Hacker News Reader

Comment by 4ndrewl | Hacker News Reader

What's the story behind this? In the UK you've been able to file your tax returns online for well over a decade.

Such a system has been in use in Canada too, since... 2001.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NETFILE

NETFILE doesn't interface directly with end users, it's more like a backend service. Canadians still need to use third-party software to file their taxes.

The government lists certified software, including free applications:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/e-services/...

Directly filing your taxes in the US was currently mail-in only until this pilot originated.

Intuit and the likes have lobbied with their millions to make sure the average citizen can only e-file with a few select proprietary options and it has been that way for as long as most anyone remembers.

This opens the gates for what might be (I didn't look much into the site) an easy way to e-file directly with the IRS.

The IRS does have an option for tax payers to electronically fill and file those mail-in forms directly. [0] No printing or mailing required, and there's no income limit. It's called Free File Fillable Forms, and I've used it for the past 4 tax years.

[0] https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/free-file-fillable-form...

In Hong Kong and France, the two places I pay taxes in, it's been digital, free and trivial for as long as I've been a taxpayer, a decade+, as well.

It's just weird when you realize the U.S. is so bloated and backward compared to places they criticize constantly like France and HK :D I suppose they don't have ways to pay taxes monthly there either, so it's all a giant lump sum yearly or a tax loan ?

I always wondered why giant tax jurisdictions never try to just do one single non-micro-optimized tax rate ladder across everyone and zero other taxes / deduction / special regimen etc.

I know HK is much smaller, but having only one single tax to collect at a very simple percentage rate, with very few deduction, makes it so cheap and simpler that the government can reduce taxes because it collects them so efficiently. France collects directly from salary, so now there's no tax return for the vast majority of tax payers, it's a bit riskier since you can't escape it, but... can't do much simpler.

> I suppose they don't have ways to pay taxes monthly there either, so it's all a giant lump sum yearly or a tax loan ?

Many (most?) people in the US pay their taxes by withholding, which comes out of each paycheck. But if not, quarterly payments are generally required. You can make payments monthly if you like, but for determining if payments were timely, they'll be aggregated by quarters.

> I always wondered why giant tax jurisdictions never try to just do one single non-micro-optimized tax rate ladder across everyone and zero other taxes / deduction / special regimen etc.

All the wacky deductions and special credits and what not are implementation of economic policies. Credits encourage behavior, and taxes discourage it. For some, a paperwork burden is enough to discourage behaviors.

> France collects directly from salary, so now there's no tax return for the vast majority of tax payers, it's a bit riskier since you can't escape it, but... can't do much simpler.

The US does withholding, but it's not necessarily correct for many reasons; some good, some bad. If income tax was a flat rate with no deductions, withholding would be enough. But other sources of income, such as bank interest or stock sales, usually don't have withholding, so you'd need to pay those taxes separately. And your employer may not know about your spouse's income, etc. And, people like getting a refund, even it doesn't make fiscal sense.

The vast majority of personal tax paid is income tax, which is very adjustable and the most powerful lever the government has to change what people do.

If most tax came from things that aren't "leverable" (everyone pays the same VAT/sales tax on a given item, they don't pay the same income tax) then it is forced to be much simpler.

Also, a decent amount of "social program funding" comes via things like the EIC and other "tax credits" in the US vs direct payments.

>France collects directly from salary

Its the same in the USA for most workers. You file your taxes at the end of each year to confirm all the numbers are correct, and report deductions.

And adjust, in one way or another, the amount of those deductions. Even if you don't itemize, the amount taken out of salaries for most people between Federal and State doesn't align with what was taken out of their salaries. (For a lot of people, they're actually owed a refund though.)

In countries like the UK, the tax code is simple enough that most employees never have to file a tax return. There isn't a long list of deductions and exemptions, so unless your financial affairs are particularly complicated or unusual, everything is handled by your employer.

Is there no tax on non-employment income?

And the IRS has most of those numbers (if not all for most people). The process should start with the IRS saying, "Here's what we have so far...". Not "We know but we won't tell you. Don't fuck it up cause them we'll screw up."

The process is intentionally designed to insight fear.

It’s the way it is due to lobbying by Intuit and friends, and Republicans wanting the process to be annoying.

You may be correct that it causes fear, but the above is the intent behind the state of things.

Intuit? You do realize there's been a Fed income tax and an IRS for a lot longer than there's been Intuit.

What’s your point? The reason it still sucks despite clear, functioning examples of how to do it better isn’t because we had an income tax in the 1930s or whatever. That has nothing to do with decades of our failing to fix it. We very likely would have by now if not for the two reasons I called out. That’s the “intent” behind it sucking—rent seeking, and political expedience.

Nah. What's *your* point? I mentioned taxes as a tool that weaponizes fear and somehow Intuit enters the conversation? Makes no sense. If you're going to change the direction of the sub-thread please use your blinker.

The situation you described in your post, concluding that it’s intentionally designed to cause fear, isn’t that way to cause fear, it’s that way for the reasons I mentioned. That was my point. It’s entirely relevant to all of the post that I responded to.

Again, what does Intuit have to do with it? Intuit is late to the game. It's simply another *symptom*. I don't want to talk about symptoms. Let's talk about root problems, otherwise symptoms are a distraction.

If you want to end the problems you brought up, the two causes I mentioned are what you’ll be working to overcome. “Income tax exists” is not the reason we do it poorly.

Nah. Not really. To solve a problem, you surface and address the root. What you want to do is what politicians do. That is, roll out a symptom. Hack a band aid on it. Smile. Take credit. And then watch the balloon grab pop out somewhere else.

Intuit will come and go and the IRS will still be an agent of fear. Let's stop f'ing around already. Please???!! Not just for this issue, but all issues.

What you're suggesting we do, we ALWAYS do. And it's just one balloon grab after another. Stop the insanity already.

The US is complicated by having multiple independent and sovereign tax authorities (minimally Federal and at least one State). Add on top of this a highly diversified geographic scope that creates regions with unusual realities that encourage quite varied local tax structures. Even though many types of withholding are automatic, you still have to reconcile their complex interactions if your taxes are anything but trivial.

> I suppose they don't have ways to pay taxes monthly there either

They have.

Interestingly, I actually have trouble to do this with my HK job. There is no way to do this in my company. I have to pay the tax every year in "a giant lump sum".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com