[yunesj]

IIRC from the last time I read it, the article only provides evidence for Intuit not wanting taxpayers (including themselves) to fund a competitor to their product, which is very reasonable.

I also don't want the government to get in the business of writing tax software.

[occz]

> I also don't want the government to get in the business of writing tax software.

Filing taxes in the rest of the developed world is essentially a one-click process, because every tax authority in the rest of the developed world already have all the information necessary to create such software (and so does the IRS).

This is a problem entirely caused by lobbying efforts. It literally does not exist for the rest of the developed world. Why insist on having it worse than everyone else, for the sole gain of the likes of Intuit? It's baffling to say the least.

[NovemberWhiskey]

>Filing taxes in the rest of the developed world is essentially a one-click process

I'm a little fed up of this canard. No. This is not the case. I've lived in the UK and had to do self assessment filing. It was not "essentially a one-click process". I have lived in Japan and filed taxes there. It was also not "essentially a one-click process".

>have all the information necessary to create such software (and so does the IRS)

No, it does not. A significant chunk of social programs are run in the US via the tax system (primarily through the forms of various credits) and are dependent on facts that the IRS does not know.

[rurp]

The proposals aren't that you have to use a 1 click process, just that it's the default starting point. People will of course need the ability to add deductions and other information if they so choose. But for someone who just needs to fill out a normal return with information that the IRS already has, and is already using to verify that return, why on earth shouldn't we just make that automatic?

It's a massive waste of time to require millions of people needlessly fill out forms that the IRS already fills out on their end! It's a manufactured problem to benefit a scummy company.

[occz]

>I'm a little fed up of this canard. No. This is not the case. I've lived in the UK and had to do self assessment filing. It was not "essentially a one-click process". I have lived in Japan and filed taxes there. It was also not "essentially a one-click process".

On the other hand, where I live in Sweden the process is essentially one-click, and there are several other countries in Europe where the same is true. No idea why U.K would still be bad, but I can see Japan being bad given their stamps on paper-culture. Pity.

>No, it does not. A significant chunk of social programs are run in the US via the tax system (primarily through the forms of various credits) and are dependent on facts that the IRS does not know.

Is information from these social programs a necessity for filing taxes? If so, the fix is simple: have them report these numbers into the IRS. Otherwise, have a base case of 0 and allow this information to be added as needed.

[NovemberWhiskey]

>Is information from these social programs a necessity for filing taxes? If so, the fix is simple: have them report these numbers into the IRS.

You misunderstand. The IRS implements the social program via the tax system.

For example, most European countries operate some kind of universal child benefit for parents. So maybe parents can receive a weekly payment of some kind.

In the U.S. this program does not exist. Instead, there is a refundable tax credit (the Child Tax Credit). When you file your taxes, you tell the IRS how many children you have, how old they are and so on and if your taxes are low enough that the credit offsets your taxes, the IRS sends you a check for the difference.

Similarly, many European countries have some form of government income support for low earners; again typically paid by some social security agency.

Although there is a program called TANF that does this for the most needy, the majority of benefits are delivered through another refundable tax credit (the Earned Income Tax Credit). Again you end up sending the IRS all the data necessary about why you qualify for this social program and maybe you get a check back at the end.

Basically, a significant amount of the transfer payments for social programs in the U.S. are implemented directly in the tax code, so the "tax filings" that people have to make combine both income information as well as qualifications for social benefits.

[kesselvon]

Those kids have social security numbers that the IRS definitely has, and social programs are based on income, which is reported to the IRS.

If it wasn't possible, Intuit wouldn't bother lobbying.

[nielsbot]

Probably depends on the filer's situation.

[syshum]

I am always baffled by the augment of "well the rest of the developed world does X"

Seems to strike me as a lesson I learned when I was young.. "Well if your friends all jumped off the bridge would you?"

Simply because other nations do X, is not IMO a valid justification for X...

[matthewmcg]

Except that in American political culture it’s extremely common to argue that such and such thing is either impossible or will introduce a parade or horrible consequences. Those that make this argument depend on voters being ignorant of the existence of other countries that have successfully done that thing or not experienced those consequences or, when those examples are cited, rush to American exceptionalism or other baseless appeals to distinguish them.

[syshum]

Or we recognize the fact that the United States has a system of government that is Unique in the world, we also have a culture and demographic that is Unique, as such many of the policies that would apply to say a EU nation can not work the same in the US for a wide range of issues from constitutional limitations, to cultural ones...

The rush to make the United States in to a EU nation should be opposed IMO, if I wanted the laws and regulations of the EU I would move.. I have no desire to be subject to the rules of the EU nor do I look to the EU for guidance of how things "should be done"...

[asdfasgasdgasdg]

Jumping off a cliff is obviously bad because of what happens when you hit the ground at the bottom. One click taxes seem a bit different.

[mike_d]

It is more along the lines of "all your friends can excuse themselves to use the bathroom, why do you keep pissing yourself?"

[opinion-is-bad]

While appeal to consensus is a common logical fallacy, we can make stronger arguments to support government tax software. Tax preparation is 100% deadweight in an economic sense. Nothing useful is created in that time, and yet billions of hours are spent on it each year in the United States. Streamlining the collection of tax revenue seems to be in the best interest of the state and the people, even if a very small minority will be harmed in the process. The additional product of those billions of hours of work time per year would pay enough dividend to cover the development cost virtually overnight.

[syshum]

I am not saying I disagree, personally I think they tax code should be extremely simplified so the need for software is not needed. One should not need an accounting degree or depend on the IRS to figure out what you owe in the first place

The tax code should be simplified to where a person with a High School education can understand it, and process what they should owe the IRS.

however that is not the argument. the argument was "Well the EU does it so American should too" I find that argument to be very lacking

[colinmhayes]

The answer to if your friends all jumped off the bridge would you? is obviously yes, my friends aren't idiots and they haven't all lost their mind at the same exact time.

[occz]

I'm not saying you should do it because of the fact that the rest of the world does it - this is merely evidence of its feasability.

You should do it because the alternative is downright dumb. That is to say, what you are doing right now is downright dumb.

[phepranto]

If all my friends jumped off a bridge they must've had a really good reason to, so yes I might as well.

Same logic applies here. Just maybe, if everyone does it, we should consider it too.

[gnulinux]

If the government is in the business of collecting tax from 300+ million people and has power to punish these people if they don't, government already is in the business of writing tax software.

[opinion-is-bad]

I find it very unlikely the IRS is not already writing tax software. They would need fairly sophisticated in-house software to evaluate returns, so it would just be the creation a new UI to be tax-payer facing. I would imagine all the required logic is already coded.

[jxramos]

I know at the least they seem to entirely outsource their Free File Fillable Forms to Intuit:

Search this page for Intuit https://www.freefilefillableforms.com/static/fed_terms_of_se...

And here's where you search for xml error codes when your return gets rejected.

https://www.irs.gov/filing/individuals/free-file-fillable-fo...

This thread a replier expresses first hand knowledge of doing government software development contracted out to their company: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28003793

[BHSPitMonkey]

"Very reasonable" if you're prioritizing Intuit's profits above the interests of every U.S. taxpayer; Unreasonable if those priorities are reversed.