Hacker News Reader

Comment by jeffwask | Hacker News Reader

The budget for the IRS has been continually slashed since Reagan despite all research on the subject showing increasing funding to the IRS funding increased revenue well beyond it's cost.

The IRS has publicly stated on a number of occasions they do not go after the wealthy because they do not have the resources to win in the ensuing legal battles.

This leaves the poor and middle class as the only groups they can target.

View on HN

This is 100% the story. The IRS can help make sure everyone is playing fair if we sufficiently fund them. And they can stop policing all the little issues and go after the big ones if we sufficiently fund them. AND sufficiently funding them is expected to increase tax revenue above the cost of funding them.

It's the most obvious and should be the most bipartisan approach. It's introducing no new taxes, it's equitable, it improves revenue (which could allow you hypothetically cut taxes.) It drives me up the wall that this isn't just a fast, handshake and proceed bit of legislation.

For every $1 of additional funding, the IRS brings in $3. They're the only federal government entity for which this is true. Increasing their finding should be an absolute no-brainer, but many powerful people have a vested interest in keeping the IRS weak and small and underfunded, so that's what we've got.

The Panama papers should be all the proof we need.

The Panama papers had enough data to chase tax cheats for decades.

The Panama paper resulted in zero.

> zero

https://www.irs.gov/compliance/criminal-investigation/us-tax... https://www.irs.gov/compliance/criminal-investigation/us-acc...

Fine so one of the biggest financial crime leaks in history implicating the wealthy and powerful all over the world resulted in one unknown old man and his accountant getting a couple years. Cool.

It effectively introduces new taxes for the powerful people currently getting away with dodging them, which should be a pretty clear indication of why we aren’t seeing stronger support.

If dodging/bungling taxes were a Civil matter instead of a Criminal matter, it might be easier to get support for better enforcement.

> should be the most bipartisan approach

Lol [1][2][3].

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/07/07/irs-taxes...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-infrastructure-deal-teet...

[3] https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/middle-class-americans-...

I'm aware, I'm pointing out the hypocrisy in these specific cases.

> budget for the IRS has been continually slashed since Reagan

Congress is working on boosting it [1].

[1] https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11977

It would not be a very smart move to go after your own supporters... I think politicians know this simple rule of power. they need the money and the connections of affluent ppl.

"Defund the Police" but for rich republicans.

In recent years after Reagan, both the Executive branch and Legislative branch have been dominated by the same party, at various times

Congress | House | Senate | Presidency | Status

101st (1989–1991) Democrats Democrats Republican (G.H.W. Bush) Divided

102nd (1991–1993) Democrats Democrats Republican (G.H.W. Bush) Divided

103rd (1993–1995) Democrats Democrats Democrat (Clinton) Unified

104th (1995–1997) Republicans Republicans Democrat (Clinton) Divided

105th (1997–1999) Republicans Republicans Democrat (Clinton) Divided

106th (1999–2001) Republicans Republicans Democrat (Clinton) Divided

107th (2001–2003) Republicans Republicans / Democrats Republican (G.W. Bush) Unified / Divided

108th (2003–2005) Republicans Republicans Republican (G.W. Bush) Unified

109th (2005–2007) Republicans Republicans Republican (G.W. Bush) Unified

110th (2007–2009) Democrats Democrats Republican (G.W. Bush) Divided

111th (2009–2011) Democrats Democrats Democrat (Obama) Unified

112th (2011–2013) Republicans Democrats Democrat (Obama) Divided

113th (2013–2015) Republicans Democrats Democrat (Obama) Divided

114th (2015–2017) Republicans Republicans Democrat (Obama) Divided

115th (2017–2019) Republicans Republicans Republican (Trump) Unified

116th (2019–2021) Democrats Republicans Republican (Trump) Divided

117th (2021-2023) Democrats Democrats Democrat (Biden) Unified

Please, lay off the partisanship.

Correct neither party cares about the will of the people both parties are beholden to the rich and corporations.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-poli...

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

At the same time, we do have to acknowledge that "Cutting the IRS or Eliminating the IRS" has consistently been a platform agenda item for Republican candidates for office both because it supports their agenda and because it is wildly popular with their base who think it means less taxes.

At the same time, when the democrats have held power they have typically not made efforts to fund the IRS because it conflicts with their agenda and because it is wildly unpopular with their base who think it means more taxes.

So while the results are the same with both parties, one party specifically uses the elimination of the IRS as a campaign rallying cry.

It's been kind of a game like abortion rights were until it was no longer a game. The both use it to raise campaign donations then do fuck all about it.

and please don't make me pull out all the Ted Cruz tweets

And yet, oddly, only one party has the platform of "drowning the government in a bathtub" which, if you think about it, is isomorphic with "defund the police".

Haven't you heard, Republicans are all about defunding or murdering the police all of the sudden. Or maybe just the FBI?

Grover Norquist is dead and was not a Republican politician, but an professional antitax lobbyist.

Grover Norquist is alive. Many Republican politicians adopted his tax pledge.

I have no idea why the poor are advocating tax rises when they are clear on the losing side

Reply on news.ycombinator.com