Are you kidding? It's in human nature to complain. It's further in human nature to presume guilt of another than oneself. Complaining about the IRS is incredibly easy. Complaining about the IRS objectively is not.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
why people hate the IRS
- Thread starter billwald
- Start date
- Status
This woman filed a tax return that apparently did not pass muster on first look - so the IRS asked her to support her statements.
That would be the investigation of the evidence.
Apparently in that investigation it was found that her information as provided was not accurate.
I have not taken any side here other than to ask questions.
As I see it this woman works at a job where much of one's income is in the form of tips.
People who earn tips can sometimes be tempted to under report their income.
The IRS compared her reported income with the local cost of living and asked her how she was able to make it on her relatively low level of reported income.
When she stated that she lives with her parents it became a natural question as to who is supporting and is thereby entitled to declare the kids as dependents.
If here parents are providing housing, utilites, food, etc to those kids then it is a matter of tax code regulations as to who gets the exemption for the kids.
If she took them as dependents when she in fact is not providing for the majority of their support then she is going to owe more tax.
What is the complaint here?
Why are you so in favor of this woman not paying taxes if she in deed owes them?
Why should you and I a whole lot of other people pay higher taxes just because some people decide that they don't want to pay what they owe?
I seriously don't get it.
Excellent statement.
I have no problem paying reasonable taxes - as long as all comply.
John, you obviously have never had to deal with complicated tax forms nor witnessed the IRS do a butcher job on someone's life. Yes, some people cheat, but many make honest mistakes and are crucified for it. Plus, I shouldn't have to pay someone hundreds of dollars to wade through wads of red tape to complete my taxes. You are kidding aren't you about chiding us for not wanting to live up to our responsibility? You really love to patornize folks don't you. Sorry, that the rest of us don't live up to your high standards. Actually, I don't mind paying taxes and I enjoy the benefits that my government provides but the current tax code and regulation of it is out of control. But, if you want to keep you patronizing head in the sand be my guest.
>>Just happenstance that the IRS claimed that 13K was owed? Under $10K and the mother could have filed in IRS small claims court.
>That depends on your local small claims court - here the limit is more like $2,000 - you are making too many broad stroke assumptions.
>I was in private practice for over 20 years as a CPA and dealt with the IRS many many times on behalf of my clients. Not once was it ever necessary to go to any court.
You been a CPA in practice for 20 years and don't know that IRS cases are filed in federal court?
Apologize for bad info. When I was "tax protesting" the limit for small claims was $10K.
From http://www.lawsguide.com/mylawyer/guideview.asp?layer=3&article=578
Small Claims in U.S. Tax Court
The federal Tax Court has a special division for small cases. If you're facing a dispute with the IRS, it may be just what you need.
Small claims courts are a vital part of each state's court system. Unfortunately, the federal government has not incorporated this user-friendly, informal and inexpensive forum into its trial court system -- with one notable exception.
That exception comes from the federal Tax Court, which has a special "small case" division. It's open to cases in which the IRS claims that the amount of taxes and penalties you owe for any one tax year is $50,000 or less. For example, if you've been audited for three years and the IRS claims you owe $50,000 for each year -- a total of $150,000 -- your case qualifies for the small case division. A case that qualifies for the small claims court-type handling is called a "small case" and is given an "S" designation.
Almost half of the people who file a small case in Tax Court end up getting some tax reduction. You may not even have to go to court; before your trial date, the IRS will ask you to meet with its lawyer to try to reach a settlement. Most tax court cases -- more than 80% -- settle without trial.
If you do go to court, you'll find that Tax Court operates much like a small claims court. You simply tell the judge your story and show your evidence.
>That depends on your local small claims court - here the limit is more like $2,000 - you are making too many broad stroke assumptions.
>I was in private practice for over 20 years as a CPA and dealt with the IRS many many times on behalf of my clients. Not once was it ever necessary to go to any court.
You been a CPA in practice for 20 years and don't know that IRS cases are filed in federal court?
Apologize for bad info. When I was "tax protesting" the limit for small claims was $10K.
From http://www.lawsguide.com/mylawyer/guideview.asp?layer=3&article=578
Small Claims in U.S. Tax Court
The federal Tax Court has a special division for small cases. If you're facing a dispute with the IRS, it may be just what you need.
Small claims courts are a vital part of each state's court system. Unfortunately, the federal government has not incorporated this user-friendly, informal and inexpensive forum into its trial court system -- with one notable exception.
That exception comes from the federal Tax Court, which has a special "small case" division. It's open to cases in which the IRS claims that the amount of taxes and penalties you owe for any one tax year is $50,000 or less. For example, if you've been audited for three years and the IRS claims you owe $50,000 for each year -- a total of $150,000 -- your case qualifies for the small case division. A case that qualifies for the small claims court-type handling is called a "small case" and is given an "S" designation.
Almost half of the people who file a small case in Tax Court end up getting some tax reduction. You may not even have to go to court; before your trial date, the IRS will ask you to meet with its lawyer to try to reach a settlement. Most tax court cases -- more than 80% -- settle without trial.
If you do go to court, you'll find that Tax Court operates much like a small claims court. You simply tell the judge your story and show your evidence.
saturneptune
New Member
No, I am not kidding. What possible sense does it make to put trust in a government agency over an average, hard working citizen? The IRS has proven in the past it is a political instrument, such as in the Watergate era. The guilt lies in the very nature of the IRS. There are always some dishonest citizens, but not the whole electorate. The low opinion you have of the average American is what keeps exchanging power from Democrat to Republican and vice versa, keeping this country in chains. Its the low bar, no vision, no individual striving of greater heights, just the C average life style. All the while, the government takes away more and more liberties. But listen, you keep on posting the high standards of the IRS.
It isn't an issue of trusting a government agency vs trusting a citizen. It's an issue of our sinful nature, which includes a propensity to want to automatically cast the IRS as the bad guy.
Don't blame me, I voted almost exclusively Republican in the last election. Hey, you just blamed me for something.... I think that's a good example of that same propensity I was talking about.
Where did I post the "high standards" of the IRS in the first place. I was addressing the propensity of people to want to lay blame elsewhere first, and on themselves second.
saturneptune
New Member
Thats a fact. I will state this once again. If the woman had broken the law, then the federal authorities should arrest her, the federal prosecuters should prosecute her, and she should be tried by a jury of her peers.
No one should have to pay more taxes because others don't. However, put things in perspective. What all the dishonest people owe to the government would be less than one percent of the stimulus package your democratic and republican buddies shoved down our throats, you know, the same ones that write the tax law and gives power to the IRS.
You are paying higher taxes because of the politicians in both parties, as there is no difference. If you want to get angry, get angry at the garbage holding the positions of leadership.
saturneptune
New Member
So please explain to us all what is the difference between a liberal Republican and a liberal Democrat.
So you think that everyone who makes a mistake on their tax return should be arrested and tried?
As opposed to simply paying the correct tax?
Your are right, but the fact is that those who cheat the system cause the tax rates to be higher than they would be otherwise.
Ok - but I am talking about the topic of this thread - not some side road that you are now choosing to take.
See above.
Actually, you can't get jailed for not paying a tax. You can get arrested for not filing, but you can't get arrested for not paying.
saturneptune
New Member
No, if it was a mistake they should merely pay the tax. What does that have to do with the thug like tactics of the IRS?
What were the "thug like tactics" used by the IRS in the OP?
why do we see the IRS in a negative light?
- An incomprehensible tax code. It asks for dishonesty, because no one can decipher it. It practically encourages two things:
- Cheating by people frustrated with its complexity (I'm not saying that excuses dishonesty...but that there is more cheating because of people's frustrations).
- Abuse by enforcers...because who's going to know that they're wrong? Besides...if tax court says they're right...then they are right, no matter what they did.
- Their un-American approach. With the IRS, one is "guilty until proven innocent," not the other way around.
The current tax system is unfair and only exits to give politicians power. We need a tax that goes across the board evenly which will do away with cuts and loopholes and remove the ability of politicians to control the behavior of the American people.
saturneptune
New Member
Here is the first one:
"They showed us a spreadsheet of incomes in the Seattle area," says Dante Driver, an accountant at Seattle's G.A. Michael and Co. "The auditor said, 'You made eighteen thousand, and our data show a family of three needs at least thirty-six thousand to get by in Seattle."
First of all, government statistics are gathered with faulty premises and inept analysis. There is a much better chance that she is surviving at numbers well below what the IRS thinks she should be living at in Seattle because she has common sense than the government is right. This is an assumption made by the brain dead IRS agents. A government spread sheet is no evidence whatsoever, from probable cause to reasonable doubt. Therefore this is nothing but harrasssment, a tactic of a thug, or a totalitarian state.
Here is the second element of acting like thugs.
She had a yearlong odyssey into the maw of the IRS. After being told she couldn't survive in Seattle on so little, she was notified her returns for both 2006 and 2007 had been found "deficient." She owed the government more than $16,000 — almost an entire year's pay.
A finding totally without foundation, without evidence. The fact she was told she owed $16K without a basis is another instance of harrassment. This is nothing but power in a governmental agency out of control, intimidating a person, a fellow American citizen.
Here is a third incident of being thugs.
"I was floored," says Rob Porcaro, 59. "I get audited now and then in my business, so I've been through it before. But to have them go after me because of my daughter, well, I've never heard of anything like it."
Rob and his wife, Patty, had to send in house blueprints, bank statements, old utility bills. Rachel was asked to prove her children were hers, as well as document the money she'd spent on her children's clothes, health care and so on.
They racked up $10,000 in accountant bills — $8,000 of which Driver is trying to recover from the IRS.
In the end, the parents were cleared. The IRS also backed off trying to reclaim Rachel's earned income tax credit.
What does this sound like? Going after relatives? It sounds exactly like Nazi Germany or Saddam's Iraq to me.
And this comment
Way to go, IRS. You did an investigation likely costing tens of thousands of dollars (counting both sides). To squeeze a grand out of a single mom who did nothing wrong.
Everyone of them should be fired for squandering our tax money on wasted time and effort.
And finally this.
The Porcaros say they get that the IRS can't just audit the wealthy. Poor people commit fraud, too. But the intensity and duration of the IRS' "obsession," as Rob called it, as well as that it appears the agency was trolling for the working poor, remains a sore point.
It's why they agreed to talk about their finances in the newspaper.
"I feel they're persecuting the people who are down in the mud making the bricks," Rob says. "I'm sure there are tons who don't have the resources to lawyer up. What a way to go, to have your own government take you down because you're too poor."
Driver, the tax specialist, says it's well-known that the system targets the weak — people with sloppy returns, for example, who don't tend to be well off.
"It's the way a wolf goes after the weakest sheep."
They should be tried for treason, everyone of them.
Have you ever read the Constitution? Do you understand what the terms liberty and freedom mean? Do you know what it means to be secure in your own home? I fail to see why you constantly run down the Democrats. Your posts are right in line with their philosophy of government, and well as the Republican pitch.
So, is that what it's come to? If you can't make a valid argument, insult the person? That says more about your immaturity than anyone's politics.
Not so sure. That would get rid of things like home interest deductions, business deductions, charitable contribution deductions, etc.
What we need is to replace the income tax with a sales tax. That would not discourage a person from making money, but would discourage people from making unwise buying decisions. Plus, it would preserve the deductions we all enjoy (no sales tax on interest, etc).
saturneptune
New Member
My views are quite clear. Those who pretend there is a difference between the anti-Constitutional Democrats and Republicans are part of the problem. There is no insult to it. It is just a fact. The very idea of posting support for an out of control governmental agency with no moral fiber over an American citizen is an outrage.
- Status