I read an in depth article about this over a decade ago which I wish I could find because it wasn't only that they targeted people who couldn't fight back, but there was also a protected class of...
I read an in depth article about this over a decade ago which I wish I could find because it wasn't only that they targeted people who couldn't fight back, but there was also a protected class of people they explicitly could not go after . I couldn't find the article, but here's an article from 2003 https://www.thenation.com/article/and-poor-pay-taxes/ that is basically a telling of the story you posted. In the end we don't care enough to do anything about it.
I used to write letters to my representatives all the time, I used to protest injustices, but I've given up on my fellow Americans to do anything other that sit around and complain at the water cooler or on the internet and then go back to whatever lives they are leading.
More and more I hear people complaining about the inconvenience protesters bring to their lives, "why can't they protest on a weekend or after work?" We put children into cages and our local protest garnered a few hundred people in an area that has over 4 million. Yet the internet was filled with outrage. It was all the talk at my workplace, yet I was the only one that left work and attended. I really thought that this time, I MEAN WE PUT CHILDREN IN FUCKING CAGES, that more of us, enough of us, a majority of us, would, I don't know, do something other than talk.
The IRS does not go where attorneys are. They are predators that go after what they can take with ease. And we allow them to exert their authority unequally.
Calling the IRS employees "predators" goes too far. They are running easy checks on people's tax returns and the result is that some people pay the right amount of taxes when they didn't before....
Calling the IRS employees "predators" goes too far. They are running easy checks on people's tax returns and the result is that some people pay the right amount of taxes when they didn't before. That's not a bad result - or if it is, the tax laws should be changed.
I'm also wondering what protests have to do with this? To get the IRS more funding and get the tax laws changed, Congress has to act. That means winning elections.
My frustration comes from issues that remain issues that we don't seem to be able to do anything about. That sort of put me on a rant that moved from the topic of this post, the IRS, and onto my...
My frustration comes from issues that remain issues that we don't seem to be able to do anything about. That sort of put me on a rant that moved from the topic of this post, the IRS, and onto my general frustration.
I did not call employees of the IRS predators, or I didn't mean to (rereading my sentence, I can see how that could be interpreted that way). The IRS is acting and has acted in the past in a predatory manner by picking off the weaker among us. IMO.
I do share your frustration. The system is set up so that sometimes the only way to get some things done is to win federal elections, or sometimes court cases.
I do share your frustration. The system is set up so that sometimes the only way to get some things done is to win federal elections, or sometimes court cases.
It’s much easier to complain, like or upvote online than it is to actually do something of significance. I’ve visited my reps, written them and have attended demonstrations but even then it’s an...
It’s much easier to complain, like or upvote online than it is to actually do something of significance. I’ve visited my reps, written them and have attended demonstrations but even then it’s an underwhelming group that seem to want change. Our president is a traitor and yet there are no marches. Our senate and congress are paid off and yet no protests. Our courts are rigged and yet we don’t demand justice. Idiocracy isn’t coming from proliferation of morons but rather from apathy of the masses.
What am I gonna do? Quit my job and go on a hunger strike over every single outrage? What am or anyone to do about all these simultaneous issues? Honest questions. Is apathy really so illogical?...
Our president is a traitor and yet there are no marches.
What am I gonna do? Quit my job and go on a hunger strike over every single outrage? What am or anyone to do about all these simultaneous issues? Honest questions. Is apathy really so illogical? I'm as aware as just about anyone and I'm at a loss. I gotta work 40 hours a week to have a job and pay bills. Other have to do even more. Doesn't leave much time for fighting Trump's corruption and fighting climate change.
Protests and marches don't have to be weeks long events. It just feels like everyone has given up and accepted criminal behavior as status quo. Looking back a couple years ago when Trump was...
Protests and marches don't have to be weeks long events. It just feels like everyone has given up and accepted criminal behavior as status quo. Looking back a couple years ago when Trump was elected, people took to the streets all over the US. Now that we have impeachment hearings that Moscow Mitch promises he will block, we don't even get a peep. We don't need Hong Kong levels of protest, but even just a weekend march in large cities or DC would help. Instead, we are relegated to complaining on the web while 40% of Americans stick their fingers in their ears and cry its a witch hunt. America is letting evil triumph because we are too broke, too tired and too apathetic to hold those in power accountable.
Regular working people are utterly disempowered by the current political and economic system. The entire structure of power in modern society is totally uninterested and unbeholden to the desires...
It just feels like everyone has given up and accepted criminal behavior as status quo.
Regular working people are utterly disempowered by the current political and economic system. The entire structure of power in modern society is totally uninterested and unbeholden to the desires and input of the population.
Sorry to say it but marches and demonstrations are not an exercise of power. They are essential in the same way as discussing issues with your peers to be sure. But they are not a meaningful means toward affecting change. By what tangible means do these marches achieve their goals?
America is letting evil triumph because we are too broke, too tired
Demos and protests are the thing I hear talked about all the time but they are marginally effective at best and only accessible to people with jobs and schedules that allow them to participate. We talk about "oh barely anyone shows up." Yeah because they're at work for some massive company that's exploiting them or they are taking care of sick and elderly relatives.
too apathetic to hold those in power accountable
Honest question, gow do you suggest this be accomplished except open revolt? Open revolt is a terrible solution for so many reasons as HK is showing us. But what other means do we have at our disposal? Wait a long ass time for the moment when I have the system's permission to participate by voting for some highly compromised corporate democrat?
I agree that talking to peers can be effective, but I also feel that the current state of social media and web forums is not talking to peers. Marches and protests are definitely not the only way...
I agree that talking to peers can be effective, but I also feel that the current state of social media and web forums is not talking to peers. Marches and protests are definitely not the only way to change the system but they help spread awareness quickly and loudly. Upvoting a meme or commenting approval/disapproval will not change things. I think the most effective way to get change rolling is to be the squeaky wheel. Marches and protests are good at getting attention to let others know your cause, but contacting representatives can be just as effective (depending on the cause and representative).
Personally I think most people currently involved in politics should be kicked out and barred for life, regardless of whether there is a D or R next to their name. I’m excited to see people taking about getting rid of citizens united, reducing lobbying and getting rid of corruption but I won’t be holding my breath. There are and will always be things wrong with our government, but accepting it as “that’s just how it is” will only lead to more problems. We the people are ultimately responsible and need to strive for better education so that we can help others make better informed decisions
I guess it's hard for me to, having systemic critiques, look for avenues of improvement that operate and thereby legitimate the system. The tacit assumption of reformist ideas is that the system...
that's how the system is set up.
I guess it's hard for me to, having systemic critiques, look for avenues of improvement that operate and thereby legitimate the system. The tacit assumption of reformist ideas is that the system can be redeemed and is therefore not totally broken by dint of its design.
Fuck the system. Neo-liberal capitalism is fucked.
I remember my amazement at the outrage over McDonald's "pink slime." America was joined together in their adamant refusal to go another day eating that "garbage." And the biggest thing of all was...
I remember my amazement at the outrage over McDonald's "pink slime." America was joined together in their adamant refusal to go another day eating that "garbage." And the biggest thing of all was they made change happen. Sadly it was over a safe beef product that allowed us to have less waste, but we swelled together and made change, and then we went back to whatever we were doing and no one noticed the significance of our ability to effect change when we are united.
This is the same story as The Jungle (I believe that was the title). The book was written to bring attention to the human cost of the meat processing industry (like losing fingers to the product)....
This is the same story as The Jungle (I believe that was the title). The book was written to bring attention to the human cost of the meat processing industry (like losing fingers to the product). The response was the Pure and Safe Food Act, and the predecessor of the FDA, to make sure that no untoward contaminants were polluting consumer products, but we didn't get anything like OSHA until way later.
I appreciate that sentiment, but it's totally elitist. The expectation for free time and engagement it takes for fellow Americans is ultimately totally unrealistic. First, consider who are "our...
I used to protest injustices, but I've given up on my fellow Americans to do anything other that sit around and complain at the water cooler or on the internet and then go back to whatever lives they are leading.
I appreciate that sentiment, but it's totally elitist. The expectation for free time and engagement it takes for fellow Americans is ultimately totally unrealistic.
First, consider who are "our fellow Americans?" A lot of em are struggling to find adequate shelter, food, child care, and employment. Almost 5% are in prison or on parole. So the assertion that these people should be or even reasonably have the time to call their representatives is right out.
Then there are people who face impediments like being intellectually, psychologically, and developmentally unable to approach such tasks. Full-time care providers for the elderly and children. Etc.
The only people who clear the basic barriers to entry to ability and opportunity are people who make enough money to have enough free time. But then even then there are challenges. Who do I call? About what? Depending on your location you have municipal, state, county, federal, and metropolitan officials. And once you track down all the phone numbers, there's literally hundreds of issues that take a not inconsiderable amount of time to become familiar with. And then once you get them on the horn, whose to say they don't ignore you outright because of partisan politics and corporate lobbyists and PAC donors controlling their voting,
So yeah, sure. People should call their representative but at the same time is it really realistic to expect that people would actually do that? What is there do but talk? Like how do I do something about kids in cages or plastic in the ocean or tar sands or the war in Yemen?
I guess I expect people to do something. Anything. Just pick something. Pick up a single piece of garbage that's seen on the street/sidewalk/parking lot. Write a letter. Give a can of food to a...
I guess I expect people to do something. Anything. Just pick something.
Pick up a single piece of garbage that's seen on the street/sidewalk/parking lot. Write a letter. Give a can of food to a food bank. Give a compliment. Be kind. I don't know. DO SOMETHING. ANYTHING. PICK SOMETHING.
I picked children because I grew up a ward of the state. I am too emotional of a person to get directly involved in their lives, but I often volunteer with agencies that are doing something. I might be pushing paperwork, or organizing clothes or food, or helping to set up an event. And screw you for thinking that by doing so I am some elite person. When I started, I was a single mother, barely sober, just getting my ass out of sex work and working a minimum wage job. I do not expect anyone else to be like me, but dammit, I expect people to DO SOMETHING. ANYTHING. PICK SOMETHING that they can do.
Just as an aside, for all their toxicity, Facebook and Twitter are more effective political motivators than letters, emails, or phone calls, as your tweet or post are visible to other voters.
Just as an aside, for all their toxicity, Facebook and Twitter are more effective political motivators than letters, emails, or phone calls, as your tweet or post are visible to other voters.
Which is the same effect as having a conversation with your peers. The comment a couple levels above is very disparaging about "people bitching around the water cooler." You know what I call that?...
your tweet or post are visible to other voters
Which is the same effect as having a conversation with your peers. The comment a couple levels above is very disparaging about "people bitching around the water cooler." You know what I call that? Agitation. People respond to the ways that their peers talk, the things they think are important, and their conclusions.
It's far more effective to be one of 1,000 people or whatever agitating among the community than it is to try and organize 1,000 people to try and influence a congress person whose mind was made up at the fundraising luncheon last week. Not to mention the utterly insulting notion that we should be resigned to change being made from above by those invested with power.
IMO this is just an example of starving the beast in action. Do we expect IRS employees to pay for lawsuits out of their own pocket? Every dollar we give them is over a dollar received in extra...
IMO this is just an example of starving the beast in action. Do we expect IRS employees to pay for lawsuits out of their own pocket? Every dollar we give them is over a dollar received in extra tax revenue, yet we keep cutting their budget. The reason the IRS doesn't prosecute the rich is that their hands are tied - the people they should be investigating also have the large amounts of influence necessary to cut their budget and neuter their ability to pursue serious tax evaders.
It doesn't seem to me that the ratio of rich to poor should be tied to amount of funding. If they are forced to do fewer audits of rich people, it seems reasonable to do proportionally fewer...
It doesn't seem to me that the ratio of rich to poor should be tied to amount of funding. If they are forced to do fewer audits of rich people, it seems reasonable to do proportionally fewer audits of the poor as well. Something doesn't add up with that line of argument they are making. If it means getting rid of some junior auditors to hire a couple of senior auditors and they can't do that because government then I could understand that I guess. I still reckon paying someone $xx,xxx to find $100-$300 of fraud from a bunch of poor people is not a "good investment". Unless there are "poor people" that are so dramatically underreporting that they're actually not even close to poor. And that sounds like "senior auditor" territory to me, like someone is actually good at evading taxes.
Well, we could drill down a bit. Here's the document, which seems pretty easy to read. Apparently some audits are done entirely by mail and that's very cheap, since it doesn't require travel. (It...
Well, we could drill down a bit. Here's the document, which seems pretty easy to read.
Apparently some audits are done entirely by mail and that's very cheap, since it doesn't require travel. (It only costs the IRS $150.) Some are done by asking the taxpayer to visit the IRS office. And the most complicated ones require the auditor to visit the taxpayer's place of business.
They also say that about 50% of Earned Income Tax Credit claims have errors, which seems very high?
Very interesting! Taking their numbers at face value, it seems like on average, they are paying out $693 too much per EITC filer, so if it only costs them $150 to process, I can see why they...
Very interesting! Taking their numbers at face value, it seems like on average, they are paying out $693 too much per EITC filer, so if it only costs them $150 to process, I can see why they would. $693 is more than I would have anticipated.
I would hope that they are better than average at spotting fishy filings too. If $693 is average, I would expect >$693 recouped per audit. In fact, if they think that only 50% are in error, then I would expect the number to be more like $1300. I think I can see where the IRS is coming from now. They're only auditing 1% of EITC filers. That really doesn't seem out of line to me. Even if those working poor are the least likely to be able to deal with being audited, there has to be a deterrent to scamming the EITC system. At a 1% rate, they're hardly harassing the poor. You could claim that credit every year of your working life and be unlikely to be audited ever.
The 50% number might be high, but idk. It's pretty easy to check every box in turbo tax that seems relevant and nets you a bigger refund. It's not like the working poor tend to be tax lawyers. I assume everyone makes mistakes on their taxes, and generally skew toward mistakes that are better for them than the IRS. The question is how big are the mistakes, and at what point can you suggest that the filer was not acting in good faith.
The reason it's a good investment is they don't fight back in court. It's "free money" compared to investigating for years just to find a million dollar legal battle.
The reason it's a good investment is they don't fight back in court. It's "free money" compared to investigating for years just to find a million dollar legal battle.
I still don't know if I buy that. I guess I'd have to see it in action. According to the article, the number of audits being done on the poor is "the same" as the number of audits being done on...
I still don't know if I buy that. I guess I'd have to see it in action. According to the article, the number of audits being done on the poor is "the same" as the number of audits being done on the 1%. Idk if that means by count or by rate.
I also don't know how long it takes to complete a basic audit on a poor person. If you could do 2 per day, recouping an average of $100 per day and you do that for 250 days a year, that's $50,000. I reckon that's roughly the cost of the auditor, before healthcare even, and does not include other overhead involved. Unless they have some kind of automated system just collecting checks from the poor... I could believe that, but that's not what this article is alleging, and I don't think it's fruitful to just say "they're doing it because they hate poor people". Court battles are not the only cost involved, and in the case of poor people, there is very little potential revenue. Unless we're not talking about "poor people" and actually talking about the middle class, in which case I can buy that. But I don't really support the middle class evading taxes, so if that $100 number is really $1000, then I think the math makes sense. But I also think those people should not get away with stealing $1000.
I read an in depth article about this over a decade ago which I wish I could find because it wasn't only that they targeted people who couldn't fight back, but there was also a protected class of people they explicitly could not go after . I couldn't find the article, but here's an article from 2003 https://www.thenation.com/article/and-poor-pay-taxes/ that is basically a telling of the story you posted. In the end we don't care enough to do anything about it.
I used to write letters to my representatives all the time, I used to protest injustices, but I've given up on my fellow Americans to do anything other that sit around and complain at the water cooler or on the internet and then go back to whatever lives they are leading.
More and more I hear people complaining about the inconvenience protesters bring to their lives, "why can't they protest on a weekend or after work?" We put children into cages and our local protest garnered a few hundred people in an area that has over 4 million. Yet the internet was filled with outrage. It was all the talk at my workplace, yet I was the only one that left work and attended. I really thought that this time, I MEAN WE PUT CHILDREN IN FUCKING CAGES, that more of us, enough of us, a majority of us, would, I don't know, do something other than talk.
The IRS does not go where attorneys are. They are predators that go after what they can take with ease. And we allow them to exert their authority unequally.
Calling the IRS employees "predators" goes too far. They are running easy checks on people's tax returns and the result is that some people pay the right amount of taxes when they didn't before. That's not a bad result - or if it is, the tax laws should be changed.
I'm also wondering what protests have to do with this? To get the IRS more funding and get the tax laws changed, Congress has to act. That means winning elections.
My frustration comes from issues that remain issues that we don't seem to be able to do anything about. That sort of put me on a rant that moved from the topic of this post, the IRS, and onto my general frustration.
I did not call employees of the IRS predators, or I didn't mean to (rereading my sentence, I can see how that could be interpreted that way). The IRS is acting and has acted in the past in a predatory manner by picking off the weaker among us. IMO.
I do share your frustration. The system is set up so that sometimes the only way to get some things done is to win federal elections, or sometimes court cases.
It’s much easier to complain, like or upvote online than it is to actually do something of significance. I’ve visited my reps, written them and have attended demonstrations but even then it’s an underwhelming group that seem to want change. Our president is a traitor and yet there are no marches. Our senate and congress are paid off and yet no protests. Our courts are rigged and yet we don’t demand justice. Idiocracy isn’t coming from proliferation of morons but rather from apathy of the masses.
What am I gonna do? Quit my job and go on a hunger strike over every single outrage? What am or anyone to do about all these simultaneous issues? Honest questions. Is apathy really so illogical? I'm as aware as just about anyone and I'm at a loss. I gotta work 40 hours a week to have a job and pay bills. Other have to do even more. Doesn't leave much time for fighting Trump's corruption and fighting climate change.
Protests and marches don't have to be weeks long events. It just feels like everyone has given up and accepted criminal behavior as status quo. Looking back a couple years ago when Trump was elected, people took to the streets all over the US. Now that we have impeachment hearings that Moscow Mitch promises he will block, we don't even get a peep. We don't need Hong Kong levels of protest, but even just a weekend march in large cities or DC would help. Instead, we are relegated to complaining on the web while 40% of Americans stick their fingers in their ears and cry its a witch hunt. America is letting evil triumph because we are too broke, too tired and too apathetic to hold those in power accountable.
Regular working people are utterly disempowered by the current political and economic system. The entire structure of power in modern society is totally uninterested and unbeholden to the desires and input of the population.
Sorry to say it but marches and demonstrations are not an exercise of power. They are essential in the same way as discussing issues with your peers to be sure. But they are not a meaningful means toward affecting change. By what tangible means do these marches achieve their goals?
Demos and protests are the thing I hear talked about all the time but they are marginally effective at best and only accessible to people with jobs and schedules that allow them to participate. We talk about "oh barely anyone shows up." Yeah because they're at work for some massive company that's exploiting them or they are taking care of sick and elderly relatives.
Honest question, gow do you suggest this be accomplished except open revolt? Open revolt is a terrible solution for so many reasons as HK is showing us. But what other means do we have at our disposal? Wait a long ass time for the moment when I have the system's permission to participate by voting for some highly compromised corporate democrat?
I agree that talking to peers can be effective, but I also feel that the current state of social media and web forums is not talking to peers. Marches and protests are definitely not the only way to change the system but they help spread awareness quickly and loudly. Upvoting a meme or commenting approval/disapproval will not change things. I think the most effective way to get change rolling is to be the squeaky wheel. Marches and protests are good at getting attention to let others know your cause, but contacting representatives can be just as effective (depending on the cause and representative).
Personally I think most people currently involved in politics should be kicked out and barred for life, regardless of whether there is a D or R next to their name. I’m excited to see people taking about getting rid of citizens united, reducing lobbying and getting rid of corruption but I won’t be holding my breath. There are and will always be things wrong with our government, but accepting it as “that’s just how it is” will only lead to more problems. We the people are ultimately responsible and need to strive for better education so that we can help others make better informed decisions
Support better candidates and win elections. It's hard, but that's how the system is set up.
I guess it's hard for me to, having systemic critiques, look for avenues of improvement that operate and thereby legitimate the system. The tacit assumption of reformist ideas is that the system can be redeemed and is therefore not totally broken by dint of its design.
Fuck the system. Neo-liberal capitalism is fucked.
Well, if that's true we are doomed, give up now. Swearing at it certainly won't fix it.
I remember my amazement at the outrage over McDonald's "pink slime." America was joined together in their adamant refusal to go another day eating that "garbage." And the biggest thing of all was they made change happen. Sadly it was over a safe beef product that allowed us to have less waste, but we swelled together and made change, and then we went back to whatever we were doing and no one noticed the significance of our ability to effect change when we are united.
This is the same story as The Jungle (I believe that was the title). The book was written to bring attention to the human cost of the meat processing industry (like losing fingers to the product). The response was the Pure and Safe Food Act, and the predecessor of the FDA, to make sure that no untoward contaminants were polluting consumer products, but we didn't get anything like OSHA until way later.
I appreciate that sentiment, but it's totally elitist. The expectation for free time and engagement it takes for fellow Americans is ultimately totally unrealistic.
First, consider who are "our fellow Americans?" A lot of em are struggling to find adequate shelter, food, child care, and employment. Almost 5% are in prison or on parole. So the assertion that these people should be or even reasonably have the time to call their representatives is right out.
Then there are people who face impediments like being intellectually, psychologically, and developmentally unable to approach such tasks. Full-time care providers for the elderly and children. Etc.
The only people who clear the basic barriers to entry to ability and opportunity are people who make enough money to have enough free time. But then even then there are challenges. Who do I call? About what? Depending on your location you have municipal, state, county, federal, and metropolitan officials. And once you track down all the phone numbers, there's literally hundreds of issues that take a not inconsiderable amount of time to become familiar with. And then once you get them on the horn, whose to say they don't ignore you outright because of partisan politics and corporate lobbyists and PAC donors controlling their voting,
So yeah, sure. People should call their representative but at the same time is it really realistic to expect that people would actually do that? What is there do but talk? Like how do I do something about kids in cages or plastic in the ocean or tar sands or the war in Yemen?
I guess I expect people to do something. Anything. Just pick something.
Pick up a single piece of garbage that's seen on the street/sidewalk/parking lot. Write a letter. Give a can of food to a food bank. Give a compliment. Be kind. I don't know. DO SOMETHING. ANYTHING. PICK SOMETHING.
I picked children because I grew up a ward of the state. I am too emotional of a person to get directly involved in their lives, but I often volunteer with agencies that are doing something. I might be pushing paperwork, or organizing clothes or food, or helping to set up an event. And screw you for thinking that by doing so I am some elite person. When I started, I was a single mother, barely sober, just getting my ass out of sex work and working a minimum wage job. I do not expect anyone else to be like me, but dammit, I expect people to DO SOMETHING. ANYTHING. PICK SOMETHING that they can do.
Just as an aside, for all their toxicity, Facebook and Twitter are more effective political motivators than letters, emails, or phone calls, as your tweet or post are visible to other voters.
Which is the same effect as having a conversation with your peers. The comment a couple levels above is very disparaging about "people bitching around the water cooler." You know what I call that? Agitation. People respond to the ways that their peers talk, the things they think are important, and their conclusions.
It's far more effective to be one of 1,000 people or whatever agitating among the community than it is to try and organize 1,000 people to try and influence a congress person whose mind was made up at the fundraising luncheon last week. Not to mention the utterly insulting notion that we should be resigned to change being made from above by those invested with power.
IMO this is just an example of starving the beast in action. Do we expect IRS employees to pay for lawsuits out of their own pocket? Every dollar we give them is over a dollar received in extra tax revenue, yet we keep cutting their budget. The reason the IRS doesn't prosecute the rich is that their hands are tied - the people they should be investigating also have the large amounts of influence necessary to cut their budget and neuter their ability to pursue serious tax evaders.
It doesn't seem to me that the ratio of rich to poor should be tied to amount of funding. If they are forced to do fewer audits of rich people, it seems reasonable to do proportionally fewer audits of the poor as well. Something doesn't add up with that line of argument they are making. If it means getting rid of some junior auditors to hire a couple of senior auditors and they can't do that because
governmentthen I could understand that I guess. I still reckon paying someone $xx,xxx to find $100-$300 of fraud from a bunch of poor people is not a "good investment". Unless there are "poor people" that are so dramatically underreporting that they're actually not even close to poor. And that sounds like "senior auditor" territory to me, like someone is actually good at evading taxes.Well, we could drill down a bit. Here's the document, which seems pretty easy to read.
Apparently some audits are done entirely by mail and that's very cheap, since it doesn't require travel. (It only costs the IRS $150.) Some are done by asking the taxpayer to visit the IRS office. And the most complicated ones require the auditor to visit the taxpayer's place of business.
They also say that about 50% of Earned Income Tax Credit claims have errors, which seems very high?
Very interesting! Taking their numbers at face value, it seems like on average, they are paying out $693 too much per EITC filer, so if it only costs them $150 to process, I can see why they would. $693 is more than I would have anticipated.
I would hope that they are better than average at spotting fishy filings too. If $693 is average, I would expect >$693 recouped per audit. In fact, if they think that only 50% are in error, then I would expect the number to be more like $1300. I think I can see where the IRS is coming from now. They're only auditing 1% of EITC filers. That really doesn't seem out of line to me. Even if those working poor are the least likely to be able to deal with being audited, there has to be a deterrent to scamming the EITC system. At a 1% rate, they're hardly harassing the poor. You could claim that credit every year of your working life and be unlikely to be audited ever.
The 50% number might be high, but idk. It's pretty easy to check every box in turbo tax that seems relevant and nets you a bigger refund. It's not like the working poor tend to be tax lawyers. I assume everyone makes mistakes on their taxes, and generally skew toward mistakes that are better for them than the IRS. The question is how big are the mistakes, and at what point can you suggest that the filer was not acting in good faith.
The reason it's a good investment is they don't fight back in court. It's "free money" compared to investigating for years just to find a million dollar legal battle.
I still don't know if I buy that. I guess I'd have to see it in action. According to the article, the number of audits being done on the poor is "the same" as the number of audits being done on the 1%. Idk if that means by count or by rate.
I also don't know how long it takes to complete a basic audit on a poor person. If you could do 2 per day, recouping an average of $100 per day and you do that for 250 days a year, that's $50,000. I reckon that's roughly the cost of the auditor, before healthcare even, and does not include other overhead involved. Unless they have some kind of automated system just collecting checks from the poor... I could believe that, but that's not what this article is alleging, and I don't think it's fruitful to just say "they're doing it because they hate poor people". Court battles are not the only cost involved, and in the case of poor people, there is very little potential revenue. Unless we're not talking about "poor people" and actually talking about the middle class, in which case I can buy that. But I don't really support the middle class evading taxes, so if that $100 number is really $1000, then I think the math makes sense. But I also think those people should not get away with stealing $1000.