Very big difference. HRBlock and Intuit are heavily vested in maintaining the current tax filing system. They are not, however, meaningful players in the attempts to rewrite the tax code.
I fail to see what being interested in the state of continued being of something has to do with having been the inventor.
IIRC you can't deduct relocation expenses, wardrobe for work, books and training materials, or a whole bunch of other stuff on a 1040 EZ.
So sure, as long as you want to overpay your taxes you can file in about 45 seconds.
Even a 1040 "long form" (2 pages) with itemized deductions for mortgage interest isn't that complicated.
I file about a 10 page return, 1040 with schedule A, schedule C, self-employment and various others and I always do it myself on paper.
If you are at the point where you think you need TurboTax, you're probably better off just hiring a local CPA firm to do your taxes.
For free worksheets to do the calculations, http://www.excel1040.com/
Filing the state return electronically is different by state, but often either doable or you can mail it in.
For the rest, it is still up to me to declare additional incomes (e.g. rental properties) or deductions (e.g. donations). It does simplify though the process, especially for "W-2" employees.
At the end of the tax year you get a P60 form that tells you how much tax you paid over the last year.
Instead of opting for the deductibles route, goods are subsidised at point of sale, so e.g. if you're buying solar panels, you don't need to cover the whole thing up front, or whatever financing deal you get, then claim money back in your tax return; instead the price you buy the panel at already has the subsidy baked in.
There is a slight difference between the UK and US, though, in that there is no per-state/county income taxes. Only UK wide. Individual counties use property tax to raise what revenues they need (counties are also responsible for a lot less things than States)
Not completely true. Scotland has for several years now had the power to set higher or lower income tax rates than the rest of the UK, but until this year they've never actually used that power. But now this year, Scottish income tax rates are actually being set slightly higher than the rest of the UK – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/02/middle-class-scot...
They at least usually shield the daylight robbery GST from us. Probably so we can sleep at night.
GST is a pain, but no capital gains tax is also a big win for many (and many states in the US, including California, have one of those too.)
It's amazing how quickly someone's feeling on taxation can flip once tax season means writing a check instead of getting a refund.
Of course, that's exactly why the system is set up the way it is; a number on a pay slip feels much less real than dollars that you have to fork over, so people hardly realize the extent to which the government is fleecing them.
In Denmark and many other countries this is a non-issue. The US should be too but too many interest from the lobbying of people like Intuit.
Second, everyone attempts to cast every policy decision they dislike as evidence of corruption, chicanery, etc., but I don't think that's typically the case. The fact that a corporation and an elected representative agree regarding some policies does not immediately invalidate the position, nor should it immediately implicate the representative in accusations of malfeasance.
People have spent significant time in this thread discussing the pros and cons of such a policy, yet you insist that the only possible reason it would fail with the people's representatives is that "a small minority are profiting from a broken system". I guess since an advocate carried around a binder full of positive reviews, we assume that must be the universal sentiment of the people?
Is it not plausible that, as seen throughout this thread, many people simply don't agree that this would be a positive change?
As a lawyer and tax accountant, do you see a flaw in the professor's approach? Any domain expert insight here?
edit: this is obviously a huge huge problem to tackle, but dont we all feel a lot of energy around this during tax season? :)
EDIT to add: plus the incentives for lawmakers are to keep the system complicated, so all the contributions keep rolling in.
Most people are not going to have personal concerns over a pre-filled return as long as they are confident that they can modify it without repercussions. They may oppose it ideologically, on the basis that the government should experience as much friction as possible in its efforts to fleece the populace. Such an ideological position is a valid reason to oppose this change.
Tax evasion is not a valid ideological policy. Tax minimization, fine, everyone is entitled to deduct as much as the tax code allows. Tax evasion is crossing the line into crime. That's literally always where the line has been drawn on taxes - "pay unto Caesar what is Caesar's".
If you don't like the tax policy, leave. It's part of the social contract - find somewhere to live where you agree with the social contract.
(and yes expatriation should be easier)
>If you don't like the tax policy, leave. It's part of the social contract - find somewhere to live where you agree with the social contract.
lol? This attitude is the antithesis of democracy. In democracies, we say, "If you don't like it, contact your representatives and organize some peaceful, lawful opposition, and you may convince enough people to change it."
And indeed, it appears that's exactly what the people of California did when they didn't like this proposal, and of course, rather than admit defeat, the other side blames a corporation that dared to exercise its rights.
I don't know what it is with HN lately, but a lot of these really vapid, myopic memes have been invading the political threads here. I didn't make it to HN until right after Obama was elected, so maybe this is just how it is when Republicans are in power? The "threat" becomes more credible, resentment becomes more palpable, and it's get taken out on the users on the board?
White noise response, nice. "How dare you post about XYZ".
Don't do this. If you don't have a point to make, then don't post. Internet bytes are cheap, you are not a mod who gets to flag posts.
You're not the first person to come up with the idea of passive-aggressive responses to things you don't like. And if you want to play the "malicious compliance" game then be my guest... but don't be surprised when an IRS agent or a judge pushes your shit in over it.
A lot of libertarians think that judges are beep-boop robots and will drop their spaghetti all over the floor when you whip out the one secret legal maneuver that attorneys don't want you to know about (judges hate him!).
This is very much not the case, at every level that you will ever reach the law is interpreted in a strongly "common law" view towards actual justice that doesn't really care for your strict textualism. The judge is going to take quite a dim view of you whipping out your clever trick and you are going to suffer for it.
Some don't, SCOTUS is notoriously partisan and the East Texas courts are notoriously friendly to patent law (although SCOTUS has repeatedly slapped down their interpretations). But anywhere you're going to get, don't expect your "the flag has a fringe!" arguments to fly.
By and large, the law will still be interpreted with the context of basic human decency. If you try and be a dick and stall the government with baseless legal maneuvering, the human being on the other side of the stand is going to recognize that and you're going to have a real bad time.
This is a laughably oversimplified way to think about, so much so that there's even a term for how wrong this is: diffuse benefits, concentrated costs (and its inverse, obviously).
That 0.5% of the economy hires 95% of the lobbyists. Corporate lobbying to save or add loopholes dwarfs all other tax-related lobbying efforts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/companies-lobbying-...
Of course, Congress could just pass a law mandating that the IRS take as little as legally required, but as you are surely aware the instant conservative view is that administrative agencies are rapacious out-of-control behemoths restrained only by the heroic efforts of a few valiant champions of liberty etc. etc.
1: http://amigobulls.com/stocks/DNKN/income-stament/annual
2: http://amigobulls.com/stocks/INTU/income-statement/annual