Why the IRS Needs $80B | Hacker News Reader

Why the IRS Needs $80B

washingtonpost.com

38 pointscameron_b34 comments

Mind boggling pictures - really shows just a tiny part of the scale, and just how manual the whole process still is. I can't imagine the difficulty of trying to upgrade systems that are 30-50 years old and maintain compatibility.

Only half joking, but the best ROI might just be hiring a few Gen Z auditors and having them watch TikTok.

The amount of bragging that goes on there about tax evasion, or charitably tax ignorance, is hilarious.

This does not explain why the IRS needs $80 billion.

Do each of these problems take billions of dollars to fix?

$1B ~= 1000 engineers working for 10 years.

$1B ~= buying 1.6 ORNL frontier supercomputers.

> "$80 billion through the Inflation Reduction Act — not only for more enforcement but also for tech modernization."

Just part for computers and consultants fee. But maybe they have plans for old school shoppnigs - machines with tailor made OS, compilers and apps ? ;) But it will be a disaster if they plan to rent some cloud "computing power"... Data on Dark Net within a year ?

Due to more than a decade of Republican budget cuts, the IRS's computer systems are very outdated, and due to those same budget cuts their staff levels are the lowest they've ever been in the modern era.

Most of this $80 billion is going to be spent simply just bringing them up to adequate staffing and technology to meet their current needs.

I love it, solid work there :)

And pretty nicely shows how insecure post 70's computers are :> Don't blame Congress alone !

Edit: btw. that lady on the photo have bad chair or too high desk - monitor top should be a bit below head top :)

Alternative label: "Why the government spends more of your money to take even more of your money, only to give it to eastern europe or israel"

FWIW, I read somewhere that increased enforcement is expected to be revenue-positive, with something like a 4x multiplier: the IRS is currently leaving lots of owed money on the table for want of someone to collect it.

It's worth nothing. The government isn't supposed to generate revenue

If you don't want roads, defense, (some) healthcare, education, research, or any of the myriad other forms of infrastructure that makes civilization work, then sure, you don't need revenue.

If you do, then I would prefer that everyone pay what we've (collectively) decided that they owe. In that sense, a revenue-positive measure is good two ways: spend a buck, get $4 AND it enhances the rule of law by making everyone pay what they owe.

My state can handle all of that, I don't need a federal body that's 24tn in debt to steal even more of my money.

The thing is, the government already has enough income to do all that if they stop doing stupid shit like wasting the GDP equivalent of Mexico on invading desert shitholes or mass producing super-advanced fighter jets when our next closest peer can still be fought off with our cold war surplus

But please, tell me more how giving my money to an entity who routinely invests money in "local" corporations only for them to immediately do buybacks and disappear the money into the haze of wall street economics improves my quality of life

I'd argue that running the IRS like this is one of those dumb things.

There's a massive army of people manually transcribing forms in 2022. One old-timer (and his ability to turn new parts of a lathe!) is all that keeps a massive, country-wide system running.

It's like the definition of penny-wise and pound-foolish.

How much do you think roads, defense, health care, education really cost?

We've given Ukraine 55 billion dollars. We clearly have cash to spare. Why do we need to raise more?

I know the answer to this one: because we are taxed without actual representation. All the good buzzwords apply here- cash grab, wealth transfer, class warfare.

Do you cheat on your taxes?

I don't, so the net result of better enforcement for me is either a) I pay the same, and the government has more money or b) I pay less--and the treasury has the same amount.

Reasonable people can disagree about whether `a` or `b` is better, but I don't see how "we need this inefficient, broken system to create ad hoc tax breaks for people willing to press their luck" is anywhere close to either of them.

c) due to crippling interest rates and surging debt, the government increases the tax rate on the middle class by 15%. with its now 160k auditors, you better comply :)

You do realize that you are the one that pays the cost of an audit right? You're looking at potentially tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to effectively prove your innocence.

Most of what we have given Ukraine is weapons that were already paid for.

The ONLY thing in your list that is the purview of the federal government is defense.

Seriously people, read the freaking constitution. It really isn't that many pages (purposefully!)

Infrastructure is clearly in there too.

- "for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings"; - "fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;" - "To establish Post Offices and post Roads"

In theory, they will not be taking my money because I file an honest return, the focus of audits is people who have been cheating us all.

Sure some innocent people will get wrapped up in audits, but I’d bet the percent is not as high as we would expect.

They’re taking your money via taxes to fund the irs.

That said, it’s a drop in the bucket. This system is unhinged

The cost is a drop in the bucket, the end result is anything but. The people on HN play checkers, our politicians and elite bankers are playing chess.

Why do you need to double the auditing arm of an organization that already doesn't audit the ruling class?

Because, when you expand and increase the middle class tax bracket (i.e. those who actually fucking pay taxes), you want to make sure your pay pig class keeps paying.

I hope you boys are ready :)

They won't be taking more of my money, because I don't lie on my tax returns.

I can't speak for the rest of HN, but this is a truly bizarre thing to complain about.

You don't lie on your tax returns, YET. There's an awful lot of money required to keep this beast going, and it's only getting worse. Our federal debt is 24tn, the M1 is fucking huge https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M1SL, how long until your income tax rate is 40%? 50%?

This IRS growth isn't to address an existing problem, this is preparation for what's to come :)

I didn't lie on my tax returns, either. In 2011 the IRS kicked off an audit, saying that I owed a little more than $50k in unpaid taxes because of inappropriate deductions. (The auditor was a contractor, who's company I found out later, was paid based upon "successful" claims against taxpayers after an audit.)

After contacting the accountant that does our taxes and asking her to represent us, she showed up in the guy's cubicle, filed the paperwork for dispute, and started the audit process.

A week after she showed up to represent us, we received a letter from the IRS stating that we now owed north of $100k. Felt like intimidation to me. After a week of our accountant going over each and every scrap of paper with this guy, turned out that the IRS owed us $2300, which we agreed to give to our accountant for representing us. The contract auditor, according to our accountant, was belligerent and abusive. (edit- we wouldn't have had a chance against this guy without our accountant)

Yes, there are plenty of people that lie on their returns, but I've come across many, many stories like mine as well. Telling the truth on a return is no guarantee that the IRS will not audit you, and I believe that uncalled-for audits are much more prevalent than is generally believed.

(Edit) Not exactly the same thing, but when you say "... because I don't lie on my tax returns." it reminds me of "If you've done nothing wrong, you don't have anything to worry about".

The question I ask to both of those statements is "According to whom?"

Now this is a very sobering anecdote- I am legitimately sorry you had to deal with this. Even more disgusting is that it was farmed out to a company that is incentivized to bully money out of people.

Thanks for sharing.

My experience with the IRS has been that they always assume the worst over trivial errors--you report earning $4312 when their records say $4321 and they're after you for the whole $4321 rather than just the $9 of the error.

They also seem to be unable to accept zebras. I had a run-in with them in the 90s because they lost record of having gotten some money. Took me 6 months to convince them that they really did get that money. In the 80s my mother had a run in with them because of "unreported income"--in hindsight, probably an illegal using her SS#. I went off to college before it was resolved and never did find out what happened.

On the other hand, I know someone who was substantially dinged on the hobby loss rules. Overall, I'm sure the IRS was right, he was engaging in wishful thinking that it was a viable business but I know he feels wronged by the IRS. (To me, he's wronged by Congress, the hobby rules are very unfair. I'd allow income-producing hobbies to file on C but losses are carried and can't be claimed.)

lol - the $80B is for agents, not clerks. Nice puff piece though.

>Taxpayers are trapped in this time warp because Congress has systemically underinvested in the IRS.

Only some taxpayers are "trapped", because they stubbornly refuse to efile their returns. The excess cost to process paper-filed returns of this minority is born directly and indirectly by all taxpayers. (It is very rare that efiling an income tax return is not possible).

Fun fact: back in the late 1990s the IRS had a scannable paper Form 1040-PC[0], not clear why it was discontinued. Very recently, the Taxpayer Advocate recommended that IRS re-institute some form of scanning technology for paper returns, the IRS rejected the recommendation, and the TA is appealing that.[1]

The IRS has actually made tremendous progress in allowing prior year returns to be efiled, and now amended returns can also be efiled.

[0]https://www.taxnotes.com/research/federal/irs-guidance/forms...

[1]https://www.accountingtoday.com/news/taxpayer-advocate-appea...

> Even if you, Joe Taxpayer, file your taxes electronically (as most Americans do), you still might land in paper purgatory. Any issues with your “e-filed” return, and the IRS sends you a letter; then, you must reply by snail mail or fax.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com