Poor Poor IRS :(
So sorry IRS is crying about not having enough dough.
Quote form article
""Right now we have about the same number of auditors at the IRS that we had back in the 1950s when the economy was about one-seventh the size," said Chuck Marr, who studies tax policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "
Well DUH! With computers you SHOULD have less people than you needed in the 50"s! Besides if the IRS was simplified and not used as a weapon perhaps they wouldn't need so much money!
Quote form article
""Right now we have about the same number of auditors at the IRS that we had back in the 1950s when the economy was about one-seventh the size," said Chuck Marr, who studies tax policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "
Well DUH! With computers you SHOULD have less people than you needed in the 50"s! Besides if the IRS was simplified and not used as a weapon perhaps they wouldn't need so much money!
0
-
Every little government entity wants their own empire. 
0 -
?...don?t give a damn about the IRS...?
Merl Haggard0 -
democrats are tying to fix that......... 0 -
GilWilson1 wrote:So sorry IRS is crying about not having enough dough.
Quote form article
""Right now we have about the same number of auditors at the IRS that we had back in the 1950s when the economy was about one-seventh the size," said Chuck Marr, who studies tax policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "
Well DUH! With computers you SHOULD have less people than you needed in the 50"s! Besides if the IRS was simplified and not used as a weapon perhaps they wouldn't need so much money!-
Exactly, right over target, bombs away.
0 -
Huh? IRS wasn't crying, that complaint came from a leftist. I don't know why he is complaining, a good leftist shouldn't care; if we don't the money, we just print what we need.
Most reports ARE handled by computer; that's why those of us who get refunds get them so quickly. But, when things get complicated (& reported income goes into 7 digits, you need auditors to keep the rich folks honest. Auditors are among the few federal workers who generate more money for the federal government than their salaries & benefits cost. Unfortunately, they got hit with salary freezes, just like other feds, thanks to Obama & the Draft Dodger.
Neal0 -
If the tax code were simpler and fair they could collect plenty without those self supporting auditors nmyers wrote:Huh? IRS wasn't crying, that complaint came from a leftist. I don't know why he is complaining, a good leftist shouldn't care; if we don't the money, we just print what we need.
Most reports ARE handled by computer; that's why those of us who get refunds get them so quickly. But, when things get complicated (& reported income goes into 7 digits, you need auditors to keep the rich folks honest. Auditors are among the few federal workers who generate more money for the federal government than their salaries & benefits cost. Unfortunately, they got hit with salary freezes, just like other feds, thanks to Obama & the Draft Dodger.
Neal0 -
With a simple flat tax, there would be no need for auditors. But then the IRS could not be used as a tool to control the people. 0 -
I'd think that with all the automation nowadays, there'd be no need for as many live bodies. Especially with all the AI. On the rare occasion that the computer can't figure something out, only then should it get kicked to a real person.
Now, do I like it that computers can and are doing that? Nope. But they are. So, the IRS is probably just another bloated government agency.0 -
Taxation = Legalized theft. 0 -
Paid $83 last year.
Got around $100 back this year. Woohoo!!
I also got around $50 extra, each paycheck. (Weekly.)
Suck it Dem's.0 -
Yeah but how many computers did they have in '50s? 0 -
With computers and AI the IRS should be doing more with less...
When the IRS database spits out a irregularity you get a letter and possibly a audit. The audit will not be cause you underpaid. If you agree to the audit vs tax prison. Bring your shoebox with reciepts and your checkbook to pay additional tax dollars you missed.
The tax man has got some racket. Its the worlds 2nd oldest and profitable profession.0 -
Better be glad they aren't using 1950 tax tables today.. 91% was the tax rate for everything above $200,000 then. 0 -
Got over a thousand back last year. This year I wrote checks totaling over $10k. I couldn't use any of my previous deductions - had to take the standard ded.KenK/84Bravo wrote:Paid $83 last year.
Got around $100 back this year. Woohoo!!
I also got around $50 extra, each paycheck. (Weekly.)
Suck it Dem's.
So - all of you that got a refund this year, you're welcome!0 -
WearyTraveler wrote:
Got over a thousand back last year. This year I wrote checks totaling over $10k. I couldn't use any of my previous deductions - had to take the standard ded.KenK/84Bravo wrote:Paid $83 last year.
Got around $100 back this year. Woohoo!!
I also got around $50 extra, each paycheck. (Weekly.)
Suck it Dem's.
So - all of you that got a refund this year, you're welcome!
So you were not able to deduct lifestyle choices and push the bill onto others?
I would say thank you, but I have not heard one from you for supporting your choices over the past couple of decades.
I have not itemized for years. It has cost me some money, but I firmly believe that it is not the business of government to dictate to me or anyone how to invest or how and to whom I should donate.
If one believes this way, it would be hypocritical to take advantage of the laws one opposes. That, and I am not a fan of revealing my choices to the Federal Government anymore than necessary.0 -
I would still be OK
My W2 was for 18Kfatcat458 wrote:Better be glad they aren't using 1950 tax tables today.. 91% was the tax rate for everything above $200,000 then.0 -
Don McManus wrote:WearyTraveler wrote:
Got over a thousand back last year. This year I wrote checks totaling over $10k. I couldn't use any of my previous deductions - had to take the standard ded.KenK/84Bravo wrote:Paid $83 last year.
Got around $100 back this year. Woohoo!!
I also got around $50 extra, each paycheck. (Weekly.)
Suck it Dem's.
So - all of you that got a refund this year, you're welcome!
So you were not able to deduct lifestyle choices and push the bill onto others?
I would say thank you, but I have not heard one from you for supporting your choices over the past couple of decades.
I have not itemized for years. It has cost me some money, but I firmly believe that it is not the business of government to dictate to me or anyone how to invest or how and to whom I should donate.
If one believes this way, it would be hypocritical to take advantage of the laws one opposes. That, and I am not a fan of revealing my choices to the Federal Government anymore than necessary.
Why do you think I owe you a "Thank You," Don? ( I'm just curious.)
I try to keep my Taxes simple. I try and have it come out to a sum zero, where I don't owe them, they don't owe me.
I'd say my last two year averages come pretty damn close.
I did pay about $57,000 in tax. ($43,000 up front, another $14,000 "Penalty" Tax when I moved down here, after Cashing out my Profit Share from a Company I had been with for 23 years, and left it there another 4-6 years.
Was getting a good return. [13%] (Better than if I would have invested it.] Until 2008 hit us all. (I Lost $58,000 that year alone, out of my Profit Share.) Decided "Screw That," cashed it out. I took the Tax hit, paid Cash for my House/Property when I moved down here. Moved on. THAT Year Sucked.
I'm not a High Roller like you Don, so I know that is Small Potatoes.0 -
KenK/84Bravo wrote:Don McManus wrote:WearyTraveler wrote:
Got over a thousand back last year. This year I wrote checks totaling over $10k. I couldn't use any of my previous deductions - had to take the standard ded.
So - all of you that got a refund this year, you're welcome!
So you were not able to deduct lifestyle choices and push the bill onto others?
I would say thank you, but I have not heard one from you for supporting your choices over the past couple of decades.
I have not itemized for years. It has cost me some money, but I firmly believe that it is not the business of government to dictate to me or anyone how to invest or how and to whom I should donate.
If one believes this way, it would be hypocritical to take advantage of the laws one opposes. That, and I am not a fan of revealing my choices to the Federal Government anymore than necessary.
Why do you think I owe you a "Thank You," Don? ( I'm just curious.)
I try to keep my Taxes simple. I try and have it come out to a sum zero, where I don't owe them, they don't owe me.
I'd say my last two year averages come pretty damn close.
I did pay about $57,000 in tax. ($43,000 up front, another $14,000 "Penalty" Tax when I moved down here, after Cashing out my Profit Share from a Company I had been with for 23 years, and left it there another 4-6 years.
Was getting a good return. [13%] (Better than if I would have invested it.] Until 2008 hit us all. (I Lost $58,000 that year alone, out of my Profit Share.) Decided "Screw That," cashed it out. I took the Tax hit, paid Cash for my House/Property when I moved down here. Moved on. THAT Year Sucked.
I'm not a High Roller like you Don, so I know that is Small Potatoes.
It was directed to WearyTraveller, not you.
One of the good things in the 2018 tax law was the expansion of the personal deduction which is expected to reduce the number of people itemizing from around 30% to around 5%.
It is the itemizing of deductions that have the 70% paying for the lifestyle choices of the 30%.
Home mortgage interest, State taxes, and charitable contributions are all lifestyle choices that reduce the total amount of taxes paid. The result is that those who choose not to borrow a lot for a home, live in a state with and income tax or ask the government to help them in their giving to their own personal causes, end up paying a greater portion of their income than those who choose to do so.
I am not a fan of subsidizing someone's million dollar home ($ 750,000.00 in the current law), or the choice to fund the spending that occurs in some of these high tax states, nor am I a fan of supporting someone else's religious choices. If we can eliminate all of these things from Federal Taxation considerations, we will all be on a more level playing field.
You don't owe me a 'Thank You'. Nor does Weary Traveler for that matter, but if he expects one based upon his not being able to deduct his choices in the past, he certainly is not owed one either.
Edit: FWIW, I wish was enough of a high roller that a $ 58,000.00 hit could be considered small potatoes.0 -
Don McManus wrote:So you were not able to deduct lifestyle choices and push the bill onto others?
Lifestyle choices? I'd prefer to call them sound financial decisions. Paying extra with each payment to get into the fabled debt free 1%. Took a while to get mortgage free. If you consider that a "lifestyle choice" I disagree but won't argue. But maybe you're right. I patterned my lifestyle to funnel more disposable income into payments and investments.
My other "lifestyle choices" that aren't deductible are my charitable donations, my BSA uniforms and mileage, and my money management fees.
Yep. They're choices that I made...0 -
WearyTraveler wrote:Don McManus wrote:So you were not able to deduct lifestyle choices and push the bill onto others?
Lifestyle choices? I'd prefer to call them sound financial decisions. Paying extra with each payment to get into the fabled debt free 1%. Took a while to get mortgage free. If you consider that a "lifestyle choice" I disagree but won't argue. But maybe you're right. I patterned my lifestyle to funnel more disposable income into payments and investments.
My other "lifestyle choices" that aren't deductible are my charitable donations, my BSA uniforms and mileage, and my money management fees.
Yep. They're choices that I made...
It has always bothered me that our tax code is set up so that someone who wants to borrow a million dollars for a home is subsidized by someone who decides to live in a $ 150,000.00 house that they can afford. I am also not a fan of the fact that our tax code is set up so that someone's gift of $ 100,000.00 to their church is subsidized by someone who is making that much working all year.
These are all lifestyle choices that are often subsidized by folks that cannot afford to make such choices. Do not see how that makes much sense.0 -
Don McManus wrote:It has always bothered me that our tax code is set up so that someone who wants to borrow a million dollars for a home is subsidized by someone who decides to live in a $ 150,000.00 house that they can afford. I am also not a fan of the fact that our tax code is set up so that someone's gift of $ 100,000.00 to their church is subsidized by someone who is making that much working all year.
These deductions were put in place to encourage home ownership and charitable deductions. As with the 14th amendment, good intentions that end up being abused.
On the borrowing a million aspect, that's a heck of a lot of interest payments over the life of the loan. I personally wouldn't borrow that much, regardless of the tax help. I've always borrowed and bought with the mindset "can I survive and keep this even if I lose my job or take a pay cut." And it's worked for me.
I personally won't cheat Uncle Sam but I'll do my level best to keep as much of my pay / money as possible. If our uncle says I can save money by doing something, I will...0 -
I will never understand why folks hope for a refund. :?: :?: 0 -
Some of those folks get more back then they pay in a refund isn't a interest free loan for them! Mr. Perfect wrote:I will never understand why folks hope for a refund. :?: :?:0 -
Mr. Perfect wrote:I will never understand why folks hope for a refund. :?: :?:
For years I lowered my withholding and put that money in a savings account every month. I figured I'd reap the benefits of ME getting the interest and not loaning our uncle money.
I figured I'd just write a check come April 15. Then I got a several hundred penalty for underpayment under withholding. Much more than I made in interest. So... rather than muck with it I raised my withholding and try to get as small a refund as possible. Last year's refund was caused by deductions I hadn't realized would be so big.
So - I agree - a refund is nothing more than Uncle Sam giving you back some of your money and wanting you to be grateful.
I've got a lot of cyphering to do this year to make next year less painful.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
24 comments