The IRS wants to know what? - Oh hell NO!

[nakedfrog]

The other side of this is that the IRS probably won't be funded by Congress enough to deal with the data load either.

My thoughts exactly.
And it's a complicated approach to a complicated problem. I can see the merit in it, but I can also see why it's upsetting.

 

[brandonbull]

Bruh, Democrats have been voting to get money (lobbyists) out of politics, but another thing both parties agree on is that you are a sheep. *bleat*

LOL. You can't believe that.

 

[dank69]

LOL. You can't believe that.

Why would I "believe" that? It isn't a matter of opinion. Wait, you know voting records are public, right?

 

[Meghan54]

Why would I "believe" that? It isn't a matter of opinion. Wait, you know voting records are public, right?

I think they either forget that part or, what seems more likely, is that cons view their voting history as irrelevant because each vote they make is in isolation, without any connection to previous views, stances, expressed views, etc. Essentially a completely dishonest way to justify their constant hypocrisy.

Well, past history counts for nothing except for criminals…there every infraction is kept track of in excruciating detail.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Cute how this doesn't place responsibility for this action where it belongs.............not on the IRS, but squarely on Joe Biden and his administration.

 

[ivwshane]

Cute how this doesn't place responsibility for this action where it belongs.............not on the IRS, but squarely on Joe Biden and his admistration.

What’s cute is that you highlight opposing viewpoints from people who belong to or support the same party. Unlike your cult like mentality where if your cult leaders are for something you too are for it and anyone not for it isn’t a real republican.

You highlight your own brainwashing daily!

 

[DaaQ]

Torn on this one, is it a guise, to give Congress the backbone to defeat the Infrastructure bill, or is it actual language in the bill and proposed by whom?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Torn on this one, is it a guise, to give Congress the backbone to defeat the Infrastructure bill, or is it actual language in the bill and proposed by whom?

Proposed Legislation Would Require Financial Institutions to Report Data for Accounts with Annual Activity of $600

In May 2021, as part of the American Families Plan, the Biden Administration proposed that financial institutions should report consumer and business account activity exceeding $600 annually. Proponents of the legislation claim that it will give the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") additional...

lawofbanking.com

"In May 2021, as part of the American Families Plan, the Biden Administration proposed that financial institutions should report consumer and business account activity exceeding $600 annually. Proponents of the legislation claim that it will give the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) additional information to assist with audits while the proposed legislation has raised compliance and privacy concerns from critics."

It was proposed by the Biden administration.

 

[Vic]

I don't support this, but at the same time, your bank or credit union is already doing this to you, both for their own purposes and (probably) to sell to 3rd parties who then sell it to everyone else.
That personalized credit card offer you got wasn't based on just your credit score. That instant auto loan approval wasn't just because you're amazing. And that mortgage you got without having to provide a paystub or bank statement? Yeah. That was because they already had those.
Now should the IRS have this data? It might rid out tax cheats, but I'm not comfortable with that. The problem is that the IRS could probably just as easily get the data from one of the many 3rd party providers as all the banks and lenders are already doing.

 

[ivwshane]

If we think about how the IRS currently operates and who they typically go after, the poor, this seems like something that will have an exacerbating affect on an already bad process. What will most likely happen is that the IRS goes after even more small time tax cheats because they will be easier to investigate versus going after the super rich who have very complicated tax returns.

I think a better solution would be to have the IRS have the ability to ask for such information when investigating tax cheats (assuming they don't already have that access).

 

[sportage]

I kinda heard this was needed because of crypto currency where it is hard to track crypto transactions and the like. So a working guy with a basic checking account and reported taxable wage income of $30,000 from oh say from Walmart, yet this same guy has $800,000 a year flowing in and out of his checking account. Well, that seems a little fishy. SO what is he doing? Sex trafficking? Drug trafficking? If it involves crypto currency then apparently that is hard to track.

So I guess it does make some sense and does qualify as a necessity as we enter into higher technology economically i.e. Crypto, and bitcoin, etc etc. I doubt there is any way around congress enacting a law like this, and it just happened to take place on Joe Biden's watch but you can be assured this would and will happen under a Donald Trump republican congress just as easily. So you can't really blame Joe Biden, it is all of them that must go along. Eventually they will all go along simply because they have no other choice.

Crypto currency is only the beginning. As technology advances and different types of currency emerges, enacting a simple law like this will seem nothing compared to what congress will need to do in the future to control and keep track of the economy. Just wait until the IRS needs everyone to have 666 tattooed onto their forehead.

666 actually simply stands for the momentary digits of currency or more commonly know as 999 (one of those idiot prophets got it upside down). SO, to have a series of digits like ones social security number tattooed is not that surprising considering the future of mankind. But more likely some type of implanted device to identify the individual will occur just like ones social security number. I mean like.... you can't say we haven't been warned of this for thousands of years.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I don't support this, but at the same time, your bank or credit union is already doing this to you, both for their own purposes and (probably) to sell to 3rd parties who then sell it to everyone else.
That personalized credit card offer you got wasn't based on just your credit score. That instant auto loan approval wasn't just because you're amazing. And that mortgage you got without having to provide a paystub or bank statement? Yeah. That was because they already had those.
Now should the IRS have this data? It might rid out tax cheats, but I'm not comfortable with that. The problem is that the IRS could probably just as easily get the data from one of the many 3rd party providers as all the banks and lenders are already doing.

If they're already doing this, then why would the banks be complaining about it? Its not like the IRS is telling them they can't sell that info like you're claiming. That argument makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. What mortgage did you get without proving income or proof of assets? Instant auto loan with a shit rate (wow 15%, I bet I couldn't get that anywhere else!)? Oh no, I bet they really vetted me before offering that!

Also, uh, what at the last part? Problem? What? What would be the point, especially since you'd then be saying the opposite "well they'll just get that from your bank and cut out the middle man!" Plus you'd be bitching that they're paying those 3rd parties for that info.

I like how you people seem to think rich people aren't funneling their money through banks, like this wouldn't catch any of that. Not to mention the banks themselves need scrutinized (again, see the Wells Fargo situation).

 

[NWRMidnight]

If they're already doing this, then why would the banks be complaining about it? Its not like the IRS is telling them they can't sell that info like you're claiming. That argument makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. What mortgage did you get without proving income or proof of assets? Instant auto loan with a shit rate (wow 15%, I bet I couldn't get that anywhere else!)? Oh no, I bet they really vetted me before offering that!

Also, uh, what at the last part? Problem? What? What would be the point, especially since you'd then be saying the opposite "well they'll just get that from your bank and cut out the middle man!" Plus you'd be bitching that they're paying those 3rd parties for that info.

I like how you people seem to think rich people aren't funneling their money through banks, like this wouldn't catch any of that. Not to mention the banks themselves need scrutinized (again, see the Wells Fargo situation).

Just a thought, but do you think that the banks are complaining about it because it will reveal their shady practices and fee structure? Think about Everything Wells Fargo has been caught doing over the last couple years, and what they really are doing that they are not being caught at, yet!

 

[Vic]

If they're already doing this, then why would the banks be complaining about it? Its not like the IRS is telling them they can't sell that info like you're claiming. That argument makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. What mortgage did you get without proving income or proof of assets? Instant auto loan with a shit rate (wow 15%, I bet I couldn't get that anywhere else!)? Oh no, I bet they really vetted me before offering that!

Also, uh, what at the last part? Problem? What? What would be the point, especially since you'd then be saying the opposite "well they'll just get that from your bank and cut out the middle man!" Plus you'd be bitching that they're paying those 3rd parties for that info.

I like how you people seem to think rich people aren't funneling their money through banks, like this wouldn't catch any of that. Not to mention the banks themselves need scrutinized (again, see the Wells Fargo situation).

I'm not sure what you're going on about here. Maybe you should read my post again?
I was referring to asset verification services like Plaid and Blend, and income verification services like The Work Number. These allow banks and lenders to verify borrowers' income, asset, and deposit history without requiring any documentation from the borrowers directly. The IRS just wants in on banks are already doing among themselves, so they can use it to catch tax cheats.
And the reason the banks are complaining is precisely because some of their best customers are funneling money through them.

 

[DaaQ]

Proposed Legislation Would Require Financial Institutions to Report Data for Accounts with Annual Activity of $600

In May 2021, as part of the American Families Plan, the Biden Administration proposed that financial institutions should report consumer and business account activity exceeding $600 annually. Proponents of the legislation claim that it will give the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") additional...

lawofbanking.com

"In May 2021, as part of the American Families Plan, the Biden Administration proposed that financial institutions should report consumer and business account activity exceeding $600 annually. Proponents of the legislation claim that it will give the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) additional information to assist with audits while the proposed legislation has raised compliance and privacy concerns from critics."

It was proposed by the Biden administration.

I guess you didn't read what I wrote.

You, I am sure, know that the Executive branch doesn't write the laws. Furthermore the Congress critters, hardly write legislation, they push the lobbyist's written interests.

Your link is from a blogger for a law firm who "specializes" in

Recognized with numerous awards by many prominent publications and ranking agencies, Jeff Novel focuses his practice on complex business litigation.

When clicking the link at the bottom of your link "read more about Jeff Novel" you end up with this.
Which says sorry no content matched your search criteria.

https://www.krcl.com/attorney/?p=1962/

So again, who is really trying to insert this content into the actual bill? Or is it just a guise to get ppl to click the link to autofill the "I oppose this legislation" to tank the entire bill?

Does not pass the smell test.

EDIT: is this the first google that came up for your reply?

 

[shortylickens]

its amusing to me that rich people can figure out ways to avoid paying ALL taxes, but for some fuckin reason we really need to track 600 dollars at a time.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

If we think about how the IRS currently operates and who they typically go after, the poor, this seems like something that will have an exacerbating affect on an already bad process. What will most likely happen is that the IRS goes after even more small time tax cheats because they will be easier to investigate versus going after the super rich who have very complicated tax returns.

I think a better solution would be to have the IRS have the ability to ask for such information when investigating tax cheats (assuming they don't already have that access).

"who they typically go after, the poor" Why would you think the IRS typically go after the poor? There's more money to be had on Skid Row? They can squeeze more blood from homeless people? The IRS has so much time on their hands they like to punish restaraunt w

I guess you didn't read what I wrote.

You, I am sure, know that the Executive branch doesn't write the laws. Furthermore the Congress critters, hardly write legislation, they push the lobbyist's written interests.

Your link is from a blogger for a law firm who "specializes" in

When clicking the link at the bottom of your link "read more about Jeff Novel" you end up with this.
Which says sorry no content matched your search criteria.

https://www.krcl.com/attorney/?p=1962/

So again, who is really trying to insert this content into the actual bill? Or is it just a guise to get ppl to click the link to autofill the "I oppose this legislation" to tank the entire bill?

Does not pass the smell test.

EDIT: is this the first google that came up for your reply?

Which is why it's "proposed by"

Definition of PROPOSE

to form or put forward a plan or intention; to engage in talk or discussion; to make an offer of marriage… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[ivwshane]

"who they typically go after, the poor" Why would you think the IRS typically go after the poor? There's more money to be had on Skid Row? They can squeeze more blood from homeless people? The IRS has so much time on their hands they like to punish restaraunt w

Which is why it's "proposed by"

Definition of PROPOSE

to form or put forward a plan or intention; to engage in talk or discussion; to make an offer of marriage… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Oh look another uninformed post by you, who would have seen that coming?/eye roll.

Well dumb ass traitor, the reason the IRS goes after the poor is because their taxes are very basic and easy to investigate and since the IRS’s funding has been cut for many years they have a limited amount of agents to do audits so they go after the easy stuff. It’s why scam artists like your orange cult leader hasn’t been busted yet.

Taxes 2020: These two groups of taxpayers face the highest audit rates

An IRS audit over taxes is about half as likely as it was five years ago. Even so, two groups face higher rates than others.

www.usatoday.com

I’ll quote the relevant parts for you because your reading comprehension isn’t that great.

Two types of taxpayers are more likely to draw the attention of the IRS: the rich and the poor, according to IRS data of audits by income range.

Poor taxpayers, or those earning less than $25,000 annually, have an audit rate of 0.69% — more than 50% higher than the overall audit rate. It also means low-income taxpayers are more likely to get audited than any other group, except Americans with incomes of more than $500,000.

“Statistically, the people over $10 million still have the highest percentage, but their rate of audit is declining,” DiBenedetto says.

With the reduction in IRS staff, all income groups have seen a decline in their audit rates, although the rich have enjoyed a sharper reduction than the poor. For instance, Americans with annual incomes of more than $10 million have enjoyed a 75% decline in audit rates since 2013, according to the most recent data from the IRS. The audit rate for taxpayers earning less than $25,000 has dipped about 30% during the same period.

Now because you are brain dead; what are there more of, rich tax payers or poor tax payers? If you said “rich”, you’d be wrong again!

 

[HomerJS]

Don't know how I fell about this yet but what is the objection...

The fact govt would get transaction information? They already get it automatically for amounts 10K>
Is it the reporting? Banks already send info automatically to the IRS about my $20 of interest

 

[Kaido]

The more I read about this stuff...

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

The more I read about this stuff...

View attachment 53678

Hot take: The primary purpose of the IRS is to provide a mechanism to arrest people the govt is confident should be arrested, but have no valid reason or burden of proof they can be arrested. The tax system is sufficiently draconic to provide the ability to arrest anyone at any time.

 

[Zorba]

The more I read about this stuff...

View attachment 53678

If only one political party didn't constantly vote against the IRS being allowed to calculate people's taxes for them.

 

[DaaQ]

"who they typically go after, the poor" Why would you think the IRS typically go after the poor? There's more money to be had on Skid Row? They can squeeze more blood from homeless people? The IRS has so much time on their hands they like to punish restaraunt w

Which is why it's "proposed by"

Definition of PROPOSE

to form or put forward a plan or intention; to engage in talk or discussion; to make an offer of marriage… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

I don't need the definition.

Would you rather have the people you elect and or vote for write the legislation or have it outsourced to their highest bidders? Answer that with honesty, try.

EDIT: I am withholding language that would not be productive.

 

[FelixDeCat]

I work in banking. They only way to access someones banking information is through a warrant, which is granted when there is suspicion.

Now the government (Democrats, of course) want to be able to access anyones banking information, spending habits, deposits / withdrawals.....which is all protected under our 4th amendment right:


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. "

With the government snooping in our bank accounts and fishing for a reason to tax you more or perhaps charge you with filing a false tax return or using your habits to drag you in demanding paperwork to audit you.......all because they saw something about what you do with your own damn money.........is outrageous.

If this garbage passes, it will be challenged and overturned by the Supreme Court. They will need a warrant again (in other words, suspicion).

 

[Brainonska511]

Now the government (Democrats, of course) want to be able to access anyones banking information, spending habits, deposits / withdrawals.....which is all protected under our 4th amendment right:

Remind me again about which party has been consistently (read: for decades) appointing judges who hate the 4th amendment? I think it starts with an R and ends with epublicans.