Taxes!

yes the government handles it

and presumably you are paying more in taxes for the government to handle these things, rather than having a system where the individual has to do a modicum of work on their own behalf?

... or pay a person or company of their choice to do that work?

that seems counter to self-interest, at least for me. For me, it's like arguing that people shouldn't have to cook their own meals, meals should be provided by the government at the prices restaurants charge, no matter if that's significantly more expensive than making your own food, or if they make mistakes.

making tax relief to those who need it dependent on their ability to correctly file their taxes seems kind of cruel and unusual tbh

especially when a lot of those situations involve people who are disabled, poorly-educated, or elderly

my understanding is there was a cabal of evil tax prep companies who successfully lobbied against the IRS (already having most of the documentation needed) providing the option of doing your taxes for you, the resulting cost to the gov't being negligible since they'd have to process your taxes anyway.

xp I think it's more like saying "this is an affirmative government program to make sure these groups get resources" as opposed to "you can keep some of your money if you navigate the system properly and possibly pay a third party to do the paperwork for you (we do not reimburse for the latter)"

lmao yes a 90 page document is a "modicum of work". very good. this is insane.

what costs the economy more: having a not-for-profit centralized shared resource handle something with the economies of scale and fairness that implies, or having every tax payer resolve a complex problem/pay rent-taking for-profit businesses to solve it?

also btw benefits are better than deductions because you can pay them to people who don't pay tax such as poor people.

lmao yes a 90 page document is a "modicum of work". very good. this is insane.

I am guessing that most of those worksheets were filled out by a computer, and it isn't like you personally had to write a 90 page document.

also btw benefits are better than deductions because you can pay them to people who don't pay tax such as poor people.

I really get the sense that you don't really understand the US system and only the parts that apply to you, because there are several sizable benefits that poor people get through the tax system, and one of the main reasons many pay for tax preparation, as opposed to utilizing free resources, is because companies like H&R Block offer "fast refunds" so they can get their $4000 - $6000 in one to two days.

the resulting cost to the gov't being negligible since they'd have to process your taxes anyway.

― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, March 13, 2018 2:57 PM (ten minutes ago)

I wouldn't be surprised if there was already a prototype program developed, but it would be a significant cost -- the way they process the returns is a bit different. And their software/systems are super antiquated.

ah yes the poor people assistance program where they can pay a corporation to more quickly receive a once-yearly assistance stipend

I really get the sense that you don't really understand the US system and only the parts that apply to you, because there are several sizable benefits that poor people get through the tax system, and one of the main reasons many pay for tax preparation, as opposed to utilizing free resources, is because companies like H&R Block offer "fast refunds" so they can get their $4000 - $6000 in one to two days.

― sarahell, 13. marts 2018 23:05 (ten minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is absolutely insane

and then they'd take the check to the check cashing place down the street and pay fees for that -- it just really reinforces the inequities in society. And maybe they give additional welfare benefits instead of the Earned Income Tax Credit ... but some agency will be responsible for administration of it.

Actually, you can get subsidies in your paycheck based on the EITC amounts, so in theory, it's not a once-yearly stipend. Employers are required to give notices to employees about it. But I've maybe seen 1 w-2 with that in over 15 years doing taxes for people. There are variety of reasons, some logical, some not.

Like Obamacare was modeled in a way on the Advance EITC concept -- where you get advance payments of the credit, with the idea that you should be getting benefits on a regular basis, and not just one big chunk, once a year -- and then you "settle up" at the end of the year, and maybe you get a bit more credit, and maybe you have to pay some of it back.

I am guessing that most of those worksheets were filled out by a computer, and it isn't like you personally had to write a 90 page document.

correct. i didn't fill out any of it myself. i paid someone. i assume he used a computer.

guess how many pages my tax returns were in australia, germany and the UK btw. (clue: think of a non-negative integer smaller than 1, that is coincidentally equal to the size of my annual tax refund in those countries.)

I really get the sense that you don't really understand the US system and only the parts that apply to you, because there are several sizable benefits that poor people get through the tax system

what benefits does someone with no income get through the tax system?

and one of the main reasons many pay for tax preparation, as opposed to utilizing free resources, is because companies like H&R Block offer "fast refunds" so they can get their $4000 - $6000 in one to two days.

hahahahahahahahahaha

people with no income aren't required to file tax returns.

Right so they cannot get benefits implemented through the tax system.

This is absolutely insane

― Frederik B, Tuesday, March 13, 2018 3:17 PM (one hour ago)

the fast refunds are kinda like the payday loan model, where the fees and interest you pay are reallllllly high, but people pay them. I would point to the numbers, and say, the fees for this would be x, and of the amount you are entitled to, you would only receive y, and they would do it anyway. It made me really aware of my economically privileged upbringing.

Right so they cannot get benefits implemented through the tax system.

I'm not even sure what you're arguing. People that get no benefits through the tax system, that don't have to interact with the tax system, which you think sucks ... so ... your point is?

a benefit system implemented through tax credits and deductions is (i) an unnecessarily complicated way of disbursing money that is more cheaply done through cash benefits (ii) of absolutely no use to people with little or no income (the people who need the benefits) (iii) tremendously popular with tories.

to take an example, parents with children are given a tax deduction in the US. in germany they are given money. the german way is cheaper for the state (and the economy) to adminisister, and it results in the poorest people getting the benefit too.

sadly the german way puts rent-takers like turbotax out of business though :-(

the german way also means that people miss out on the opportunity to lend the federal government $4-6000 dollars for a year, and then pay h&r block a fee to get the loan back in a timely fashion :-(

there should be billboards explaining to people how to adjust their withholding properly so as not to do that but it's basically a secret

my federal refund was like $300 so i was very patient waiting for it

1. in the U.S. the amount you "get" as a parent with children depends on your income. If it is low, you get more, if it is very high, you get none. the government often does not know how much income you have to base that on, until you file your taxes. It's a bit unfair for the government to pay people who are already wealthy the same benefits as people who aren't.

2. some poor parents with children get additional benefits not through the tax system.

1. Means-tested benefits are a thing

2. Yes those are good. More of them.

the tax system pays people who are already wealthy vastly more benefits than to people who aren't

in germany they are given money. the german way is cheaper for the state (and the economy) to adminisister

how do they determine eligibility? how do they prevent against fraud? does everyone get the same benefit? ... not being defensive here, just curious how things work elsewhere.

The key thing about the U.S. system, that I don't really see addressed in the stuff you're saying, caek, is how to determine income (and thus tax), if the government does not know how much income you made.

Unless, the tax ID number of everyone is included in every single transaction, and all cash payments have to be reported as such?

Christ on a fucking bike Sarah. You literally sound like Esther McVey giving a talk to the Taxpayers Alliance here.

sounds like a top bird, then, if she sounds like me.

does she also believe that people who make $500,000 a year shouldn't get tax benefits for having children?

Child benefit for posh ppl over here was done in a few years ago , I think. But I'd say that sounds very bad, but not a justification for hyperbolic nonsense against the poorest of your country.

what hyperbolic nonsense are you referring to?

all of it.

like this?

It's a bit unfair for the government to pay people who are already wealthy the same benefits as people who aren't.

or is the part where I suggested that a system where people have the option of doing things themselves, as the government often makes mistakes or does not advocate for them?

how do they determine eligibility? how do they prevent against fraud? does everyone get the same benefit? ... not being defensive here, just curious how things work elsewhere.

The key thing about the U.S. system, that I don't really see addressed in the stuff you're saying, caek, is how to determine income (and thus tax), if the government does not know how much income you made

Unless, the tax ID number of everyone is included in every single transaction, and all cash payments have to be reported as such?

in the case of kindegeld in germany, I believe that specific benefit is not means tested as it happens, because the goal of is to increase the birth rate not redistribute wealth, but let's say it was.

The government does know how much money you make. You have a taxpayer ID. Your employer reports your income. If you have a business or are self-employed, you report your income (like in the US, although the forms are much simpler for exactly the reasons we're talking about). It uses this knowledge to scale the benefit payment.

Means testing is controversial on the left in countries with a history of benefit payments, and it's wandering off topic, but as a practical matter it totally possible to means-test benefits without making people who are the non-US equivalent of single W2 filers file insanely complicated tax returns.

(and yes, a 1040-EZ is insanely complicated)

it's not really that "unfair," some benefits are just made more visible than others in a way that has no correlation to the magnitude of the benefit. i get way more out of my mortgage interest deduction than i would out of a child tax credit, if i had a child. if everyone got the same benefits maybe rich whiners wouldn't complain (wrongly) that poor people are getting "more" than them from the government. there are other ways. there are other countries that don't make people do cartwheels to show how much they deserve their paltry benefits. somehow their societies are more equal idk how that happens.

btw sarahell, if he's forced to grant some redistribution of wealth rather than a flat tax, guess what side paul ryan is on when it comes to means-tested benefits vs tax deductions.

and just to be clear...

I really get the sense that you don't really understand the US system and only the parts that apply to you, because there are several sizable benefits that poor people get through the tax system, and one of the main reasons many pay for tax preparation, as opposed to utilizing free resources, is because companies like H&R Block offer "fast refunds" so they can get their $4000 - $6000 in one to two days.

this is a sickness

also one of the nice things about a means test is you can apply it to wealth rather than income (which is another reason paul ryan is quite happy to handle the what redistribution there is as part of the income tax system, where taxing wealth is not possible)

i worked for one of those companies for two years, when I started doing taxes. I was told to try to sell the fast refunds, and earned commissions on how many I sold. But people bought them, and paid those fees. Does that make it "right"? I still think it's unethical, but if someone chooses it, and I am not in their situation, I feel kinda awkward saying "this should be illegal."

xp - I disagree with most of Paul Ryan advocates, to be clear, and while I might marginally benefit from the changes he has made to the tax system, I ethically disagree with most of them.

No totally. I’m saying it shouldn’t be necessary. People with simple incomes should not need to be financially sophisticated in order to avoid lending he government money by overpaying, and the government should pay it back without being asked.

People with simple incomes should not need to be financially sophisticated in order to avoid lending he government money by overpaying, and the government should pay it back without being asked.

one of the issues is that it isn't always clear who has a simple income and who doesn't - and there are people who have types of income that have financially sophisticated tax treatments, that might not be financially sophisticated themselves ... I get a handful of "my grandpa died, and i got this thing after he died, and they sent me this form, and I don't know what it is" clients every year.