reminds me of CIV quote "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."
marpstar 12y ago
I'm in the Midwest USA, I work a 9-5 day job (W2) and brought in $45k in side income freelancing (1099) last year, with a few grand in expenses. I own a house (home office deduction, mortgage interest, etc) and have two kids (deductions), trade stocks for fun (dividends, capital gains/losses). I paid my brother $5k as a subcontractor on a project. Admittedly, as a sole proprietor my taxes are simpler than many business owners' taxes would be, but their considerably more complicated than the average Joe's. My accountant charged me $135 to handle everything for me. He's been doing business with my family for years, but I'm more than happy to pay him and he seems to do a pretty good job of finding me deductions. Is this uncommon? Are reputable tax accountants that hard to find, or are they really that expensive? I can't think of a reason I'd buy TurboTax or anything else when I can have someone with 30+ years experience taking care of it for me...
- adventured 12y ago
  I would have expected closer to $250 to $300 from a decent accountant for your tax work. $135 is a pretty good price, if we're talking, say, two hours of total billing time. I think it's very easy to find good tax accountants, it just becomes a pricing matter. I think you're getting a great deal and I'd absolutely stick with your accountant.
Cshelton 12y ago
Another issue, before we even talk about letting the IRS filing for you, is the amount of redundant paper work and mailing. Entities are required to provide your W2, or 1099, or whatever have you through the mail. They have to provide several copies as well.They still provide a 'send to the IRS with your return' copy, which is not required, but also redundant again by the amount of people electronic filing. The flow of -> entity printing the documents -> mailing them -> individual then either entering in themselves or having somebody else prepare their taxes -> the information is, for the most part, entered into the computer via plane ole' data entry...by a person -> the return is e-filed to the IRS...who already has an electronic copy of said document...from the Entity that sent it to you... Let's face it, before we even debate about letting the IRS just do it for us...let's at least get them to streamline the process. The IRS single handily keeps the Post Office in business, not to mention the cost and time/labor expense of the tax payers. (at least we get to deduct tax prep cost...if you can actually itemize..) Let's get the basic forms first. The IRS should have an easier method of somebody getting the information about them that was sent in from entities electronically. Set up an API, I'm sure the NSA will let them use their server farms... This alone would probably eliminate the need for 80% of the population to ever have to file. All Capital gains will be in, unless the basis was not submitted to the IRS of course. Now, I don't see a blanket, "The IRS will file your taxes for you" for everyone. Most people who have K1's or Sch C's, etc, will most likely need to make estimated payments. Many of the decisions on what to classify things and best place to 'deduct' them can become an art. But that is not going to apply to most people. I've probably repeated some stuff in the article, I only skimmed it.
gyardley 12y ago
Nope, for a few reasons. First, the IRS has already screwed my taxes up with faulty assumptions - three times over the last decade. Each time it's been a huge pain to correct. I simply don't trust them to get it right. Second, I don't particularly trust them to notify me when there's something in the tax code that works in my favor. They're not going to file your 83b elections for you. They certainly aren't going to tell you about, say, the special rules for the Qualified Small Business Stock that you've held for five years. However, they'll happily take your overpayments if you don't know about these rules yourself. Third, I want everyone to be more aware of the taxes they're paying. You're not going to get informed citizens and intelligent voters if the system's set up to hide the financial consequences of their voting decisions. It'd be better for America and American politics if we moved in the opposite direction, and got rid of automatic tax withholding.
- raldi 12y ago
  How do you feel about this quote from the article? “Imagine if your vehicle registration fee was done the same way,” Mr. Bankman asked in a recent interview. “Imagine if the state said, ‘Go to your car, find your VIN number and then look at this table that has different tax rates to find out how much you owe.’ If they did, people would probably need to hire an expert for that too.”
  - gyardley 12y ago
    Honestly, I'm a little torn. It sounds like a huge pain, and I wouldn't want to do it. Neither would anyone else. On the other hand, huge pains like this are how policy gets changed. If it became more obvious to everyone that this was yet another hidden tax, perhaps there'd be more pressure to eliminate it or make it more rational.
    - raldi 12y ago
      How far would you take it? Would you support a law that mandated that taxes had to be paid in person, at one central office, with a long line in a hot, crowded room, and also they have crying babies and car alarms? That would be an even bigger pain and lead to even more pressure to eliminate taxes.
jrs235 12y ago
[Duplicate] (except this is using the mobile subdomain) Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 Mods, is it possibly to merge these two discussion?
rebootthesystem 12y ago
How about this: NO The IRS needs to go away. It is an organization responsible for the execution and enforcement of the enslaving of the American people. Our tax system has devolved from "let's collectively pay for our expenses" to a system using financial punishment for behavior modification. Freedom my ass. The other problem is that, through attrition, people have become comfortable with taxing just about anything, even farts: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/11/republicans-warn-of-a-federal-tax-on-cow-flatulence/ http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/11/republicans-warn-of-a-fede... Not only do we have to kill off or massively reduce the size and influence of the IRS, we need serious controls on how government spends our money. Government is huge beyond belief and grotesquely inefficient. Of course, the crown jewel of this and what probably brought it home for a lot of people is the ridiculous cost and mess that the Obamacare website became. How should we pay for running the country? A flat tax is one idea. A consumption tax is another. I personally think that no government should take more than 20% of your money. In our case this would include state and federal added up. Government needs to be the most frugal, efficient and effective enterprise in a country, not the most wasteful, inefficient and ineffective organization, which is what we have.
- ctdonath 12y ago
  This is "The United States of America". It was intended as an association of states. Get rid of the creeping direct taxation, and just bill the states. Let each state decide how its share of federal revenue is raised (income tax? sales tax? mineral rights sales? port fees? smart investing? etc). The IRS should be two guys who work a couple days twice a year. When the Congress & President pass a budget, these two take the bottom line revenue needed, divide by number of congressmen, aggregate by state, and send each Governor a bill (overnight courier); next day they confirm the bills were received. On April 16, they open the IRS mailbox, cash the checks for each state; next day they confirm the funds transferred, and inform the President which states did/didn't pay on time (subject to Executive enforcement). Done.
Spoom 12y ago
Lobbying is how laws get made and unmade in the US. If you want laws changed, you had better have a lot of money or the right connections. Your voice might as well be non-existent if it's not accompanied by a campaign contribution.
mgarfias 12y ago
My dad works for the IRS. Got an SMS from him the other day: "I owe 11k!” Guess working for the IRS is no guarantee of getting your withholdings right.
guelo 12y ago
Anti-government ideologues don't want taxes to be easy because they want people to complain and hate the government more. Anti-government ideologues are why we can't have a lot of nice things.
upofadown 12y ago
>No other industrialized country asks its citizens to jump through as many hoops to calculate their taxes as ours. Except for Canada? The same sort of situation exists here. The Canada Revenue Agency enthusiastically supports the private tax preparation companies. It's pretty much the same deal except perhaps a little worse. The private companies will extend you charity here as well, but if you have any amount of income you don't even get online forms to fill out. Presently in Canada the only way for a citizen to file their own taxes is by filling out paper forms. Ironically the easiest way to get the forms is to download them off the internet from the CRA website. Then you fill them out and mail them. The really ridiculous thing is that since the CRA already has all the information it doesn't really matter how you fill out the forms. Just get your deductions and withholding on there and you are good. You can put whatever other gibberish on there you want. I actually file on paper on the principal that I don't want to support a corrupt system. This year I am considering just drawing pictures on the parts that are ignored and putting down a hundred billion jillion dollars as my refund... I strongly suspect that the people made to do the data entry could use a bit of entertainment.

93 points by raldi 12y ago

The best way to simplify tax preparation is to simplify the tax code. The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small, as is the percentage who claim (or are eligible for) any of the more generous deductions. Doing taxes in the US feels like going through a garbage can of bad social program ideas, bureaucratic waste, etc. Then to make matters worse we get expensive wars...

bonesmoses 12y ago
The annoying part about all of this is that our taxes are already done. Due to various required forms for businesses, the IRS pretty much knows exactly what you make and how you did it. Banks file forms. Charities file forms. Employers file forms. They know how many kids you have, they know how old they are, they know if you own or rent, and how much your mortgage is and the interest being paid. They have info on your outstanding student loans. Except for the edgiest of edge cases, there really should be no surprises. Even a moderately powerful desktop should be able to precalculate the taxes for everyone in the country in less than a day. Why is filing taxes even a thing anymore? Hell, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if Facebook could do our taxes for us due to all of the info they have. Our tax system is stuck perpetually in 1960, and it's just sad to watch.
- vonmoltke 12y ago
  As I said in the other posting of this, it is already done at some point. You get most of your tax forms before the IRS does, and you submit your tax return before the IRS processes most of them. They can't verify the information on your 1098s, 1099s, and W2s until the businesses that generated those forms submit their taxes and the IRS processes them.
  - bonesmoses 12y ago
    Yeah, I didn't see that there was a previous post; sneaky. In any case, that just accentuates my point, really. Were this more automated, the businesses wouldn't need to file either. If forms were handled more like an API, i.e. filed when expenses/income happens, it would all be live info. The government bitches about the digital age stealing their income, but they're not even trying to adapt. Nobody anywhere should have to "file" anything. The very act of buying and selling means it's already on file somewhere, and that means a live view is possible. Unless you're using computers from 1960...
  - gerbal 12y ago
    Many if not most businesses file taxes and tax forms on a monthly or quarterly basis. Between 75% and 100% of the relevant data is already in the IRS's hands. Businesses also generally don't wait until the deadline to file.
    - vonmoltke 12y ago
      Only businesses that withhold taxes from employees, and then only on the employees. Principals who are not classified as employees, those who qualify as "family employees", and 1099 contractors do not report anything until the end of the year.
sbov 12y ago
Anyone who bought a home in California in the last 10 years probably saves money by itemizing. Or any other high cost state with decently high income tax. It isn't huge but I wouldn't call it extremely small... Any tech worker probably saves money by itemizing in California too. State taxes and salaries are high enough for that.
- grandalf 12y ago
  When I lived there I saved a tiny percentage by itemizing about half of the years, but then got hit by the AMT so it was all a massive waste of time. I could see that homeowners in CA would benefit by itemizing, however a simplified system could make something like mortgage interest much easier to factor in.
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    The stated purpose of making mortgage interest deductible is to make home ownership more affordable. We should take a careful look at whether it accomplishes that goal. My not well studied understanding is that people price homes based mostly on the monthly payment they will make, so the mortgage interest deduction tends to make them willing to pay more for a given home. Rising prices do not make housing more affordable.
    - sbov 12y ago
      People seem buy houses based upon how much money a lender will give them. Hence the whole housing bubble problem. I'm not sure if lenders factor in deductions or not.
      - maxerickson 12y ago
        That has a very strong relationship with the monthly payment that they can manage.
        sbov 12y ago
JoshTriplett 12y ago
> The best way to simplify tax preparation is to simplify the tax code. That much I absolutely agree with. A flat tax would require a single tax form the size of a business card. > The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small, as is the percentage who claim (or are eligible for) any of the more generous deductions. Not true at all. Anyone who owns a home itemizes to deduct interest. Anyone who pays enough state taxes itemizes because you can deduct state tax payments on your federal taxes. I do agree that taxes should be drastically simplified, but in the process they would also need to be lowered so that the average person pays the same or less in taxes as they would have with today's high taxes and deductions.
- Cshelton 12y ago
  Right, many people do put down their home interest, real estate taxes, medical expenses, sales tax on a new car, etc...but even then, most peoples' itemized expenses fall below the standard deduction, especially for married filling joint. So yes, a large percentage of people are just getting the standard deduction.
  - smackfu 12y ago
    Generally around 30-35% of taxpayers itemize. So a minority, but not an insignificant one.
- taeric 12y ago
  Not necessarily anyone that owns a home deducts. Consider that the median home price is $188,900. If you have a loan of 4% (current rates), that puts the amount of tax you would pay at about 7k for the first year. If you are single, this is just over the standard deduction amount. If married, it is below. So, yes, plenty of people in the "we can afford expensive houses" category are in position to deduct. Majority of the nation? Not so much.
- jbooth 12y ago
  A progressive tax would require the same size tax form, even a progressive tax that went negative at the lower incomes. Flat isn't the simplification -- elimination of the billion deductions is the simplification.
Cshelton 12y ago
Let's be honest, the tax code is used as the means to influence social/economic decisions, without having to impose any laws. Even take gay marriage as an example...many states do not allow it still, however; because the IRS has said you can file married filing joint as a gay couple...as long as you were married in a state that allows so, even if you re a resident of a state in which it's illegal, you're good to go. This by itself pretty much made gay marriage legal nation wide. This is just an example, not that gay marriage should or shouldn't have been made legal, but should it be done in this way... using the tax code instead of ratifying the actual laws. It's a long, dark road we have started down with this method, and something needs to be done about it.
- eli_gottlieb 12y ago
  Is it really that dark a road to have the IRS pass a simple rule that simplifies tax filing and brings it closer to people's lived experience of keeping their finances as a family unit? They wanted to save themselves some paperwork by allowing people who cohabit as a family unit to file taxes as a family unit. How is that a long, dark road to having the IRS tell everyone how to live?
thedufer 12y ago
> The percentage of people who save money by itemizing deductions is extremely small I don't know where you're getting that. The only number I can find on it is an unsourced assertion that more than 60% take the standard deduction [1], which still implies that on the order of 1/3 of taxpayers itemize. Hardly "extremely small". [1] http://abcnews.go.com/Business/tax-tip-choose-standard-deduction-itemizing/story?id=28873573 http://abcnews.go.com/Business/tax-tip-choose-standard-deduc...

kylec 12y ago

Yes

cmdrfred 12y ago
1
- frostirosti 12y ago
  ^
  - lfowles 12y ago
    this

japhyr 12y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232

sobkas 12y ago
adding ?_r=0 at the end doesn't suddenly change the content of the article...

gfilice 12y ago

I would. But I'm sure YC techno-libertarians will find a reason it's a bad idea.

mycroft-holmes 12y ago
Maybe it's just me but I see a lot more liberal leaning comments on here than I do libertarian.
- sophacles 12y ago
  It seems to be pretty even split IMO. It depends on your personal bias - if you lean in X direction, comments leaning in X direction will seem "reasonable", therefore not trigger your "oh crap this person is a Y" alarm. Since the human brain isn't really wired with an "all is as expected" alarm, it tends to not notice these things.
  - mycroft-holmes 12y ago
    But wouldn't "reasonable" comments trigger an "oh crap this person is like me" alarm?
    - dang 12y ago
      No, for the same reason that pain is more memorable than pleasure.
- 15155 12y ago
  With the high localization of individuals in SF, NYC: you're probably not wrong.

FreakyT 12y ago

It's absolutely ridiculous that we can't get pre-filled tax forms here in the US. As the article notes, a large part of the reason for that stems from questionable behavior on the part of Intuit, which has been known to not only engage in lobbying [1] but also astroturfing, creating fake "grassroots" campaigns made up of "concerned citizens".[2] (I guess these "concerned citizens" just really enjoy spending time doing paperwork and buying tax software.) [1] http://capitolweekly.net/turbo-tax-maker-intuit-again-is-mired-in-political-turmoil/ http://capitolweekly.net/turbo-tax-maker-intuit-again-is-mir... (link from the article) [2] http://www.propublica.org/article/turbotax-maker-linked-to-grassroots-campaign-against-free-simple-tax-filing http://www.propublica.org/article/turbotax-maker-linked-to-g...

grandalf 12y ago
I used TurboTax this year and it's horribly buggy. I ended up having to print and mail two state returns due to TurboTax bugs. Not using it again.
- eli 12y ago
  It's almost beside the point -- it would be a problem even if TurboTax worked perfectly -- but I agree, I've found the interface quirky enough that it makes me question if it's always doing the math correctly.
  - sbov 12y ago
    Turbotax has a view that lets you see all the forms and how they're filling it out. It's pretty easy to check the math there if you really want to. Depending upon how complicated your taxes are, it can also be easy to do them by hand. I only recently started using turbotax because I was tired of doing it by hand. My taxes are fairly simple though.
    - eli 12y ago
      It's a few years ago, but I had a slightly complex multi-state situation and found that the numbers TurboTax calculated changed based on the order in which I typed them into their interface. That really felt like a bug.

maratd 12y ago

> Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? No. Stop with these stupid stop-gap measures. Income taxes are inherently flawed on so many levels, it's absurd. They're difficult to calculate, easy to cheat on, don't tax swaths of people who don't have a traditional income, cause grief every year and untold resources to calculate, verify, audit, etc. Just stop. A national sales tax, property tax, or frankly, any other option, would be better by far.

raldi 12y ago
If you had read the article before posting, you'd have realized that what it's calling for would solve every problem you just raised.
- maratd 12y ago
  Thanks, but I read the article before it was even posted to HN and it doesn't even come close to resolving anything for anyone who's self-employed or has their own business. It might resolve the problem for some people, in a marginal manner, but overall, it doesn't do much.
  - s73v3r 12y ago
    So because it doesn't help you, even though it would help the vast majority of people, we shouldn't do it.
    - maratd 12y ago
      Is that what I said? I think I said there are better options that would help everyone even more. We should explore those instead. Also, if the government has all the information necessary to do your income taxes properly, then it'll literally take you 5 minutes to fill out the form. You receive the same forms they do, just plug in the numbers. The PDF version will calculate everything for you. The problem is that the vast majority of people have DEDUCTIONS and the government has no idea what those are, so this wouldn't work for them.

golemotron 12y ago

It's funny that that the article lists Intuit as the primary opposition. Every company that does tax preparation and creative loopholing, as well as the people taking advantage of the loopholes is a likely opponent.

Karunamon 12y ago

Groups that call for lower taxes, like Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, say it is a “conflict of interest” for the government to both collect taxes and calculate how much people owe. I think there's some logic in this objection, but then again, I don't see these same complaints levied against the other "post-billed" taxes people deal with, like property, vehicle, and so forth. Really, there's no likeable side in this. The tax prep software people (never buy Intuit!) have a vested interest in keeping the tax code complicated, and decent portions of the government has a vested interest in same. The solution to both problems is a massive simplification of the income tax code - too many people opposed to it for that to ever happen, though.

grandalf 12y ago
> it is a “conflict of interest” for the government to both collect taxes and calculate how much people owe Doesn't the government do this anyway? Try claiming that you owe $0 and see how that goes over. The individual taxpayer has already had the money withheld and then submits paperwork after the fact just in case any of the business entities involved failed to submit their required documentation.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  In about 15 years in the labor force, I've never once had the withholding match up perfectly with the taxes owed. Either not enough is withheld or too much. Either way, I'm stuck filing the #($&ing paperwork.
  - raldi 12y ago
    The withholding is calculated by you and your employer, not the IRS.
    - grandalf 12y ago
      So how can I request $0 withholding?

thisone 12y ago

I let HMRC do it, and they've been good enough to even refund me when I was overpaying. So, yeah, I'd let the IRS do it if I moved back.

sophacles 12y ago

My understanding is that they already do. That is, I send in my tax documents, and they check the documentation against what they've already received from others. Then upon comparison, they decide, if things match up, I'm OK. If not, they send me a notice that they think I owe more or less than I think I do. It seems to me an altogether more sensible approach to have them make available the records they have for me, and I can check them, or ask someone to check them, or whatever. I'm tired of the fact that in 2015, I am still waiting until sometime in February to get that one piece of paper about my house mortgage before I can go off and pay someone to do a bunch of mindless redundant (see above) paperwork for me. I'd much rather my financial planner just pull up my information, and file adjustments on my behalf, etc, and go about my business.

raldi 12y ago
Everything you say in your comment was already said by the fifth paragraph of the piece.
- sophacles 12y ago
  I did, I was agreeing. Sorry for annoying you - perhaps I should reread the commenting guidelines in case they added a "don't every restate things from the article" rule that I missed.... Oh it doesn't say that. However your comment is very similar to this guideline: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." Note also - the article doesn't mention any of my opinions or preferences in it. So no, not everything I sated was in the article by the fifth paragraph. edit - the parent originally started with something like: "I suggest you read the article before commenting". I'm leaving the above as is, because I don't think substantially changing a comment after people reply to it is good behavior.
15155 12y ago
> It seems to me an altogether more sensible approach to have them make available the records they have for me http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript If the IRS has any documentation on you, it's available on the web. This includes notices, etc. sent out.

justinsb 12y ago

All the arguments against seem to stretch credulity. The IRS already computes your taxes, they are just not allowed to share that with you (thanks to Intuit's lobbying). Instead, you must repeat the computation, and hope that your computations match what the IRS has. If you don't match, then the IRS will either audit you or send you a proposed correction (along with penalties); i.e. once you fail to match, then the IRS is allowed to show you the correct calculations. This is an incredibly convoluted system.

vinay427 12y ago
Yes, it makes no sense at all. It's akin to a business which provides you services asking you to prepare an invoice yourself, then sending you an invoice along with a fine if you missed something. They already know everything relevant about you (except perhaps donations and such, which you can fairly easily tack on) so I don't see why anyone would prefer the current mess that we have to deal with. It doesn't help that state taxes are non-uniform and weirdness often results if you live in one state and work in another, for example.
nsxwolf 12y ago
Seems to be how many Federal forms work: Fill out this form accurately, under penalty of perjury. We already know all this information, but reserve the right to prosecute you if your answers don't match ours. Don't forget to sign.
- SilasX 12y ago
  State too -- I remember when I did a defensive driving course in lieu of paying a ticket, you had to get a certified state copy of your driving record ... that the state already has.
analog31 12y ago
Since they compute your taxes for you, they should be required to share their source code. We own it.
- 12y ago

vesinisa 12y ago

I live in Finland, and I have never filed a tax return. The tax office here has used pre-filled annual forms since the mid 1990s, and since 2006 the pre-filled form is automatically accepted if you take no action. For me, the information has always been 100% correct, and should there be an error you can correct it in an online service using two-factor e-banking login or a government-issued ID card with smartchip for authentication.

masklinn 12y ago
AFAIK, modulo the date where this was put in place that's the case in much of Europe.
rinze 12y ago
Very similar in Spain. We get our pre-filled forms and you only have to correct what's missing (typically, in my case, the annual rent I paid the landlord) using a secure on-line system. You then submit it on-line too. Done. Takes 30 minutes of your time in total or less.
- Kurtz79 12y ago
  Yes, it does work quite well. In case of doubts, you can book (again, online, with a digital certificate) an appointment with the local "hacienda" branch on one of the available slots and have a clerk filing it for you. The last time I was there, the clerk had me deduct the rent, when I didn't know I was eligible. I have childhood memories of my parents being immersed in files and files of esoteric looking forms filled with numbers for days on end, and dreaded filing my first taxes. Progress!
bonesmoses 12y ago
And this is the way it should be. Our government seems to think computers are operated entirely via witchcraft. I doubt we'll get something like that before 2050.
- adventured 12y ago
  The problem isn't primarily the government's thinking around computers or technology. It's the lobbying standing in the way. Obama could force Congress' hand via an executive order, to get the ball rolling on tax reform. They would dive in to begin fighting for their interests rather than be left behind. He won't do it because he's just as susceptible to lobbyists as any of the other major politicians in DC.

tvanantwerp 12y ago

This is certainly feasible from a technology standpoint. But so is backing up emails, and the IRS doesn't have a very good track record on that comparatively simple task. I'm no fan of filling out taxes each year, but it's reasonable to exercise skepticism when contemplating large US Government IT projects.

Sharlin 12y ago

The Finnish tax authority switched to prefilled tax forms years ago - I have literally never had to do my taxes unless I have wanted to report some extra deductions. Usually I don't bother. You don't even have to provide receipts for your deductible expenses, just store them for some number of years for the purposes of a potential audit (a mostly hypothetical scenario for a middle class private person.)

dankohn1 12y ago

Could I just call out David Williams, Intuit's Chief Tax Officer, for making statements that range from disingenuous to despicable. I mean, he may coach his kid's little league team and be a wonderful co-worker, but could you imagine having a job that required you to actively lie and make tens of millions of people worse off so that you can make more money? 'And rather than download people’s financial data from government sources — which Mr. Williams said might not be very secure — Intuit prefers to connect its systems to banks, employers and other private companies to obtain taxpayers’ information, he said.' David Williams knows perfectly well that every US taxpayer's tax transcript (showing W-2s, 1099s, etc.) are available online at http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Get-Transcript . Intuit is using security as a cover for their regulatory capture <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture> of the US tax paying system.

yc1010 12y ago

"Why are taxes not easier?" Because Revenue/Tax collection services in many countries operate on the principle of "guilty until proven innocent", they simply view every individual/company as being guilty by default and it is the job of that entity to prove they are not (hence lack of motivation in pre-filling forms as is suggested in article) The same line of thinking is also why the tax code is so complicated and seems to always get more complicated, it becomes almost impossible to become tax compliant for average person/company since there are so many caveats and loopholes and exceptions and so on, tho it also leads to employment for armies of accountants, advisors etc and of course the people working for Revenue/Tax entities themselves. Why would the give us simpler tax codes and procedures when it can put them out of job? Reminds me of CIV quote "The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy."

marpstar 12y ago

I'm in the Midwest USA, I work a 9-5 day job (W2) and brought in $45k in side income freelancing (1099) last year, with a few grand in expenses. I own a house (home office deduction, mortgage interest, etc) and have two kids (deductions), trade stocks for fun (dividends, capital gains/losses). I paid my brother $5k as a subcontractor on a project. Admittedly, as a sole proprietor my taxes are simpler than many business owners' taxes would be, but their considerably more complicated than the average Joe's. My accountant charged me $135 to handle everything for me. He's been doing business with my family for years, but I'm more than happy to pay him and he seems to do a pretty good job of finding me deductions. Is this uncommon? Are reputable tax accountants that hard to find, or are they really that expensive? I can't think of a reason I'd buy TurboTax or anything else when I can have someone with 30+ years experience taking care of it for me...

adventured 12y ago
I would have expected closer to $250 to $300 from a decent accountant for your tax work. $135 is a pretty good price, if we're talking, say, two hours of total billing time. I think it's very easy to find good tax accountants, it just becomes a pricing matter. I think you're getting a great deal and I'd absolutely stick with your accountant.

Cshelton 12y ago

Another issue, before we even talk about letting the IRS filing for you, is the amount of redundant paper work and mailing. Entities are required to provide your W2, or 1099, or whatever have you through the mail. They have to provide several copies as well.They still provide a 'send to the IRS with your return' copy, which is not required, but also redundant again by the amount of people electronic filing. The flow of -> entity printing the documents -> mailing them -> individual then either entering in themselves or having somebody else prepare their taxes -> the information is, for the most part, entered into the computer via plane ole' data entry...by a person -> the return is e-filed to the IRS...who already has an electronic copy of said document...from the Entity that sent it to you... Let's face it, before we even debate about letting the IRS just do it for us...let's at least get them to streamline the process. The IRS single handily keeps the Post Office in business, not to mention the cost and time/labor expense of the tax payers. (at least we get to deduct tax prep cost...if you can actually itemize..) Let's get the basic forms first. The IRS should have an easier method of somebody getting the information about them that was sent in from entities electronically. Set up an API, I'm sure the NSA will let them use their server farms... This alone would probably eliminate the need for 80% of the population to ever have to file. All Capital gains will be in, unless the basis was not submitted to the IRS of course. Now, I don't see a blanket, "The IRS will file your taxes for you" for everyone. Most people who have K1's or Sch C's, etc, will most likely need to make estimated payments. Many of the decisions on what to classify things and best place to 'deduct' them can become an art. But that is not going to apply to most people. I've probably repeated some stuff in the article, I only skimmed it.

gyardley 12y ago

Nope, for a few reasons. First, the IRS has already screwed my taxes up with faulty assumptions - three times over the last decade. Each time it's been a huge pain to correct. I simply don't trust them to get it right. Second, I don't particularly trust them to notify me when there's something in the tax code that works in my favor. They're not going to file your 83b elections for you. They certainly aren't going to tell you about, say, the special rules for the Qualified Small Business Stock that you've held for five years. However, they'll happily take your overpayments if you don't know about these rules yourself. Third, I want everyone to be more aware of the taxes they're paying. You're not going to get informed citizens and intelligent voters if the system's set up to hide the financial consequences of their voting decisions. It'd be better for America and American politics if we moved in the opposite direction, and got rid of automatic tax withholding.

raldi 12y ago
How do you feel about this quote from the article? “Imagine if your vehicle registration fee was done the same way,” Mr. Bankman asked in a recent interview. “Imagine if the state said, ‘Go to your car, find your VIN number and then look at this table that has different tax rates to find out how much you owe.’ If they did, people would probably need to hire an expert for that too.”
- gyardley 12y ago
  Honestly, I'm a little torn. It sounds like a huge pain, and I wouldn't want to do it. Neither would anyone else. On the other hand, huge pains like this are how policy gets changed. If it became more obvious to everyone that this was yet another hidden tax, perhaps there'd be more pressure to eliminate it or make it more rational.
  - raldi 12y ago
    How far would you take it? Would you support a law that mandated that taxes had to be paid in person, at one central office, with a long line in a hot, crowded room, and also they have crying babies and car alarms? That would be an even bigger pain and lead to even more pressure to eliminate taxes.

jrs235 12y ago

[Duplicate] (except this is using the mobile subdomain) Previous discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 Mods, is it possibly to merge these two discussion?

rebootthesystem 12y ago

How about this: NO The IRS needs to go away. It is an organization responsible for the execution and enforcement of the enslaving of the American people. Our tax system has devolved from "let's collectively pay for our expenses" to a system using financial punishment for behavior modification. Freedom my ass. The other problem is that, through attrition, people have become comfortable with taxing just about anything, even farts: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/11/republicans-warn-of-a-federal-tax-on-cow-flatulence/ http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/11/republicans-warn-of-a-fede... Not only do we have to kill off or massively reduce the size and influence of the IRS, we need serious controls on how government spends our money. Government is huge beyond belief and grotesquely inefficient. Of course, the crown jewel of this and what probably brought it home for a lot of people is the ridiculous cost and mess that the Obamacare website became. How should we pay for running the country? A flat tax is one idea. A consumption tax is another. I personally think that no government should take more than 20% of your money. In our case this would include state and federal added up. Government needs to be the most frugal, efficient and effective enterprise in a country, not the most wasteful, inefficient and ineffective organization, which is what we have.

ctdonath 12y ago
This is "The United States of America". It was intended as an association of states. Get rid of the creeping direct taxation, and just bill the states. Let each state decide how its share of federal revenue is raised (income tax? sales tax? mineral rights sales? port fees? smart investing? etc). The IRS should be two guys who work a couple days twice a year. When the Congress & President pass a budget, these two take the bottom line revenue needed, divide by number of congressmen, aggregate by state, and send each Governor a bill (overnight courier); next day they confirm the bills were received. On April 16, they open the IRS mailbox, cash the checks for each state; next day they confirm the funds transferred, and inform the President which states did/didn't pay on time (subject to Executive enforcement). Done.

Spoom 12y ago

Lobbying is how laws get made and unmade in the US. If you want laws changed, you had better have a lot of money or the right connections. Your voice might as well be non-existent if it's not accompanied by a campaign contribution.

mgarfias 12y ago

My dad works for the IRS. Got an SMS from him the other day: "I owe 11k!” Guess working for the IRS is no guarantee of getting your withholdings right.

guelo 12y ago

Anti-government ideologues don't want taxes to be easy because they want people to complain and hate the government more. Anti-government ideologues are why we can't have a lot of nice things.

upofadown 12y ago

>No other industrialized country asks its citizens to jump through as many hoops to calculate their taxes as ours. Except for Canada? The same sort of situation exists here. The Canada Revenue Agency enthusiastically supports the private tax preparation companies. It's pretty much the same deal except perhaps a little worse. The private companies will extend you charity here as well, but if you have any amount of income you don't even get online forms to fill out. Presently in Canada the only way for a citizen to file their own taxes is by filling out paper forms. Ironically the easiest way to get the forms is to download them off the internet from the CRA website. Then you fill them out and mail them. The really ridiculous thing is that since the CRA already has all the information it doesn't really matter how you fill out the forms. Just get your deductions and withholding on there and you are good. You can put whatever other gibberish on there you want. I actually file on paper on the principal that I don't want to support a corrupt system. This year I am considering just drawing pictures on the parts that are ignored and putting down a hundred billion jillion dollars as my refund... I strongly suspect that the people made to do the data entry could use a bit of entertainment.