IRS builds task force to explore running its own free e-file system

(Sometimes it takes me 2 or 3 tries because I mistyped a number from a W2 or missed a line or something.)

The form is totally fine - according to IRS, one just needs to write "NRA" ("non-resident alien") instead of spouse's SSN and that's it. But for some technical reason (despite, AFAIK, IRS having at least 4 iterations of XML schemas) e-filing is said to be not possible - one gotta print and mail it.

Worse, I had to explain how this works to "specialists" at H&R Block, as they almost made a mistake of suggesting to file my returns as "single" (glad I did my own research, huh). And I can't use FreeTaxUSA because they don't support such scenario either.

Edit: Upd: freefilefillableforms.com doesn't let me type in "NRA" in that field either. (Doesn't really matter, works for me as long as I get a PDF out of this)

I honestly don't know what a "public-private partnership" means, or how that's different from the IRS just contracting a company to build a product. But it seems awfully integrated into the IRS's website, so there's clearly a "partnership" -- it can't be total randos (hopefully??).

I don't see any obvious red flags in the privacy policy, is there something to be worried about?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_File#Free_File_Fillable_F...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_File_Alliance

Here's an interesting and relevant news story.

https://news.yahoo.com/irs-urges-millions-taxpayers-delay-15...

If even the IRS doesn't know what their own rules are within the many pages of vague, complicated, and contradictory rules, what chance does an average person have to not mess up at least one thing in their taxes? The immense complexity of the tax code and the chance for getting something wrong gives them power to theoretically try and ruin anybody they want to go after, or at least have them have a lot of influence over peoples lives.

Governments want power and influence, and the IRS isn't going to vote to give away their own power. Having everybody being afraid of the IRS and making people jump through hoops gives them power and influence. This type of power isn't something that will go away with a fight.

It’s amazing how much whining there is about these forms. A smart high schooler could do even a moderately complicated tax return. It’s when you own a business of some kind (including investment properties) that things get hard.

There are a few cases (some crypto 1099s) where they tell you the basis on the statement, but don't actually send that to the IRS since it's not a security. In that case, you'd copy

There are a few scenarios where the brokerage doesn't know the right basis though--examples would be a wash sale across two different accounts.

This is roughly what the UK does.

I wouldn't care if I over pay. After paying someone hundreds in fees to do my taxes I don't usually get much of any money back. I'd rather let the government keep $400 than give it to a tax company that probably won't actually help me in an audit.

1. Final price including tax

2. Fiber to the home

3. Optional tax returns

4. High speed rail

5. Unarmed alternatives to police

Of those, the following have (despite being impossible to do though already done) managed to find themselves unimpossibled:

1. Fiber to the home (I had it)

2. High speed rail (Acela)

3. Unarmed alternatives to police (Camden, NJ)

The fascinating thing about the Internet is all these things that just are so impossible to do (usually in the US) but are somehow already done elsewhere and then, given time, the impossible is done. At the rate of impossibilities, I think we might actually be the case that dS<0 is possible globally.

Business taxes are different. That's fine. Accountants are a cost of doing business.

The child tax credit and other tax credits are bad examples. The IRS isn't going to bust your front door open because you didn't take a tax credit. What would end up happening under the push tax system is:

IRS: "We think you owe $4,200.69 in taxes"

Parents: "Not so fast! We had quadruplets this year, we're taking a credit!"

IRS: "Yikes, we'll give you $2,000 this year as a refund, good luck."

(I obviously have no idea what the tax credit for quadruplets is, this is not tax advice.)

It just doesn't make sense that we need to ask these questions every tax year: "Did you have kids? Did you get married? How much money did you make according to the W2 your employer already sent us? What other income did you make according to the 1099s we were already sent by other institutions?"

All of this just so a small group of people can be... checks notes... reminded to take a child tax credit? They can always just put a cute little reminder about the various tax credits on the bill.

The only other examples are highly-regulated or people who are already operating under the table (in which case the IRS already doesn't know and the IRS will continue to not know). Business tax returns are almost always going to have to continue as the IRS pulling the information, but for normal people, tax returns should not be a burden.

It's sad that the IRS can't prefile taxes. The information is there.

In countries that do auto withholding/filing, you still need to tell the tax authority about any tax events, but for most workers, most years don’t require you to take any action.

It's completely true for most people. "And a new paper estimates that at least 41 percent of American households — some 62 million tax filing units — could have their entire tax returns handled this way with no further intervention necessary." https://www.vox.com/23055489/irs-automatic-filing-prepopulat...

Even if that's too high of an estimate, there are absolutely 10s of millions of people for whom the IRS already has the correct amount of taxes calculated based on the forms they receive from other entities. Sure, you might have to ask people a few questions, but my statement is accurate for an enormous percent of the population.

The IRS doesn't have to have facts on your marriage and children; all w2 employees already keep a w4 up to date with this information - or at least are legally bound to.

In one year I had some "extra income" besides my job and had to file a return and pay some extra money.

The next year they asked me what my "extra income" was for that year and when the letter got lost by me they just assumed the same amount as the prior year and sent me the bill for that.

After the initial shock and beating myself up for that mistake, I could simply file a correction and got it fixed with no problem.

Not really ... Americans for Tax Reform (Grover Norquist) .. a very influential conservative group, opposes this because they want people to associate taxes with pain. If its easier to do, its less pain.

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax...

How complex are your taxes that you need more than one CPA and lawyers to do them?

So, the statute of limitations seems… pretty ironclad. I don’t understand the issue you’re raising. If you don’t want them to look further back, don’t consent to extending the statute of limitations?

3 years (from the later of date of filing or the due date) to audit any return, for any reason. The 3 year statute of limitations applies to taxpayers seeking refunds by filing an amended return. Note that because the amended return is essentially a new return, the IRS gets 3 years to audit the amended return.

6 years (from the later of date of filing or the due date) to audit a return with a substantial undereporting of gross income or overstatement of deductions in credits resulting in a 25% or more understatement of taxable income

No deadline for returns that were not filed. Because obviously you can't audit a return that hasn't been filed.

There is also no deadline for fraudulent returns. Fraud is something more than the type of things that would trigger a 6-year audit window, like trying to avoid tax entirely, or taking advantage of a deduction or credit for which it's clear that the taxpayer wouldn't qualify for without some active effort to falsify their return. (Think Wesley Snipes.)

I think their point was that this case should be "log in, check the totals match, click OK", not an hour of your time.

Or better yet, not require you to do anything if you believe your withholdings were sufficient.

Sure, if you have a bunch of weird expenses/deductions you can file, but for most people, the numbers the government has are already correct.

- page zoom at 100% or different

- hardware acceleration on or off

- autofill on

- history tracked

- cookies recorded

And it is able to do it. Software engineering is usually far ahead of most other fields, it is true, but I think this concept https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_(computer_science) is transferable without it being too much trouble.

It would be a lot easier in most cases then you’re making it out to be - and even in exceptional cases, you would only have to address those exceptions, and skip the drudgery of regurgitating all the information the government could have easily found for itself.

The first two would be minor corrections. The latter two would naturally require more attention and detail, but they don't apply to most people.

> Deducting mortgage interest?

The IRS has my 1098s. They know the mortgage interest, principal, and origination date.

And taxes have never taken "just" an hour of my time. It's an entire afternoon of frustrated reading up on tax esoterica so I can figure out e.g. whether I should itemize or take the standard deduction (which I always wind up doing anyway). And 14 other things that I promptly forget about.

You end up with a situation where if the IRS ignores it, then I’m getting away with paying less than my fair share. If they don’t ignore it, then it’s a lot of unavoidable hassle for me.

If the IRS gives me their calculations (which they do already!) then I know the baseline they’re using. If something looks wrong, or they don’t cover some scenarios in my life, I can simply adjust those situations from the IRS baseline.

This leads to a much more transparent, less stressful, more efficient process.

I think the less discussed part about this is the philosophical aspect of it as well. The current system frames the IRS-taxpayer relationship as adversarial. Now, this may be naturally true for 2-3% of high earners. But it’s not for 90+% of people who are basically just receiving a paycheck.

Starting with the IRS baseline allows the process for that 90+% to be more collaborative as opposed to adversarial, with either side trying to see how much they can get away with in the latter system.

Something like 85% of people take the standard deduction. I itemize most years, and pretty much everything I itemize (taxes and mortgage interest) are things the government already knows about. I think the only exception is charitable donations.

It would be a great time saver to just get a form from the IRS saying "here's everything we know, edit any mistakes or things we missed".

So if you file for an extension, don’t pay anything by April 15, and then it turns out you owe $1000 in taxes in October, you will now have to pay $1000 + penalty + interest on the $1000.

Filing for an extension only extends the time to file your taxes. Not the time to pay your taxes (I think the one exception to this was when COVID hit, where even the date to pay taxes was extended, but I’m not a 100% sure).

In many other countries the government provides you a pre-filled form. You can sign and return or file your own with relevant "loopholes."

There are two groups of people who want to keep tax filing difficult. Grover Norquist feels if paying taxes is too easy people won't be angry about it. This increases support for cutting taxes. The other group are tax preparers, like Intuit.

[1] http://www.freeby50.com/2012/12/what-percent-of-people-file-...

That is, we go ahead and tax consumption of land, road space, emissions, extraction, etc and everyone receives the same monthly sum that is enough to cancel out the taxes paid by a person who uses a minimal share of resources.

(Though I'm not sure I'd consider police interactions as a source of consumption taxes as per the original poster.)

2. Tax credits can relieve regression in consumption taxing; small consumers can pay as little as nothing.