The IRS is developing an online tax filing system

[akugami]

This subject was touched upon in another thread. I commented similarly that other countries just send you a letter with either "You owe X" or "We owe you X", and if you agree, just sign it and return it along with payment if you owe any money. There is also a third option of disputing their calculation, and in that case, that's when you have to fill out forms and stuff and send it to them.

I honestly don't understand why this isn't that way in the US. The government has everything on you already. I work in an industry that has to remit financial documents on our clients to the IRS. And knowing payroll taxes are paid to the IRS in as short of an interval as weekly for certain business types, as well as financial institutes needing to send copies of your finances to the IRS, they have everything they need to accurately calculate taxes for 95% of the individuals out there.

 

[ivwshane]

This subject was touched upon in another thread. I commented similarly that other countries just send you a letter with either "You owe X" or "We owe you X", and if you agree, just sign it and return it along with payment if you owe any money. There is also a third option of disputing their calculation, and in that case, that's when you have to fill out forms and stuff and send it to them.

I honestly don't understand why this isn't that way in the US. The government has everything on you already. I work in an industry that has to remit financial documents on our clients to the IRS. And knowing payroll taxes are paid to the IRS in as short of an interval as weekly for certain business types, as well as financial institutes needing to send copies of your finances to the IRS, they have everything they need to accurately calculate taxes for 95% of the individuals out there.

You don’t understand? I assume that was sarcasm.

I’ll use this opportunity to explain how we got here: imo it started in 1913 when Congress passed a law limiting the total number of house representatives to 435 (technically the law was passed in 1911 and implemented in 1913 and then cemented in 1929 with The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929). How this was/is even constitutional I have no idea as article 1 section 2 clause 3 of the constitution specifically states that:

The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative;

This act slowly eroded people’s representation in the House and has led to the most vocal and the biggest donors getting better representation. It is this that I believe has led to lobbying by “big” lobbyists who have fought hard to protect moneyed interests to the detriment of normal Americans. Add to that the citizens United Supreme Court ruling, newt Gingrich’s gutting of congressional aids and a reliance on donors for campaign finance and we have a system where not only do those who can afford “big” lobbyists get more/better representation but the lobbyists also write the laws and we end up with a system that doesn’t work for the American people, even for stupid efficient shit like automated taxes.

But I could be wrong and I’m open to other theories.

 

[uallas5]

They probably going to fire all those extra IRS workers.

No need to fire, the hiring freeze means none of the normal temp workers for the tax season aren't being hired in the first place.

 

[hal2kilo]

You don’t understand? I assume that was sarcasm.

I’ll use this opportunity to explain how we got here: imo it started in 1913 when Congress passed a law limiting the total number of house representatives to 435 (technically the law was passed in 1911 and implemented in 1913 and then cemented in 1929 with The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929). How this was/is even constitutional I have no idea as article 1 section 2 clause 3 of the constitution specifically states that:



This act slowly eroded people’s representation in the House and has led to the most vocal and the biggest donors getting better representation. It is this that I believe has led to lobbying by “big” lobbyists who have fought hard to protect moneyed interests to the detriment of normal Americans. Add to that the citizens United Supreme Court ruling, newt Gingrich’s gutting of congressional aids and a reliance on donors for campaign finance and we have a system where not only do those who can afford “big” lobbyists get more/better representation but the lobbyists also write the laws and we end up with a system that doesn’t work for the American people, even for stupid efficient shit like automated taxes.

But I could be wrong and I’m open to other theories.

This is a personal pet peeve of mine. We are sorely underrepresented. This has led to the place we are at now. There is not enough granularity of the voices in the country, which leads to conspiracy theorists making shit up about deep states.
There should be at a minimum a thousand representatives in this country by now.

 

[DZero]

They probably going to fire all those extra IRS workers.

Literally every worker in the IRS is now extra... so, 100% automated systems anyone?

 

[brycejones]

This act slowly eroded people’s representation in the House and has led to the most vocal and the biggest donors getting better representation. It is this that I believe has led to lobbying by “big” lobbyists who have fought hard to protect moneyed interests to the detriment of normal Americans. Add to that the citizens United Supreme Court ruling, newt Gingrich’s gutting of congressional aids and a reliance on donors for campaign finance and we have a system where not only do those who can afford “big” lobbyists get more/better representation but the lobbyists also write the laws and we end up with a system that doesn’t work for the American people, even for stupid efficient shit like automated taxes.

But I could be wrong and I’m open to other theories.

Shall not exceed one rep per 30000 merely sets a floor of 30k it can be greater than 30k and still be constitutional.

If we went the level of representation of 1929 and just set as the new standard it would be one rep per 279k or about 1215 reps today. I think that would go a long way to weakening the ability to buy elections and force reps to more effectively represent the people in their districts.

 

[ivwshane]

Shall not exceed one rep per 30000 merely sets a floor of 30k it can be greater than 30k and still be constitutional.

If we went the level of representation of 1929 and just set as the new standard it would be one rep per 279k or about 1215 reps today. I think that would go a long way to weakening the ability to buy elections and force reps to more effectively represent the people in their districts.

Interesting. I never considered it being a reading comprehension fail by me. Thankfully the point still stands; the limit congress set in 1929 is woefully inadequate.

 

[brycejones]

Thankfully the point still stands; the limit congress set in 1929 is woefully inadequate.

I completely agree. Radically increasing the number of districts makes gerrymandering less effective.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I completely agree. Radically increasing the number of districts makes gerrymandering less effective.

Can you imagine if we had one rep per 30k right now? That's nearly a low enough ceiling to be able to legitimately listen to issues from each of your constituents, at least to some extent.

 

[Brainonska511]

Can you imagine if we had one rep per 30k right now? That's nearly a low enough ceiling to be able to legitimately listen to issues from each of your constituents, at least to some extent.

Yes. The house should be expanded, and it should add statewide or some large district proportional representation to help reduce the impact of gerrymandering.

Rewriting the Constitution to make the president subordinate to Congress could also be a good idea, but that might be a separate discussion.

 

[IronWing]

Yes. The house should be expanded, and it should add statewide or some large district proportional representation to help reduce the impact of gerrymandering.

Rewriting the Constitution to make the president subordinate to Congress could also be a good idea, but that might be a separate discussion.

Under our current Constitution, the President is subordinate to the Congress. Decades of craven Congresses unwilling to perform their duties has created a power vacuum cheerfully filled by Presidents.

 

[Jaskalas]

Under our current Constitution, the President is subordinate to the Congress. Decades of craven Congresses unwilling to perform their duties has created a power vacuum cheerfully filled by Presidents.

What are they going to do, impeach him?
There is no power for Congress to defy the President. Not without the opposition having a super majority. They do not. They never do.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I never used a tax preparer or tax accountant in my life until last spring. I was audited in 1983, and -- like only 20% of taxpayers audited -- the government had to send me a $245 check, as opposed to the 80% required to pay the IRS. I was "early" on the use of tax software -- I had originally purchased a tax program which ran on the Timex-Sinclair 1000, regarded by some as a toy. Between PC Taxcut and Turbo-Tax, I and my colleagues settled on the latter.

Then, my dear old Moms passed away in October, 2023, and the eldercare responsibilities and other matters had kept me from researching the tax requirements of her family trust in time to do the taxes and file on my own, as I had always done. To tell the truth, I wasn't counting on Moms to punch her ticket so soon. I figured I could help her make it past 100.

I went to HR Block. We sorted out the problem of an IRA, deciding to cash it out. I was satisfied with the tax-accountant's help. About 4 months later -- last June-- I sold my rental property in Virginia, and went to the tax accountant for an assessment of the capital gains tax I would owe.

I now also have an investment nest-egg in several Merrill-Lynch accounts. So I'll pay the tax accountant again this year. But the work in preparing source documents for the tax accountant is almost the same in number of hours as doing my taxes myself in prior years. Of course, I'm paying for someone else to sort out a real-estate sale and its implications so I don't need to do it myself. I've already seen his draft calculations, and I can understand how its done. But since he did that work for me for free last June, I'll let him do the paperwork and file again for me this year.

You have to ask, if the IRS implements this direct online filing process, if people will still be able to get it right without a tax preparer or accountant. In the old days, I'd purchase the Ernst&Young tax guide for $35, research my tax situation, and move forward with Turbo Tax. But these last years, I've had neither the time nor the energy.

 

[Brainonska511]

Under our current Constitution, the President is subordinate to the Congress. Decades of craven Congresses unwilling to perform their duties has created a power vacuum cheerfully filled by Presidents.

Yes, but I mean make it even more explicit than it already is (instead of a "co-equal branch"). Strip the executive of power - such as agencies no longer being subordinate to the president - and lower the barrier to removal of the president (a 2/3rd majority in the Senate is apparently a bar too high).

 

[BonzaiDuck]

One more point. The GOP has kept the IRS pathetically understaffed. Biden tried to hire more IRS employees, and I was all for it. They need to conduct more audits, and they need to go after the big tax cheats -- like Donald Trump.

Trump said, when asked how much he pays in taxes, "I pay as little as possible." Just short of an admission of guilt, because an honest politician would say "I pay what I owe -- no more, and no less."

I pay what I owe. I ALWAYS paid what I owe -- no more and no less.

 

[IronWing]

Yes, but I mean make it even more explicit than it already is (instead of a "co-equal branch"). Strip the executive of power - such as agencies no longer being subordinate to the president - and lower the barrier to removal of the president (a 2/3rd majority in the Senate is apparently a bar too high).

The idea that the three branches were intended to be co-equal is a modern contrivance. Congress was intended to be the dominant branch.

 

[ivwshane]

What are they going to do, impeach him?
There is no power for Congress to defy the President. Not without the opposition having a super majority. They do not. They never do.

You are validating his point

 

[biostud]

In Danmark your employer sends all info to Skat (IRS) and the bank will send all info regarding loans and investments, and unless you have some very special setup it takes most Danes 5-15 min to log on to Skat and you simply have to say ok, and it is done. If something needs to be changed you just do it in the online form.

 

[Jaskalas]

In Danmark your employer sends all info to Skat (IRS) and the bank will send all info regarding loans and investments, and unless you have some very special setup it takes most Danes 5-15 min to log on to Skat and you simply have to say ok, and it is done. If something needs to be changed you just do it in the online form.

Competency and function?
Not in my country....

 

[hal2kilo]

I never used a tax preparer or tax accountant in my life until last spring. I was audited in 1983, and -- like only 20% of taxpayers audited -- the government had to send me a $245 check, as opposed to the 80% required to pay the IRS. I was "early" on the use of tax software -- I had originally purchased a tax program which ran on the Timex-Sinclair 1000, regarded by some as a toy. Between PC Taxcut and Turbo-Tax, I and my colleagues settled on the latter.

Then, my dear old Moms passed away in October, 2023, and the eldercare responsibilities and other matters had kept me from researching the tax requirements of her family trust in time to do the taxes and file on my own, as I had always done. To tell the truth, I wasn't counting on Moms to punch her ticket so soon. I figured I could help her make it past 100.

I went to HR Block. We sorted out the problem of an IRA, deciding to cash it out. I was satisfied with the tax-accountant's help. About 4 months later -- last June-- I sold my rental property in Virginia, and went to the tax accountant for an assessment of the capital gains tax I would owe.

I now also have an investment nest-egg in several Merrill-Lynch accounts. So I'll pay the tax accountant again this year. But the work in preparing source documents for the tax accountant is almost the same in number of hours as doing my taxes myself in prior years. Of course, I'm paying for someone else to sort out a real-estate sale and its implications so I don't need to do it myself. I've already seen his draft calculations, and I can understand how its done. But since he did that work for me for free last June, I'll let him do the paperwork and file again for me this year.

You have to ask, if the IRS implements this direct online filing process, if people will still be able to get it right without a tax preparer or accountant. In the old days, I'd purchase the Ernst&Young tax guide for $35, research my tax situation, and move forward with Turbo Tax. But these last years, I've had neither the time nor the energy.

That's why I end up just using software. To me 90% of doing your taxes is getting all the statements together. This year, though I took a chunk of of an IRA to put in a new heating and cooling system, first full year of annuity distributions, and a partial year additional annuity distribution, so I might use an accountant this year.