Meanwhile in pretty much all other nations you go online to the free website, see your employer contributions already filled in and acknowledge they are correct for the year, add any extra income, check boxes for relevant deductions and you’re done.
This is true even of some third world countries like Sri Lanka (where I live). There is a web-based system called RAMIS (Revenue Administration Management Information System). Any taxpayer can log in using their tax identification number and file their taxes.
Doesn't America have uniquely complicated tax that requires you to keep all your receipts to claim all sorts of confusing deductions? How can the IRS know what you spent your income on if you don't tell them?
I've had the misfortune of having to fill in a W8-BEN-E form [1] and the first time, I just gave up and refused to work with the client because it was too complicated. The 2nd time, I got an LLM to tell me how to fill it in. Just look at the dense jargon - nonparticipating FFI, deemed-compliant FFI, Restricted distributor, International organiztion (hint, that's the wrong answer), Excepted territory NFFE, Passive NFFE, Direct reporting NFFE. There are 32 of them! What the hell is all that? Well 99% of cases are just one of those buried among the rest but you wouldn't know which without some advice.
For most people, those deductions are less than the "standard" deduction you can take instead. For most of the people who do itemized deductions, it's mostly just your mortgage payment and state taxes, which the IRS already knows about, and maybe charitable donations.
And even if you do have a lot of things to report, why not just report those things directly and let the IRS calculate your taxes, rather than you having to do it, fill out a complicated form, then the IRS does the calculation anyways to make sure you did it right?
> Just look at the dense jargon ... There are 32 of them! What the hell is all that?
For every form I've ever had to file with the IRS, there's a corresponding set of instructions. Those instructions inevitably have a definitions section and/or define the terms in-line.
The instructions for form W8-BEN-E are at [0]. The definitions section starts at printed page 4 and continues through to printed page 7. Some terms you mentioned (like "Excepted territory NFFE") are not in the definitions section, but are described in their own sections.
I'm definitely not going to claim that it's foolish to consult with a tax lawyer (or similar such thing) when one is significantly uncertain about one's taxes. I'm definitely going to object to your implied claim that the IRS dumps a bunch of jargon on you and leaves you to rely on general-purpose search engines to figure out what the fuck they're talking about.
Just follow the instructions? From your linked PDF:
> The time needed to complete and file this form will vary depending on individual circumstances. The estimated average time is: Recordkeeping, 12 hr., 40 min.; Learning about the law or the form, 4 hr., 17 min.; Preparing and sending the form, 8 hr., 16 min.
> [The] implied claim that the IRS dumps a bunch of jargon on you and leaves you to rely on general-purpose search engines to figure out what the fuck they're talking about.
Feel free to imagine that I was addressing something else. It's a free country and all.
You also might want to look at the estimated average time for a non-business taxpayer to complete a 1040. If the 1040 estimate methodology is typical, then those estimates are pretty pessimistic.
Yea I did look at the guide but it's a huge amount of work that I wasn't prepared to do just to make a couple of hundred dollars from one client. Imagine you start at the first option:
Nonparticipating FFI. A nonparticipating FFI means an FFI that is not a participating FFI, deemed-compliant FFI, or exempt beneficial owner.
OK, then what's an FFI, a participating FFI, a deemed-compliant FFI, and an exempt beneficial owner? That's 4 other definitions to look up just to learn you should not choose option 1 of 32. If you keep track of this intermediate knowledge, it can help you skip some other options but you have to look ahead and see that possibility and find a way to store all these intermediate conclusions so that when you wake up the next day you haven't forgotten if you're an exempt beneficial owner or not - and by the way, before you even begin, you have to work out if you're a beneficial owner - exempt or not.
Once you've decided you're not an FFI, you look to see if you're a "Certified Deemed-Compliant Sponsored, Closely Held Investment Vehicle", which doesn't have a definition in the guide! What now? Try to find it in the Internal Revenue code?
By the way, the one you called out - "Excepted Territory NFFE" doesn't actually have a definition at all in the guide either and it refers you to "Regulations section 1.1472-1(c)(1)(iii)". Maybe if you're clever, you can set aside these difficult ones in case you discover an easy right answer first, but that gets back to designing a system to manage the intermediate knowledge and design your search strategy. Yes, you can do it, but also it's stupidly burdensome.
That's a lot of words to agree with my objection to
> ...your implied claim that the IRS dumps a bunch of jargon on you and leaves you to rely on general-purpose search engines to figure out what the fuck they're talking about.
I never suggested that satisfying the requirements of complex parts of the tax code would -somehow- not be complex. I even indicated support for talking to a lawyer when confused:
> I'm definitely not going to claim that it's foolish to consult with a tax lawyer (or similar such thing) when one is significantly uncertain about one's taxes.
If you'd slowed down and thought carefully about what I wrote, you probably would have spent less time overall than it took to write up your comment.
Speaking of reading too quickly:
> ...you look to see if you're a "Certified Deemed-Compliant Sponsored, Closely Held Investment Vehicle", which doesn't have a definition in the guide!
Did you read the part of the form to which those instructions apply? Those checkboxes are part of the FATCA Status section. Isn't it clear that you are to look at the FATCA regs for additional definitions?
My point is that the form is too burdensome. You said there were instructions in the guide, implying that makes it easy enough. However, even with the help of the guide, it's still too much work. You're suggesting consulting a professional which is ridiculous. This is not even "one's taxes", this form is specifically for people not paying tax to America. I can only assume it's even more difficult for people who do pay American tax.
Don't forget that this is for a random one-man business in another country doing a $100 job for a US client. The cost of what you're suggesting is completely disproportionate to the value of the transaction.
> Isn't it clear that you are to look at the FATCA regs for additional definitions?
Not at all. The form tells you to look at the instructions, not the FATCA regs. I have no idea what FATCA regs are or what FATCA even is. That's just more obscene over-complication.
Yes, the IRS does dump a bunch of jargon on you and leave you to Google it. "Google" here means searching the laws and regulations but probably Google itself because it's easier.
The French tax system is pretty simple. Taxes are high, but simple. The website you use to file your taxes is also pretty simple, and every single field has a button that explains what it is about and in which cases you should write stuff inside.
The only annoying parts are if you have accounts outside of France, you have to declare them. And if you get dividends/capital gains in foreign currencies outside of the EU, you have to calculate yourself how much tax you owe using a bunch of tables per country and currency.
Yes, and? Nobody would fill all annexes. They are annexes because they're not part of the common path, and are only needed in specific scenarios. Their length is kind of irrelevant.
They make even the simple case more complicated than it needs to be. In these other countries, most people don't need to file anything, it just works with what the state already knows. You don't have to provide a load of supplementary info to get the correct outcome. I can only guess you think this way because you've not done taxes in another country.
While I fully agree that there are a lot of complicated rules for edge cases, for simple (non self employed) cases it is very straightforward. In fact, you don’t have to do anything at all in many cases and still won’t be screwed over as the German IRS will assume typical deductions. There is an official free filing software and if you spend 20-30 USD a year you’ll get access to super easy to use professional filing software. My situation is more complicated than most and I spend 2hrs a year for my entire family
Technically, America is neither a country nor a continent. But the USA is the only country on either of the continents of the Americas to have the word "America" in its official name. Give the Americans a break.
I think this is a cultural difference around the world. In my county, people call it America. USA sounds a bit wanky or what Americans themselves call it. It doesn't matter because everyone knows what you mean.
Which is basically how it works here too. If you just have W-2 income from an employer it takes less than 10 minutes to fill out the form. Sure, the system you mention is more convenient, but the difference is minimal.
The IRS already has most of my tax information and knows the tax code. Why must I deal with a third party (and potentially have to pay them) to electronically file my own taxes?
As for "having most of your tax information", they don't. They know your reported income. You see that on your W2s/1099s/etc. What they don't know is whether or not you had a kid this year, or whether you lost a kid this year, whether you got married or divorced, if your spouse is claiming the kids this year or not, the number or amount of your charitable contributions, whether you have deductible mileage expenses, or a million other things.
The info that the IRS has from your employer is maybe 5 boxes on your return. Literally takes a few minutes to take the info from your w-2 and put it on a 1040.
If it's so easy, why is the IRS unable to do that? Why must I retype all of the information that they already have? If there's anything they don't have, I have zero issue tying that in myself.
The number and type of people living in your household is not an edge case. It applies to almost everyone, has huge tax impacts, and the IRS doesn’t know.
Filing a 1040 in the US is also very easy and takes a few minutes and can be done for free.
Another factor most people are ignoring is that state taxes are filed at the same time and each state has its own separate system. These third parties let you fill in and file both at the same time. It would be nice if the US gov did this too but it requires a total restructuring of the American system, and Intuit’s lobbying has nothing to do with why it hasn’t happened or for that matter why the tax codes looks like it does.
Not for most people. It’s a giant pain in the ass if you have bank accounts and want to file correctly.
If all you do is plug in your w-2 and pretend that’s your whole tax return and you don’t care about anything except the standard deduction, sure. That’s not correct for most people.
> state taxes are filed at the same time and each state has its own separate system
Can we stop pretending like this is a problem insurmountable for the federal government?
This idea that TurboTax can make this work but the government can’t is absurd.
Yes, in many European countries dependents and marital status changes are registered in a national civil registry, which the tax authority can query directly.
Countries like the U.S., Canada, the U.K. cannot easily do that without huge data-sharing reforms.
The federal government doesn't always know if you've had a child or if you've died. Not even specifically the IRS, but its possible for you to have a child and never involve any organization that reports to the federal government.
When I lived in the US(5 yrs), early 2000s, from my second year onwards, I used to receive a pre-filled 1040NR-EZ with my W2 info already printed/filled-in on it. Typically, I would just add a deduction, and mailed it back. Does that program not exist? Or was it only for NR?
That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is: "We did your tax return for you based on all the information reported to us. Please click 'OK' to complete your return for the year."
Remember, Americans have to file taxes separately to the State and Federal government. The Federal government has little authority to dictate State taxes. The paperwork is in part a coordination problem between the State and Federal governments.
Basic taxes are trivial in the US if you just work to live, it is essentially one page. However, there is an extremely long and fat tail where the government has no way of knowing the correct details to compute your taxes. There are myriad subsidies and offsets that have to be accounted for, many of which depend on what State you live in.
If you earn a lot of money, like the tech people that frequent this website, you are much more likely to find yourself in that fat tail. It can become esoteric quite quickly. The Federal tax code has to accommodate the completely independent tax codes of all 50 States in a reasonable way.
Yes, it's complicated because the tax code has been designed for special cases, where there is an opportunity cost to identify and use the special case, but that can be paid for with large enough savings. If hiring that tax preparer/accountant costs $1000 more, but reduces the tax by $1001, then it is economically worthwhile. But in reality, most people are not able to use these provisions and of those who technically can, only a few can use them efficiently.
If you mostly have income from wages, interest, and dividends, your tax is hard to reduce using special provisions and your return is easy to file. If you have a lot of income from business investments, property, minerals, esoteric securities, gambling, etc., then you have more places where you can use these things, and your taxes are accordingly complex.
All right, I guess I see your point. If you company doesn't handle the complexity, it can be a nightmare.
Where I've worked, they withhold the necessary number of shares from RSU's and it just gets taxed as W-2 income. Then, it shows up with the taxed cost basis in Fidelity so you don't get double taxed when selling shares. It doesn't appear like they have to factor in travel into that equation - that's only for your salary.
As far as options, it was similar where I was receiving them. The only issue I ever had exercising options was when the company whose stock I was trading changed names, and then the IRS suddenly believed all those options were 0 cost basis and wanted a bunch of money. That took two rounds of letters and a call to HR to get sorted out. Granted - laws have changed since then - that fiasco was 18 years ago.
>Where I've worked, they withhold the necessary number of shares from RSU's and it just gets taxed as W-2 income. Then, it shows up with the taxed cost basis in Fidelity so you don't get double taxed when selling shares.
The same as where I work (Schwab though for me, not Fidelity). However, they don't track wash sales for me. Do they track wash sales for you? From what I understand, federal law tells brokers to track wash sales for regular stock purchases and sales, but not for stock from vested RSUs, but still requires the stock holder to track wash sales for stock from vested RSUs.
>It doesn't appear like they have to factor in travel into that equation - that's only for your salary.
My employer also doesn't generally track travel for the purposes of taxes. But the state laws say I need to do it and file taxes based on my tracking.
Morgan Stanley at Work seems to track wash sales. Last year I had two vests in May, one week apart. I'd instructed the brokerage to sell some of those shares on vest. On the first date, I experienced a capital loss (less than $20), due to price movement between the RSU vesting and the broker selling the resulting stock. This was reported on the 1099B as a disallowed wash sale due to my acquisition of more stock with the second vest a week later.
There is actually a pretty massive tax evasion problem. Or at least the IRS is pretty sure there is, but they don’t have the resources to go after even a small fraction of them. The only thing that keeps people honest is the worry that if they lie, the IRS might already know (based on e.g. 1099 reports that go to the IRS), or they’ll get audited (which actually happens very infrequently).