[aerosmile]

So many people offering explanations, and yet not a single one of them answers the OP's question. If you're upset that Intuit is engaging in lobbying (as you should be!), that might be an appropriate answer for a different question (eg: why doesn't the IRS just send us their own reports for us to approve?). Again, I am not defending Intuit's involvement in politics, but that's not the answer to the dark patterns question - let me try to answer that specific question:

For years, I kept experimenting with different approaches to filing my taxes. I started out with TurboTax, and being so painfully aware of their bad reputation, I kept trying out every alternative I could think of - including their biggest competitor TaxAct and three different tax firms. After all that work, I am back to using TurboTax. Obviously, it was not an easy decision given how hard I tried to avoid that path, and no, I didn't return to TurboTax because I got tricked by one of their dark patterns.

The simple answer for why the tax firms didn't work out is that the work they required in their onboarding equaled or exceeded the amount of work it would have taken me to do the whole thing in TurboTax myself. Mind you, this is just the onboarding piece - not including the emails and calls leading up to the onboarding and following the onboarding.

The least sophisticated firm just said: send us everything in a zip file. That sounded appealing until they started following up with a million questions. The medium-sophisticated firm (which was the most painful of all of them) asked me to use their web app which was essentially TurboTax except that the questions were incredibly confusing so that I had to look up a ton of stuff just to make sure I was submitting the right thing. The third firm used a better web app, but it was still the same thing - the onboarding was essentially the same as just using TurboTax.

The obvious added value with tax firms is that they might catch something that you would have done wrong without their assistance, but these days TurboTax does offer the same service as well (and no, I never received some valuable piece of advice that justified the additional time and effort of working with a tax firm).

TaxAct is not bad, and would be my close second preference. In fact, they actually cover more niche cases (eg: filing certain types of corporate taxes). Even so, their UI/UX is only almost as good as TurboTax but not quite. As unpopular as TurboTax might be in this community, I think we can take a moment and appreciate their PM+UI/UX team, who used some pretty delightful copy and super slick design to turn an awful task into a rather pleasant experience.

And that's the ultimate answer to the OP's question as I see it... most people who are aware of the dark patterns in TurboTax know that it is not the cheapest way to file, but it's certainly not the most expensive either - and if you're looking for the easiest-to-use and fastest method to get the tax report checked off your list, then it's hard to find a better solution (granted, partially because they are helping create the world we live in).

[giantg2]

"why doesn't the IRS just send us their own reports for us to approve?"

I assume because nobody would file taxes for things that the IRS was absent from their report, because now you know the IRS doesn't know about it and won't be missing it.

I think TurboTax has too many partnerships and offers. It gets people because it's free or only $10 or whatever. It would be pretty easy to switch to other software, like HR Block.

[twblalock]

> I assume because nobody would file taxes for things that the IRS was absent from their report, because now you know the IRS doesn't know about it and won't be missing it.

That's not why.

The IRS is underfunded and overworked, so even if it had the information it needed to generate a report for everyone, it still couldn't do it. But it doesn't have that information anyway!

A lot of taxable income is derived from sources that are not reported to the IRS before taxes are filed. This includes things like cost basis for RSUs, state and local taxes (including property tax), and various kinds of investment income. Until 2008, brokers were not even required to report cost basis information to the IRS, which enabled people to easily lie about the amount of their taxable gains!

On top of that, there are a lot of deductions that are based on information the IRS does not have, such as business expenses, moving expenses, etc.

The IRS still largely relies on self-reporting by taxpayers. Anyone with a moderately complex tax situation (e.g. a homeowner, or someone with investment income) knows more about their tax situation than the IRS does!

[kelnos]

> This includes things like cost basis for RSUs, state and local taxes (including property tax), and various kinds of investment income.

Assuming the political will to make tax prep easy (which I know does not exist), the fix for this would be pretty simple for Congress to legislate. Sure, it would likely take a few years for all municipalities to come into compliance, but it's not like this would be difficult.

> On top of that, there are a lot of deductions that are based on information the IRS does not have, such as business expenses, moving expenses, etc. [..] The IRS still largely relies on self-reporting by taxpayers.

Sure, but there's no reason why the IRS couldn't have a website where everything it does know is pre-filled, and then could ask you about things they don't know about (and even hint at the kind of things that they wouldn't know).

> Anyone with a moderately complex tax situation (e.g. a homeowner, or someone with investment income) knows more about their tax situation than the IRS does!

Not really? My tax situation is probably "moderately complex": for 2021 I have W-2 income, contractor (1099-NEC) income, interest income, dividend income, capital gains through sales of stock, mutual funds, and bonds, RSU vesting, ESPP purchases and sales, required distributions from an inherited IRA, mortgage interest payments, charitable donations, and state, property, and estimated tax payments. I even have AMT credits I've been carrying forward and using for several years now. There is no reason, in principle, why the IRS could not be unambiguously and correctly notified of all of these things and prepare a return for me.

I hear a lot of "the IRS doesn't know X because Y isn't required to report X"... well... fix that! And I totally agree that the IRS won't know everything sometimes, especially sometimes things that would help lower someone's tax bill (like, say, deductions for business expenses). But there's nothing wrong with that; taxpayers can simply report those extra things during tax season, after doing a quick check to verify that everything the IRS does know is correct. Most other developed nations in the world have no problem with all this; the only thing that's "unique" about the US is our dysfunction.

[scarface74]

To a paraphrased an old saying, “it’s hard to get a politician to pass laws to make something easier when he gets paid to make it harder.”

https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-f...

[beej71]

> Sure, but there's no reason why the IRS couldn't have a website where everything it does know is pre-filled, and then could ask you about things they don't know about (and even hint at the kind of things that they wouldn't know).

What about the fact that such a thing would certainly start to eat into Intuit's profits?

You're right--there's no technical reason this couldn't be done. And it should be done. But too much money is greasing too many palms.

As to the OP's question, I don't know why more people aren't steaming mad about it. We're getting taken to the cleaners.

[sofixa]

> Sure, but there's no reason why the IRS couldn't have a website where everything it does know is pre-filled, and then could ask you about things they don't know about (and even hint at the kind of things that they wouldn't know).

Just the way it works in saner countries like France. Things the tax authority knows are pre-filled, and I'm asked about the rest. So yes, there's no reason besides the fact that many companies would lose their business ( like TurboTax), so they lobby against it.

[giantg2]

"the IRS doesn't know X because Y isn't required to report X".

They are required to report it. Only the current reporting is that an individual is being sent numerous pieces of mail. It could instead be that the IRS gets these (systematically) and sends a person the compiled tax form for validation.

[andreareina]

Because the tax firms lobbied to bar the IRS from doing so. Other countries I've lived in make the common case this easy.

[kelnos]

I used TaxAct for many years and had no real issues with it. A few years ago I started having a CPA do my taxes because my tax situation got a bit more complicated, and I didn't trust myself to even answer TaxAct's (or TurboTax's) questions correctly.

> The least sophisticated firm just said: send us everything in a zip file. That sounded appealing until they started following up with a million questions.

That's super weird. Every year I answer a 2-page questionnaire (about 30 yes/no questions), sign an engagement letter and some authorization docs, scan those, zip up all my tax documents, and send them over. My CPA rarely needs to ask any questions of me at all, and sends me my completed return for approval in early April. It's not cheap ($1700), but the peace of mind plus the lack of need for me to do much of anything, is very much worth it. I'm fairly certain I'm saving money overall, but even if my tax bill ended up being exactly the same were I to do it myself, I'd still pay to have it done for me, with a much higher expectation of correctness.

[irrational]

You might want to try freetaxusa. I tried them last year and really like them.

[smichel17]

I used freetaxusa last year after using turbotax previously. I found that the experience of using turbotax was more like giving my information to an accountant and having them prepare the forms, while freetaxusa was more like sitting there with an accountant explaining what each box means, while you fill out the forms yourself.

I'd say the turbotax approach was easier to fill out, but freetaxusa was much easier to look up additional information when the guidance fell short; when I wasn't sure how to fill out turbotax's questions, figuring out which box it applied to so I could look up more information was supremely frustrating.

Specifically, I was freelancing the previous two years, and I was looking up information about itemized deductions.

[nightski]

For many if not dare I say most TurboTax is among the cheapest because it is free. The fact is if your situation is simple (a W-2 and the standard deduction) then you can get away with just about anything.

The truth is the IRS doesn't send reports because this country is obsessed with deductions. Your income (which the IRS does know about) is a small factor in the entire equation.

Ironically, under Trump's tax cuts, the standard deduction was made a lot larger (while removing the availability of some deductions). This pissed off the people who loved those deductions, but in the end it made the standard deduction applicable to a lot more people.

If you aren't taking deductions, then you can just use any of the services for free and don't really need to worry about dark patterns.

[satronaut]

I remember there was a huge issue among the teachers unions that teachers wouldn't be able to deduct up to 500 dollars anymore for classroom expenses (I may have the number wrong). I was thinking, you teachers should be good at math and realize your deduction being doubled is way nicer than having that classroom supplies deduction. Also, why isn't the school paying for your expenses (but that's a whole separate conversation)

[Spivak]

You are thinking about this wrong. When you are in a situation where you take the standard dedication then you suddenly lose the benefit of doing any tax-deductible actions. So teachers across the board were immediately disincentivized from buying school supplies because it’s effectively not tax deductible anymore.

I rant about this all the time with charitable donations. Any behavior the government wants to incentivize through tax policy — charitable donations, student loan interest, IRA contributions should be credits that apply in addition to the standard deduction because otherwise there’s no incentive for most people.

[DangitBobby]

Are you really suddenly not going to spend $500 on your students because now only $450 of it goes towards goods instead of the full $500? That doesn't really make any sense to me. Especially if the standard deduction grants you an additional $1k that you wouldn't have gotten otherwise.

[satronaut]

Honestly though, we also need to ask why teachers are having to spend money out of pocket at all. We pay all these taxes, shouldn't the schools be able to afford photo copies?

[Spivak]

By that reasoning there was never even a point to having the deduction in the first place.

[DangitBobby]

If you believe incentives are the only point of deductions, then sure. I believe part of the reason for deductions is to provide some relief to people who are spending for their work or for the state. In any case, I'll take favorable taxes however I can get them, even if it means I no longer benefit more from itemized deductions over the standard deduction. Especially since the standard deduction is much easier.

I wonder how many teachers ever benefited enough from itemized deductions to take it?

[satronaut]

I think you're right on how the policy works, but look at the math. The standard deduction doubled, so as an equation New_deduction > old_deduction+school supplies

Teachers came out ahead

[zardo]

And they come out even more ahead if they stop buying classroom supplies.

[satronaut]

no argument there. Would you agree with me that it'd be better if the schools provided all the materials that a teacher needs, instead of them paying out of pocket for supplies? I'll sometimes pay out of pocket for work supplies but I just get reimbursed so it's no big deal.

[flatiron]

If you sold a single stock throughout the year you are excluded from all the free tax filing software I’ve seen. A bunch of my income is in RSUs. For us I need a VM to run TurboTax

[SilasX]

I used FreeTaxUSA with a Wealthfront account that had stock trading. Wasn’t charged.

[mwint]

FreeTaxUSA is strangely under-mentioned on these threads. I’ve used it the last couple years with a complex-ish situation. Not a single complaint.

[SilasX]

I initially tried it because CreditKarma had egregious errors last time, like:

1) Inverting my answer to “have you sold cryptocurrency” on the forms.

2) Silently removing decimal points (changing 8.005 to 8005 shares in the forms)

3) Persisting an entry for income after I tried to delete it and re-enter, with no way to fix it even after talking to support.

4) Having forms with an overlay “do not use”.

FreeTaxUSA still refused decimal points in the forms (like in item 2) but at least warned me so I could work around it.

[BostonEnginerd]

I’ve done my taxes with FreeTaxUSA for a few years as well. The webapp is simple, with no swooshing animations - but it gets the job done for 1/4 the price of TurboTax these days.

A few years ago I benchmarked the two together and they basically gave the same answers. They also don’t hold your past returns hostage.

I’ve been recommending them to everyone that I talk to about taxes.

[davchana]

For me no animations (except a real loading circle) is a plus point. I don't want to spend time looking at a fake circus display of taxes. Its form filling, I just want to fill data and be done with it.

[irrational]

I tried it last year and really liked it.

[nunez]

didn’t know about it until i browsed /r/tax

[bpodgursky]

I have filed with all sorts of wild overcomplicated ISO/ESPP/RSU/NSO/etc employee stock compensation and never had to use anything other than the webapp. Why do you need to run the desktop application at all?

[_moof]

> A bunch of my income is in RSUs. For us I need a VM to run TurboTax

No you don't. I've sold stock more years than not and I've never needed to do that.

[rkk3]

> TurboTax is among the cheapest because it is free

Free? Haha in what world?

[bpodgursky]

It's free if your taxes are covered by:

* W-2 income * Limited interest and dividend income reported on a 1099-INT or 1099-DIV * Claiming the standard deduction * Earned Income Tax Credit (EIC) * Child tax credits * Student Loan Interest deduction

basically if you don't sell any assets, have employee stock compensation, or donate a ton of money you can file for free.

[rkk3]

Pretty much everyone has to pay if you use turbo-tax, the "free" edition is not an IRS free file offering they don't advertise that one. There are very very very limited cases to not be hit by a "surprise" you need to upgrade and pay us from with money from your tax return. A staggering percentage of people who would have eligible to file for free under the IRS program end up paying because of the dark patterns, and the misleading marketing you for whatever reason are perpetuating.

2 years ago 37 Million people filed online who were eligible to use an IRS free file offering and only 6.8% did... [1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xQQkzWhMOc&ab_channel=Netfl...

[2] https://www.propublica.org/article/turbotax-just-tricked-you...

[LynxInLA]

Also if you aren't filing your state taxes.

[bshoemaker]

I've used FreeTaxUSA and it's done everything I've ever wanted.

[tootie]

I don't think that really is what OP is asking. The simple answer is that people are very fearful and confused over finances and Intuit offers tools to manage it. And they likely found very high conversion rates by offering these services midway through a very stressful process. Having a company with a strong public reputation offer services to protect your finances is likely very appealing.

I think it's also unfair to say the only standing between us and free file is lobbying. Lobbying doesn't set policy. Congress can still do whatever they want. And it's not like Intuit is keeping free file secret. The IRS hasn't built it. Doing so would cost money, create new bureaucracy and likely face a distrustful public who would rather pay a company then trust the IRS.