[HN Gopher] Call on the IRS to provide libre tax-filing software
___________________________________________________________________
Call on the IRS to provide libre tax-filing software
Author : CoBE10
Score : 219 points
Date : 2023-04-25 19:31 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.fsf.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.fsf.org)
| zdw wrote:
| I feel like the IRS should just make the rules of the tax code in
| a spec that can be implemented by many.
|
| The french already do this as of the 90's, and there was a
| modernization effort detailed here:
| https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3446804.3446850
| yieldcrv wrote:
| That is comprehensive, but I believe I benefit from the current
| system in the US.
|
| There is no one single professional, bureaucrat, or
| representative that understands the simultaneous and
| interrelated parts of the tax code.
|
| And from I can tell, telling people what compliant thing you
| found almost guarantees that it changes.
|
| There is an incentive to let the rest of people operate in
| ignorance and disbelief, while they squabble over "fair share"
| without defining what that is.
| Laaas wrote:
| If it's a website what point is there in making it "FOSS"? Even
| if it weren't, what would happen if you forked their code
| somehow? Would they sue you?
| mattl wrote:
| the GNU AGPL is a license that works with websites and web
| applications that's also open source.
| davidw wrote:
| So you can learn how it works and verify it and maybe even make
| some improvements or find bugs?
| blooalien wrote:
| > "So you can learn how it works and verify it and maybe even
| make some improvements or find bugs?"
|
| That there, yes! Since it benefits _all citizens_ there is
| _no_ reason why it should not be able to continually improve
| and become better so that said benefit grows over time for
| all concerned. If closed source and / or proprietary, those
| things will almost certainly only happen in ways that benefit
| a small select group (the owners of the "IP" / source). If
| open source / FOSS, then _anyone_ who understands code, or
| who can _hire_ someone who understands code can contribute
| improvements and bugfixes that benefit the "greater good".
| This is one of the "superpowers" of FOSS that few seem
| willing or able to grasp.
| Twirrim wrote:
| The IRS wants to. They're not allowed to.
| joshstrange wrote:
| I started an LLC for my side business and the taxes for that were
| way more complicated than they should have been even with me
| paying for software (TaxAct) to help me. In the end I had to go
| to H&R Block because I was worried I was going to mess something
| up and over/under pay (more worried about underpaying). I ended
| up watching someone else enter data into a computer (they messed
| up my address and my phone number so I had to correct some forms)
| and while they were able to e-file some of it, other parts I had
| to send in (paper). It's absurd and my business is tiny and
| relatively simple.
|
| The fact that I couldn't even find the info I needed online for
| /what/ I needed to file (let alone /how/) makes me furious.
| Having to pay ~$400 for someone else to enter basic info feels
| like robbery. I think for next year I can figure it out but I'm
| still wary (TaxAct kept asking for all these forms I didn't have
| and couldn't tell if I needed to "generate" them from my LLC to
| myself or if that was only for partnerships/corps).
|
| I have zero issues with paying taxes, in fact I'm somewhat happy
| to pay them but figuring out what I owe is miserable and fills me
| with anxiety and dread that I might mess up something and get in
| trouble.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Those tax entry people are a scam. Don't ever use them. They're
| a tax on the computer illiterate and do nothing to indemnify
| you. They will get things wrong worse than you will and you
| will have no recourse.
| bluGill wrote:
| You should have an accountant for that side business who will
| do taxes for you as part of services. They already have an
| unlimited account with someone for tax filing that can read
| from their computer so it is very quick. Plus there actually is
| good advice an accountant can give you.
| joshstrange wrote:
| Yeah, this is my other plan for next year. I didn't do it
| this year because I waited too late (I thought I could figure
| it out) and I didn't look forward to being told I was doing
| it all wrong (turns out I don't think I was based on what H&R
| Block said).
| bombcar wrote:
| As long as you do not mess up _intentionally_ the worst case is
| they hit you with a penalty fee, and often not even that. Or
| you miss out a deduction.
|
| Unless you have an actual tax accountant, you're just paying
| some teenager to enter your data into a higher-cost version of
| TurboTax.
|
| https://johntreed.com/products/aggressive-tax-avoidance-for-...
|
| This book is aimed at the real estate investor but may still be
| worth a read.
| ortusdux wrote:
| We just need to go to pre-filled tax forms.
| AdamJacobMuller wrote:
| Why couldn't the FSF just develop such software on their own?
|
| You don't even need to make it complicated and walled-garden with
| eFile, just have the program end up with a printable PDF that you
| mail to the IRS.
|
| Want to incentivize the IRS to open their eFiling system so
| someone like the FSF can eFile or make their own ? Just send
| 10,20,30m paper 1040 forms. That will quickly cause the IRS to
| want alternatives. This will never work for a simple reason.
|
| The problem, as I see it, is that people misunderstand what value
| online eFilers offer their customers.
|
| I could have gone on TurboTax website the day I got my W-2,
| filled out their forms and "get your money in as little as 1
| minute," deposited directly into their bank account where you get
| a virtual debit card. Regardless of your opinions about that
| scheme, many people are very attracted to it and in my
| hypothetical paper filing logjam scenario it might take 6 months
| and legislation to resolve it, nobody wants to wait for their
| refund, not even for the week or two it takes the IRSs normal
| ACH, I want it in 1 minute! This is (part of) the real perceived
| value from companies like TurboTax. Is the FSF going to fund
| advances like this? Of course not.
|
| The other half of the value proposition from them is protection
| against mistakes. Again, regardless of the actual utility of
| these claims, some people are very afraid of making seemingly
| minor errors on their tax return and being faced with a huge tax
| bill with huge fees and fines and penalties. Yes, I know that the
| IRS is actually a semi-reasonable organization and for the
| average filer the chances of having something like this happen is
| effectively nil, but, people are attracted to the security of
| those protection guarantees. Is the FSF going to back their
| software with a similar liability promise?
| jdmichal wrote:
| Up until a couple years ago, I used to do my taxes myself. I
| would just open Excel and start doing one line at a time. The
| value that goes on the form was the left-most column, and cells
| to the right of that would be for additional values and
| calculations. Worksheets and schedules became additional sheets
| within the workbook. Any change to a value would automatically
| propagate through the entire thing.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I sometimes get into a new area that gets ahead of my
| understanding
|
| and then after the CPA and tax counsel does it one year, then
| I know how to do it future years and its back to the excel
| spreadsheets for me
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| Why? because the reality is these are NOT technical issues.
|
| It's easy to recruit developers to make the next best editor.
| It's another to get them to read tax law.
| bluGill wrote:
| I can read tax law, but the problem is you get a month
| between when the IRS release the rules and when you have to
| be done - and correct. The big companies put in a lot of work
| to enter all the rules in the month, and then even more work
| to validate they are correct. That is boring work that needs
| to be done every year. If you get something wrong it is the
| users who find out when the IRS rejects their forms. While it
| isn't a big deal for that to happen to one person, it is
| still annoying, and if there are lots of users who hit the
| same typo that is a lot of annoyed users.
|
| The FSF just doesn't have the ability to do a good job with
| tax software.
| jedberg wrote:
| It's a good thought, but the wrong solution.
|
| The US should do what other civilized countries do and send you a
| tax bill. They can give you a simple form to tell them a few
| things that a lot of people have (donations, change in marital
| status, new dependent, other income like rent, etc) and then you
| can either pay the bill or file the regular return because your
| situation is complicated.
|
| 90% of taxpayers only have income the government already knows
| about, and with some simple data about donations and dependents,
| most people's tax bills can be calculated and billed.
|
| The only people who would need to prep forms would have such
| complicated situations that they need a professional.
| elihu wrote:
| I agree that's the main problem that needs to be fixed, but
| even so some people and most business will still need to file
| taxes because the federal government isn't omniscient. It would
| be better if those people had free software to do do their
| taxes on.
|
| I could imagine a scenario where everyone from your average
| taxpayer to a large corporation uses the same desktop
| application to pay taxes. For most taxpayers, they'd fire it up
| and it downloads all the relevant data from the IRS and asks
| you if it's correct -- done in five minutes. If people need to
| add more information they can enter it.
|
| You could accomplish the same thing with an IRS website, but I
| think it's a little better if there's a desktop app that talks
| to the IRS over a standardized API, as it means users aren't
| locked into using the app if they don't want to, and if the
| source code is available then if someone wants to add features
| or improve the interface, they can. It's also good to have the
| business logic be out in the open in a way that users can
| inspect and change.
|
| (Best case might be an app that can run either as a stand-alone
| desktop application, or as a web app. The IRS could run their
| own instance for users who just want a website with the default
| experience and don't want to install software. States could
| also run their own instances with whatever extensions they need
| so you can figure out state taxes at the same time.)
| Gunax wrote:
| On the contrary, I think this is the only solution that will
| actually occur.
|
| The reality is America is incredibly difficulty to change.
| There are just too many people and groups with interest.
|
| And I don't even mean this in the conspiratorial way--it's just
| that simple taxes are in opposition to some of our other goals.
|
| For instance, we want simple taxes. But we also want to use the
| tax structure to incentive certain actions (having kids, buying
| an electric car, or whatever). Every exception is another check
| everyone else has to do. This is why every year you need to
| select whether you were a member of the railroad workers union,
| or invested in tribal lands, etc.
|
| I just am very pessimistic about America's ability to adjust.
| America is legacy software.
|
| By analogy, there's no way we could have reformed the taxi
| system. It was only by flanking the issue that anything
| changed.
| DANmode wrote:
| > we also want to use the tax structure to incentive certain
| actions
|
| I may have missed that vote.
| xoa wrote:
| This so much. Taxes every year consist of me telling the IRS
| what it 100% already knows and doing the math it does to check
| my filing anyway. All the income related forms I get are copied
| straight to them too. It's such a waste of time and stress,
| just send me the bill, with my status and what they think I
| made. If I think something looks terribly wrong fine I can deal
| with that. If not I pay it and I'm done. Same with states.
| duped wrote:
| Absolutely, this misses the forest for the trees and mistakes a
| political problem as an economic or technical one.
|
| The problem isn't a lack of FOSS tax prep software. The issue
| is the need for it, and the cause is Intuit bribing politicians
| to keep it that way.
| dudeinjapan wrote:
| Let's not blame the Inuits.
| jksmith wrote:
| All this above. Dystopia for you: Track digital exchange or
| currency at the Fed level, but they still mandate you file a
| tax return. It's a control mechanism. That and some taxco
| maybe has a nice condo in the Bahamas for use by friends.
| It's a whole accounting industry, not just apps. Have to
| start somewhere I guess, but it won't matter.
| freitzkriesler2 wrote:
| What's stopping someone from making an app that creates a
| printable 1040 that you can mail to the IRS? You don't have
| to digitally submit a tax return.
| mminer237 wrote:
| There are multiple of those. The IRS even provides such
| itself: https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/free-file-
| fillable-form...
|
| FreeFileUSA lets you e-file your federal taxes for free
| even.
|
| The problem is that most people don't know about such
| things and don't feel comfortable filling in the needed
| data anyway.
|
| Plus most states have the same requirements and make filing
| even harder.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Taxes were complicated before Intuit existed. What was the
| cause of that? Blaming Intuit really seems to oversimplify
| the situation.
|
| In reality there are many smaller variables but I think the
| single biggest factor is how regulation works. You hardly
| ever see all the rules thrown out in favor of a new system.
| It takes more buy in than you will ever get. Instead you can
| just add or remove a few things at a time. Over time cruft
| accumulates.
| jedberg wrote:
| Taxes were complicated worldwide before Intuit came along,
| but then computers came along and made it possible to
| simplify. In the other countries they embraced computers
| and made it easy for the citizens. In the US Intuit
| embraced computers and then lobbied to keep it complicated
| for their profits.
| zamalek wrote:
| They also ran a very successful propaganda campaign, it
| doesn't take long for a "I don't trust the government to
| do my taxes" proponent to appear when discussing this
| (despite the fact that they don't have to).
| kelnos wrote:
| > _Taxes were complicated before Intuit existed. [...]
| Blaming Intuit really seems to oversimplify the situation._
|
| Having a complicated tax code certainly makes things
| difficult in general, but has very little to do with the
| issue at hand.
|
| The IRS could send you an email in March every year, where
| you click through to their tax portal. It would show you a
| list of all the income and deductions and other
| miscellaneous things they know about. If you have extras,
| or if any data is incorrect, you can click around and add
| and change things. It might also start with a short
| questionnaire to ask if any tax-relevant things have
| changed about your life (change in dependents, change in
| marital status, etc.).
|
| For the vast majority of US taxpayers, they won't have to
| change a thing, and it would take them minutes to finish
| up.
|
| Yes, there are a lot of rules in the US tax code that can
| make things complicated. But -- critically -- these things
| _do not apply_ for the vast majority of taxpayers. For
| those for whom it does, yes, they will have more work. But
| it 's still going to be less work than the current regime,
| and none of this precludes having a CPA take care of it for
| you if you'd prefer that.
|
| I suspect even many of us tech-job types wouldn't have much
| extra to do. The main thing we'd have to fill in ourselves
| would be cost basis adjustments for RSU vests. (But really,
| law should be changed so that brokers are required to
| report that info to the IRS as well; so dumb that it isn't
| the case.) The IRS could easily keep track of capital loss
| carryover, AMT credits, etc., over many years if necessary.
|
| It feels like the argument is often "this won't 100% work
| for 20% of taxpayers, so we should make the other 80%
| suffer... and make the 20% still do more work than they'd
| otherwise have to do".
|
| There are still really just two main reasons we have to do
| our own taxes:
|
| 1. Companies like Intuit who lobby to make it illegal for
| the IRS to do it for us.
|
| 2. Buttholes like Grover Norquist who actively convince
| people that it's necessary to feel the pain of filing
| taxes, lest the government slip in new taxes that we don't
| notice ( _largest eye-roll in history_ ).
| ghaff wrote:
| >The main thing we'd have to fill in ourselves would be
| cost basis adjustments for RSU vests.
|
| The cost basis thing used to be a nightmare. At one point
| with some old stock that got converted to another
| company's stock with an acquisition, I just threw up my
| hands and put in a plausible number. (It wasn't a huge
| amount of money in the scheme of things.) But these days,
| the only time I've had to manually provide a cost basis
| to my accountant was when I was donating some stock.
| not2b wrote:
| Yes, for a taxpayer who has a salary, a bank account and
| a brokerage account, and no other income than salary,
| interest, and investments, the IRS already has every
| number needed to compute the tax bill. With the last
| round of tax changes, very few people will have enough
| deductions (charitable contributions, local taxes, etc.)
| to make itemized deductions worthwhile. So the IRS could
| just do what many other countries do, which is to present
| the taxpayer with a filled-out form, which the taxpayer
| can either just accept, or amend (perhaps add deductions
| or unreported income).
| Kye wrote:
| They lobby to keep the situation as it is against numerous
| attempts to improve things.
|
| https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-
| turbotax-20-year-f...
|
| https://www.propublica.org/search?qss=intuit
| nonethewiser wrote:
| That says they lobbied to prevent free filing. There is
| free filing, so I guess they weren't effective And don't
| have some stranglehold on tax law.
| wwweston wrote:
| > You hardly ever see all the rules thrown out in favor of
| a new system. It takes more buy in than you will ever get.
|
| Probably for the same reason that it's rare to see entire
| codebases scrapped and rebuilt from scratch (and that when
| you do, it's often the case that you end up with something
| that isn't an improvement). The judgment behind it has a
| lot in common with "look at all this terrible complicated
| code, this could be way simpler, let's just rewrite it."
| Which also sometimes is hard to get buy-in on, and thank
| goodness the industry has learned some Chesteron's Fence
| lessons.
|
| The tax code (like other forms of regulation) does stuff,
| it's a tool for policy as well as revenue, it creates and
| reshapes incentives. Criticisms of specific things it does
| or how it does them make sense. Vague criticisms like
| "cruft" or "complicated" should be for people who don't
| have a technical or systems mindset.
|
| And that's before we get to other points. Like the facts
| that for most people with some W2 income and a few
| investments, taxes _aren 't_ complicated, the system for
| filing them is, and the reasons for this are some
| specialized interests combined with partisans who suppose
| an advantage to making filing aggravating. And where taxes
| do require professional involvement, that has as much to do
| with the complexity inherent in situational judgments as
| proliferation of rules.
| CivBase wrote:
| The problem isn't that taxes are complicated. For most
| people, they're really not complicated. They're simple
| enough for most of us that - like OP suggested - the IRS
| really could just send you a bill calculated from the
| information they already have and you could just pay what
| you owe (or deposit what you receive).
|
| The minority of tax payers who have more complicated taxes
| would still have to file returns like they do now. But the
| overwhelming majority of those people are probably already
| going through professionals or using commercial software
| (like Intuit's) - not looking for FOSS tax software to do
| it themselves.
| ghaff wrote:
| For the typical person who has a W2 and maybe one of two
| 1099s, tax filing is really straightforward although the
| IRS could absolutely make it even more straightforward.
| And, as you say, most people with moderately complicated
| taxes where they can't just straightforwardly fill in
| some obvious boxes are arguably better off using a
| professional.
| belthesar wrote:
| I'm glad you're calling out that the US in general has had
| a complicated tax situation well before the Intuits and the
| H&R Blocks of the world came into being. It's easy to look
| to a singular demon when the problem is complex and
| generational.
|
| However, the callouts for tax return preparation companies
| lobbying against simplification are still valid. It's also
| fair to advocate for changing the allocation of energy by
| the US's IRS from auditing underprivileged folks and
| slapping them with fines to assisting them in validating
| that they've met their tax obligations.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| But how do you simplify it? You get rid of things. The
| complexity comes from these different carved out
| exceptions. This will ultimately hurt some tax payers and
| they will fight it.
| iudqnolq wrote:
| That's not what we're suggesting. You get an email from
| the IRS that looks like so. The best option for you would
| depend on your circumstances, but you'd be strictly
| better off having the choice.
|
| Hello nonethewiser,
|
| We have filled proposed tax returns for you. You may
| either
|
| [Review and pay proposed return]
|
| [Submit your own return]
| jjoonathan wrote:
| Other countries have this figured out, but I guess it just
| must be impossible in the USA. Thank God we have Intuit to
| help us!
|
| No, Intuit's hands are not clean in this, and while
| corporate taxes might be intrinsically complicated (the
| information does have to enter the system somewhere),
| personal taxes are largely not.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| How would you simplify it? The complexity tends to come
| from rules that create opportunities not to pay taxes. I
| think any simplification will hurt some tax payers who
| will fight it out of their own self interest.
| deathanatos wrote:
| > _Taxes were complicated before Intuit existed. What was
| the cause of that?_
|
| Well, people using the tax code to encourage certain moral
| and political views. Whether that's good or not depends on
| your political stance, and probably even various between
| particular deductions/credits.
|
| But I don't think it's relevant. The tax code is however
| complicated it is. The point is that the government already
| knows, more or less, all the right answers. Put that
| information, in bill form, down, and bill the taxpayer; the
| commenter above you is also attempting allow for
| adjustments (such as for things the government might not
| know about, perhaps like a donation) to permit for the
| cases the government already know about. The question still
| stands: why can that not be done, thus freeing most people
| (whose tax situations are simple) from the burden of
| needing to file using today's system?
|
| To your points about the rules, I think even in a scheme
| where the government sends a bill, the rules can quite
| easily change. Most of the rules today fall into either
| deductions or credits, or how we account for various
| sources of income. (E.g., normal income vs. capital gains.)
| That much could stay the same, and then the government can
| adjust its own accounting.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| You point to the nature of the complications. The
| complicated bits are opportunities to pay less on taxes.
| As such, simplifications will always hurt people. It's
| not evil Intuit trying to inject complexity into the tax
| system. It's lots of taxpayers (individuals and orgs) and
| acting out of their own self interest.
|
| Taxes are just controversial by nature. Every change that
| raises taxes is going to be opposed by those people who
| will be taxed more, and when taxes are lowered it will be
| opposed by a portion of the people that the reduction
| doesn't apply to.
| tialaramex wrote:
| We're talking about US taxes right? The US tax code has
| lots of places where the complexity is purely
| happenstance. I think Vox did a piece recently about some
| of the silliness that's not some loophole helping a few
| tax payers it's just what happens when a sprawling tax
| code is appealing to special interests.
| function_seven wrote:
| > _It's not evil Intuit trying to inject complexity into
| the tax system._
|
| No, they instead lobby to make it illegal for the IRS to
| offer the tools that would mitigate the complexity.
|
| Intuit didn't invent tax code complexity, but they sure
| fight like hell to own the results of that complexity.
|
| https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6483065-Intuit-
| board...
| iudqnolq wrote:
| The average American uses (or should use) the standard
| deduction. Those using complicated tricks to pay less on
| taxes are a minority.
|
| > Taxes are just controversial by nature
|
| Yes, but that doesn't mean that anything tax related
| automatically has no solution, you have to look at the
| specifics. And in this specific case things could be a
| bit better for many people.
| thfuran wrote:
| >The complicated bits are opportunities to pay less on
| taxes.
|
| Or requirements to pay more.
| bluGill wrote:
| For the majority of people taxes were not complex before
| Intuit. I did my taxes by hand before they were a company.
| Trump's tax reformed made taxes a lot easier for most
| people, and before that Regan's tax reforms made taxes a
| lot easier.
|
| At one time the rich in theory paid 90% tax rate, but via
| deductions that needed an accountant could get their real
| rate down to the mid 30%. Now most deductions are gone and
| their real rates are still in the mid 30% range. The rich
| needing accountants spread the idea that taxes were hard
| for most people when in fact with basic 4th grade math they
| were easy for most people.
|
| I do use software. while taxes by hand are not hard, the
| computer doesn't forget to copy line 13b from form 1234 to
| line 36d of form 9876 - as I did one time. The IRS caught
| that mistake, but then I had to redo my state taxes, and
| the whole thing was a pain - all caused by forgetting
| something a computer does automatically.
|
| Tax software makes it seem hard by adding a lot of waits
| while they calculate. In truth any 8 bit computer could do
| your taxes in less than a second once the numbers are
| entered - the rest is just artificial waits to make it seem
| like it is more complex than it is. That less than a second
| includes calculating all scenarios to see if you can save
| money with some deduction or not.
|
| The above applies to 90%. There are situations where you
| need help - but if you don't already have an accountant to
| help you with your books that isn't you, and taxes are
| easy.
| fafqg wrote:
| A tax bill that includes everything you have to pay but no
| deductions. So you have to pay for tax software or someone to
| do your taxes anyway or you get ripped off by the government. I
| would rather get ripped off by a corporation.
| jedberg wrote:
| 70% of taxpayers just take the standard deduction. So they're
| already covered.
|
| Most of the rest take some pretty standard deductions so with
| a simple form would be able to input those and have their
| bill updated.
| Twirrim wrote:
| There are a number of influential libertarian & fiscal
| conservative lobbying groups that have significant sway, that
| argue that doing so means people become unaware of how they're
| being taxed, and for how much. Signing the form becomes a tick
| box exercise.
|
| I can see and empathise with their concerns, but... eh. Just
| let me have my form thank you.
|
| I really miss the UK's PAYE system.
| cal5k wrote:
| A better solution would be to scrap income & capital gains tax
| altogether, thus sparing 90%+ of taxpayers from having to file
| at all.
|
| Shifting to a higher consumption tax would put the onus on
| businesses that sell things, not the average person.
|
| It would also greatly reduce the need for governments to
| surveil citizens to make sure they're not evading taxes.
| byy wrote:
| [dead]
| [deleted]
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _60M Americans have taxes so simple the IRS could do them
| automatically_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35476709 -
| April 2023 (277 comments)
|
| _Lobbyists begin chipping away at Biden's $80B IRS overhaul_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35381701 - March 2023 (214
| comments)
|
| _Intuit pouring money into lobbying amid push for free
| government-run tax filing_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34840039 - Feb 2023 (178
| comments)
|
| _IRS builds task force to explore running its own free e-file
| system_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34764952 - Feb
| 2023 (199 comments)
|
| _IRS Free File: Do Your Taxes for Free_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34462122 - Jan 2023 (247
| comments)
|
| _IRS will look into setting up a free e-filing system_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32753099 - Sept 2022 (408
| comments)
|
| _The IRS could be on the verge of changing the way Americans
| file their taxes_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32550841
| - Aug 2022 (17 comments)
|
| _IRS will study free tax filing options_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32502321 - Aug 2022 (25
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax's fight against free tax filing_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31072202 - April 2022 (394
| comments)
|
| _Filing taxes could be free & simple. H&R Block & Intuit lobby
| against it (2017)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30856968 - March 2022 (114
| comments)
|
| _FTC sues Intuit for its deceptive TurboTax "free" filing
| campaign_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30846071 - March
| 2022 (587 comments)
|
| _Ask HN: How does TurboTax get away with dark patterns?_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30409523 - Feb 2022 (122
| comments)
|
| _Why do Americans have to pay much to file their tax returns
| when the IRS knows?_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30267361 - Feb 2022 (22
| comments)
|
| _Filing Taxes Could Be Free and Simple. But H &R Block and
| Intuit Lobby Against It (2017)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30185484 - Feb 2022 (18
| comments)
|
| _California tried to save the nation from tax filing, then
| Intuit stepped in_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28944200 - Oct 2021 (283
| comments)
|
| _The IRS has a big opportunity to fix the way Americans file
| taxes_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28177289 - Aug 2021
| (12 comments)
|
| _UsTaxes - open-source tax filing web application_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27998452 - July 2021 (53
| comments)
|
| _Good Riddance, TurboTax. Americans Need a Real 'Free File'
| Program_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27902380 - July
| 2021 (248 comments)
|
| _Intuit will no longer be a part of IRS Free File program_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27865625 - July 2021 (140
| comments)
|
| _Killing TurboTax_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26330584 - March 2021 (662
| comments)
|
| _Show HN: ustaxes.org - open-source tax filing webapp_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26138446 - Feb 2021 (219
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax Tricked You into Paying to File Your Taxes (2019)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26102695 - Feb 2021 (306
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax's 20-Year Fight to Stop Americans from Filing Taxes
| for Free (2019)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26060414
| - Feb 2021 (199 comments)
|
| _FTC Is Investigating Intuit over TurboTax Practices_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24409093 - Sept 2020 (194
| comments)
|
| _IRS stops firms like TurboTax from hiding free tax-filing
| products in searches_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21948935 - Jan 2020 (25
| comments)
|
| _IRS Reforms Free File Program, Drops Agreement Not to Compete
| with TurboTax_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21923220 -
| Dec 2019 (448 comments)
|
| _IRS Tried to Hide Emails That Show Tax Industry Influence over
| Free File Program_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21393758 - Oct 2019 (188
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax's 20-Year Fight to Stop Americans from Filing Taxes
| for Free_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21281411 - Oct
| 2019 (447 comments)
|
| _TurboTax to charge more lower-income customers_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20461169 - July 2019 (81
| comments)
|
| _Congress Scraps Provision to Restrict IRS from Competing with
| TurboTax_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20119916 - June
| 2019 (18 comments)
|
| _TurboTax Uses a "Military Discount" to Trick Troops into Paying
| to File Taxes_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19994118 -
| May 2019 (42 comments)
|
| _Listen to TurboTax Lie to Get Out of Refunding Overcharged
| Customers_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19870242 - May
| 2019 (44 comments)
|
| _TurboTax and H &R Block Saw Free Tax Filing as a Threat_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19810981 - May 2019 (143
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax Hides Its Free File Page from Search Engines_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19758126 - April 2019 (262
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax Uses Dark Patterns to Trick You into Paying to File
| Your Taxes_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19718284 -
| April 2019 (274 comments)
|
| _Congress Is About to Ban the US Government from Offering Free
| Online Tax Filing_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19613725 - April 2019 (696
| comments)
|
| _Filing Your Taxes Is an Expensive Time Sink. That's Not an
| Accident_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19572917 - April
| 2019 (155 comments)
|
| _How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing
| (2013)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19392673 - March
| 2019 (253 comments)
|
| _H &R Block and Intuit Lobby Against Free and Simple Tax Filing
| (2017)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18956883 - Jan
| 2019 (190 comments)
|
| _Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes? (2015)_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17751383 - Aug 2018 (424
| comments)
|
| _IRS electronic filing system breaks down hours before midnight
| deadline_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16860086 - April
| 2018 (97 comments)
|
| _Why I 'm boycotting TurboTax this year_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16844458 - April 2018 (23
| comments)
|
| _H &R Block and Intuit Lobbying Against Simpler Tax Filing
| (2017)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16841449 - April
| 2018 (232 comments)
|
| _Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax
| Filing Process_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13990391 -
| March 2017 (386 comments)
|
| _H &R Block and Intuit Are Lobbying Against Making Tax Filling
| Free and Easy_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13922482 -
| March 2017 (234 comments)
|
| _How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing
| (2013)_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13853150 - March
| 2017 (439 comments)
|
| _US Senator Warren Introduces Bill to Simplify Tax Filing_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11492025 - April 2016 (155
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax Takes Aim at Smaller Rival in Fight for Filers_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11150694 - Feb 2016 (87
| comments)
|
| _Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes?_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9381437 - April 2015 (150
| comments)
|
| _Would You Let the I.R.S. Prepare Your Taxes?_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9380232 - April 2015 (124
| comments)
|
| _TurboTax Maker Intuit Funnels Millions to Lobby Against Easier
| Tax Returns_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7595440 -
| April 2014 (182 comments)
|
| _Filing taxes: It shouldn 't be so hard_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5488084 - April 2013 (56
| comments)
|
| _How the Maker of TurboTax Fought Free, Simple Tax Filing_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5443203 - March 2013 (330
| comments)
|
| _Intuit lobbies against California 's free tax filing service_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1569169 - Aug 2010 (29
| comments)
| kriro wrote:
| I applaud this. The old official German tax software
| (ElsterFormular) for doing my taxes was the only reason I kept
| Windows around on some machine. There used to be a free
| equivalent with less functionality (Geierlein) developed by a
| nice person, however the option to communicate with the
| government backend was shut down for free software (I'm
| simplifying a lot here, the whole storry is interesting and
| there's also the ORacle Java required issue etc. etc.). Germany
| has since moved to a web based solution (Elster Online) so I can
| now happily run Linux everywhere. Personally I feel like all
| government software should be libre because it's paid for by the
| people so I don't see why it shouldn't be open to the people. At
| the very least they should provide a clear and freely usable API
| to communicate with servers for transmitting data.
|
| Humerous sidenote I always thought it was kind of funny that the
| software is called Elster (magpie). At least someone in the
| government had a sense of humor.
| munk-a wrote:
| This seems like a surprisingly fix easy for politicians to
| swallow compared to the real issue (Intuit and H&R block
| constantly lobbying for a complex tax code). If a free
| alternative is available we can slowly suffocate those two bad
| actors until they lose the money to lobby with and then implement
| a real solution.
| snthd wrote:
| Can US taxpayers not just do a freedom of information request to
| to the IRS, and base their tax return on that?
|
| https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/irs-freedom-of-inform...
| kelnos wrote:
| FOIA requests take time, though. Financial institutions usually
| haven't sent in all their data on everyone until February or
| March; you wouldn't get your information back in time to file
| your tax return in April.
| opan wrote:
| This year I found ustaxes.org (AGPL) which could handle federal
| taxes. For state I used the same method I've heard Stallman uses.
| Downloaded the form(s) I needed as PDFs (weirdly hard to find,
| after getting lost on the official site, I found them on another
| site that just collects and hosts tax forms) and modified them
| with xournalpp. The remaining gotcha is that I didn't know how to
| e-file in a libre way, so I had to print off the documents to
| mail them. I would very much like to see things improve more in
| this space. I believe I had very simple taxes, and I didn't much
| care about how much I got back. I would gladly give up the
| potential return to not have to do this at all.
| junar wrote:
| The IRS has to approve any e-file provider or software. So you
| can generally assume that any unofficial tools will be unable
| to e-file.
| kelnos wrote:
| That's so weird, when e-file could also just be "Go to
| irs.gov and upload your PDF". (Yes, I know it's not quite
| that simple, but... c'mon.)
| dmckeon wrote:
| What would it cost the US government to buy out the major tax
| prep providers? The IRS could then provide free tax estimates to
| a large percentage of filers, and hire many former tax prep
| workers as IRS agents.
| kelnos wrote:
| I think a broader issue is that, after the purchase, those
| decently-well-paid Intuit employees would now be paid according
| to federal government salary bands, and many of them -- likely
| many who are critical to the operation of the company -- would
| quit and find a better-paying job.
| bombcar wrote:
| Intuit is like $125 billion and has many other divisions
| besides TurboTax.
|
| People just don't care enough (a state like California could
| make it illegal to charge for e-filing, for example, but they
| don't).
| jkaplowitz wrote:
| The government wouldn't have to buy the rest of Intuit. They
| could just buy the parts necessary for filing US federal
| income tax returns. Intuit can't actually say no if the
| government is willing to use the eminent domain power. Yes,
| just compensation would constitutionally have to be paid, but
| it would be just compensation for what the government
| purchased, not for all of Intuit. If somehow this isn't
| upheld in court (though I think it would be), they could pre-
| arrange one or more buyers for the rest of Intuit and use the
| money to be paid by the other buyers for those divisions to
| fund what would initially be a purchase of all of Intuit.
|
| To save even more money, I wonder if they could even take a
| page from real estate law where easements for public benefit
| are sometimes purchased either through the free market or via
| eminent domain. Under this theory, they wouldn't even have to
| purchase full ownership of whatever's necessary for US filing
| purposes, they'd just need to purchase an easement
| transferring to the federal government Intuit's right to
| charge US citizens and resident noncitizens for US federal
| income tax filings via TurboTax, as well as the right to deny
| these groups TurboTax's US federal income tax filing
| services. And then the federal government would decline to
| exercise these two transferred rights.
|
| But yeah, I have no idea if the easement idea would hold up
| in court, and in any case I doubt the government would be
| politically willing to use eminent domain against Intuit
| despite indisputably having the right to do it.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| The only thing that would make Intuit worse is if they were a
| division of the IRS.
| logicalmonster wrote:
| I think the FSF's heart is in the right place here, but the real
| travesty is that the tax code and forms are so complicated for
| average people to navigate, and the consequences for a mistake
| can be so great, that even poor people with standard income
| sources feel they absolutely need professional help filing taxes.
|
| This is absurd. Particularly with W2s and 1099s and the like, the
| government knows what your tax bill should be anyway and is just
| sitting there waiting for you to mess up complicated forms and
| penalize you.
| nubinetwork wrote:
| I'm on the opposite side of the fence here... Intuit is a
| business, and can choose to do business as they please. If the
| FSF doesn't like that, they can write their own tax software.
| (And not on the IRS' dime/time)
|
| If that's too hard, that's not Intuit's problem. They shouldn't
| be forced to go FOSS if they don't want to.
| jonathankoren wrote:
| Poor people don't need professional help. There's certainly any
| industry telling people that they need professional help, but
| honestly, poor people just take the standard deduction, and if
| they have kids the Earned Income Tax Credit.
|
| If you can read a W2, and can do basic arithmetic, you're done.
| As my parents said years ago, "You think it's really that hard
| when they just grab a bunch of people off the street, stick
| them behind a folding a table call them H & R Block?"
|
| It's only when you start having to deal with itemized
| deductions, self-employment, multiple investments, and all the
| stuff that quite frankly poor people can't afford, do you start
| to need help, and even then, the _filing_ isn 't that big of a
| deal. It's the _structuring_ to reduce taxes prior to tax day
| that 's complicated as hell.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| I don't really know that having multiple investments is
| outside the reach of "poor people".
|
| If you want to put $100 in some stocks, it isn't going to
| cost anymore than that today.
| kelnos wrote:
| I think you are a bit out of touch. Many poor people don't
| even have access to a checking/savings account, let alone a
| brokerage account or 401k.
|
| And for many people, even $50 a month can mean the
| difference between being hungry or not, or paying rent or
| not. It's a very bad state of affairs.
| jonathankoren wrote:
| Poor people don't even have _banks_. Why do you think all
| those check cashing places are everywhere?
|
| Thinking they have _savings_ is just the chef 's kiss of
| out of touch.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| This comment was absolutely painful to read. It's just so
| out of touch, it's unbelievable.
|
| There was a time in my life when $100 was my monthly food
| budget. I had to get dental work done, and even with
| insurance, it was $400. I had to take out a god damn credit
| card to pay for it and cut my meager food budget even
| further to make payments.
| coldpie wrote:
| > the consequences for a mistake can be so great
|
| In my (admittedly limited, personal) experience, the
| consequences are not so great. They send you a letter letting
| you know what the mistake was, and how to fix it. And then you
| fix it. The IRS isn't out to punish you, they just want what
| they're owed.
|
| Playing it up like screwing up your taxes will get you the
| death penalty is a myth perpetrated by the tax prep lobby.
| eximius wrote:
| It's somewhere in between. I know of second hand stories
| where folks were unintentionally strung along by the IRS.
| They'd get a notice that they underpaid by $X and it had been
| Y days with Z% interest being applied. So they send in a
| check. They get back another notice that their payment was
| received but the amount due had increased due to interest in
| the interim so a small balance still remained. Back and forth
| a few times until finally the person overpays significantly
| just to end the whole drama until the IRS finally sends a
| refund.
|
| Is this the end of the world? No. It is stupid, stressful,
| and potentially ruinous given the economic reality that huge
| swaths of people can't sustain a surprise bill (outdated and
| likely worse by now: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/20/heres-
| why-so-many-americans-...).
|
| Now, the cohorts who can't absorb a surprise tax bill likely
| fall into two camps: unlikely to be hit with a surprise tax
| bill - their taxes just aren't complicated enough, they don't
| earn much, etc. But at the same time, surprise 'income' like
| debt forgiveness can still hurt people.
| bombcar wrote:
| In 80% of the cases where you mess up AND they notice they
| just send you a form saying "here's our numbers" and you can
| say ok or complain.
|
| They've even done that to me when I made a mistake that
| resulted in a smaller refund; they sent the "you fucked up"
| letter along with a check.
| exabrial wrote:
| How about 0%(poverty line or below) - 18%(max for anyone) income
| tax and we forget all other taxes? Income happens when it is
| realized or upon transfer. I'm sure there's some other
| definitions that need to be added to this but this is the fairest
| way I can think of supporting savers, supporting investing,
| supporting small businesses, and allowing the wealthy to be taxed
| at a reasonable rate. This also incentivizes congress to actually
| grow the GDP and work within a budget.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| No thanks. How about 0 income tax (which is already on shaky
| legal ground) and only usage tax?
| deathanatos wrote:
| > _which is already on shaky legal ground_
|
| ...
|
| > _The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes_
|
| -- The Constitution of the United States
|
| Oh, and the 16th Amendment,
|
| > _The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on
| incomes, from whatever source derived_
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| How can you _possibly_ claim the income tax is on shaky legal
| ground when there 's a Constitutional Amendment that
| _explicitly_ makes it legal?
|
| How far to the right do you have to go when you start
| considering the Constitution is shaky? I mean, yeah, people
| quibble over interpretations, but the 16th Amendment is
| pretty explicit.
| exabrial wrote:
| I'm actually ok with a usage tax, but it's nearly impossible
| to have a sliding scale usage tax and maintain relative
| anonymity of the user.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > How about 0%(poverty line or below) - 18%(max for anyone)
| income tax and we forget all other taxes?
|
| How about no? How'd you pick those numbers and a two-tier
| system? ("Let's set the top marginal rate of our only tax to
| approximately the lowest tax-to-GDP ratio of the OECD" is, I
| suppose, a choice, but its a very odd one.)
|
| > Income happens when it is realized or upon transfer.
|
| In any progressive (including a two-tier like this, which,
| while far less progressive than the status quo, is still
| _technically_ a progressive system) system that brings LTCG in
| line with general income taxation, you also want to allow
| advance recognition (for sure) and maybe deferment of income
| spikes, otherwise you end up taxing income that takes multiple
| years and is nonrepeatable the same as current and repeatable
| ongoing income, which is unfair to people with irregular income
| through capital. Doing this, and applying equally to regular
| income, also is more fair for people with irregular _non-
| capital_ income, which may be a less-common pattern, but
| definitely happens.
|
| > this is the fairest way I can think of supporting savers,
| supporting investing, supporting small businesses, and allowing
| the wealthy to be taxed at a reasonable rate.
|
| It radically cuts taxes on the wealthy, and "supports" all
| those things by cutting taxes on the wealthy people doing them.
| Its just a giant downward shift of net tax burden that also is
| a massive cut in overall tax revenue.
|
| > This also incentivizes congress to actually grow the GDP and
| work within a budget.
|
| No, it doesn't. (I mean, there are incentives to both of those,
| especially the first, that exist independently, but this
| doesn't add to any of them.)
| freeone3000 wrote:
| This would cut US Government revenue by over 70%, and would not
| allow Social Security and Medicaid to be paid out, ignoring all
| other governmental programs. Nonstarter.
| exabrial wrote:
| sounds like a win to me.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| Great, let's do it.
|
| Who here looks at the current US government and thinks "this
| is working great, let's have more of it?" Because that's what
| more taxes does. It doesn't fix deficiencies.
|
| Didn't take 5 minutes before the "roads are good" straw man
| emerged.
| munk-a wrote:
| /me raises hand
|
| We've got some seriously great government programs. I won't
| stop you from criticizing the visible parts of the
| government (politicians can be quite frustrating) but
| Medicaid and Medicare are both extremely efficient and
| Social Security is basically why we have such a high
| expected lifespan. Personally, I am quite thankful for the
| roads, rail lines, sewage and all the other things living
| in a modern society gives us.
| deathanatos wrote:
| But asides from all _that_ , I mean, really, what have
| the Romans done for us?
| lesuorac wrote:
| Look, Microsoft could cut out like 95% of the features
| and it'd be an amazing product.
|
| Everybody I talk to agrees that they only use 5% of the
| features so nobody would miss them!
| exabrial wrote:
| I agree, I find all of these things quite nice.
|
| The construction of roads and rail lines though is
| enormously overpriced though. It's not like they'd just
| disappear if we stopped paying taxes.
|
| Instead why not just pay for them directly and get _a
| lot_ more of them? What if your AAA membership built the
| actual roads you're driving on and you could buy an
| unlimited pass, or a pass based on your actual mileage or
| something like that?
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| It doesn't take much of an imagination to see how poorly
| such a world would end up.
|
| We don't need parallel highways built just so
| corporations can compete on who has the best roads.
|
| And I'm imagining a scenario where one company sells
| their road network to another, and the new one decides
| they hate SUVs and so won't allow SUVs on their network,
| and suddenly my neighbor can't leave the neighborhood
| because he drives an SUV for work.
|
| Not to mention the extreme number of tolls booths you
| might have to set up.
| munk-a wrote:
| Does your vision involve a single large government
| mandated corporation (i.e. like a crown corporation up
| here in Canada) or by individual private companies?
| munk-a wrote:
| That would likely significantly lower federal tax revenue and
| shift an even bigger burden of taxes onto lower income folks.
| We could adopt a graduated taxation system with 1000 gradients
| of slowly increasing brackets - as long as a computer can "if
| 18 < x AND x < 20" through the whole list having a reasonably
| progressive tax bracket system isn't a real cost - it's all the
| exemptions and BS that make things a pain... basically "I'm
| sure there's some other definitions that need to be added to
| this" is where the demons live in your idea - and they're big
| demons. The basic graduated tax brackets are as clear as water
| and trivial to implement.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| You need to know how much to withhold for taxes. 1000
| brackets makes things a lot more complicated.
|
| Edit: the fact that it requires software proves my point. No
| one thinks it's a difficult programming problem.
| munk-a wrote:
| I build software for a living - building a program to take
| a list of 1000 brackets and compute the graduated tax rate
| would take about fifteen minutes (in a vacuum).
|
| This is not a real problem.
|
| (In response to your edit) Do you think accountants are
| currently working by slide rule? The tax code is currently
| extremely corrupted by loopholes and exceptions. My
| original hyperbolic statement was to highlight that the
| graduation of income tax is dirt simple. We've currently
| got seven tax brackets and it is trivial to calculate what
| you're going to owe based on them, even if we pushed seven
| to a thousand it's still a trivial calculation to run.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| You shouldn't need to be an account to know how much to
| withhold either
| bigfishrunning wrote:
| Or, stop withholding taxes and bill people monthly (or
| quarterly). Why should the government make the interest on
| money that should be in my account?
| koolba wrote:
| They should stop all withholdings and change the tax
| deadline to be the week before general elections.
|
| Imagine the political seismic shift when people head to
| polls realizing how much their government is taking out
| of their pockets.
| nonethewiser wrote:
| That's hilarious, I love it
| lesuorac wrote:
| I'm not sure it'll work that way.
|
| There's a lot of people who want the government to stay
| out of medicare ...
|
| People might feel like not-heres-ville shouldn't get
| government funding for whatever project but when it comes
| to any less funding for heres-ville there will be
| complaints. Its basically reverse NIMBY. You think Iowans
| want the government to do less weather prediction or crop
| testing?
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > You need to know how much to withhold for taxes.
|
| So? Withholding formulas can be separate from the main tax
| formula (heck, they can be "withhold at your personal
| overall rate for the prior year".)
|
| > 1000 brackets makes things a lot more complicated.
|
| For whom?
|
| > the fact that it requires software proves my point.
|
| It only requires software to generate the tax tables. Every
| other use can just use the lookup tables.
| jmull wrote:
| I think we just want no-cost tax prep software and filing.
|
| Mixing in the FSF desired source code licensing would muddy the
| waters, and I don't think it would provide anything 99% of tax
| filers care about.
| polygamous_bat wrote:
| We should set our aim higher than hundreds of millions of
| people spending six+ hours doing math that IRS has already
| done. Why not go for a pre-filled return at that point? 90% of
| the population won't need to do much of anything beyond that.
| jmull wrote:
| Well, sure, but these are two different things. I agree we
| should do both.
| byy wrote:
| [dead]
| dahwolf wrote:
| Taxes in the Netherlands: go to website, log in with digital ID.
| Next, next, next, next, finish. Done. Less than 5 minutes.
| Income, savings accounts, mortgage, all prefilled.
|
| For businesses, complicated households, people dealing with
| particular life events (divorce, inheritance, special medical
| deductions) it's a bit more work but still doable.
|
| Our government is strongly incentivized to make taxes easy and
| even came up with a slogan: "taxes. we can't make them more fun,
| but we sure can make them easier".
|
| It's clear why they want to make it easy: it takes an army of
| very expensive staff to address endless questions. And then some
| even more expensive staff to address tax appeals.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-25 23:02 UTC)