April 17, 2007
At Least We Have Decent Ideas…
Let me make it clear to you: I personally do not think a flat tax is the answer to simplifying the ridiculous tax code in this country, but I applaud Senator Brownback for pushing the need to do something about it. Many conservatives do support a flat tax, and I support it in theory.
But I want to offer my full support to the GOP candidates on this issue - whether they are pushing for tax-free savings, a flat tax, or some other kind of solution along those kinds of lines. Because the Democrats…, well, they… well… read it for yourself:
Edwards: Let the IRS Prepare Your Tax Returns
The former North Carolina senator laid out the idea in an audio podcast posted on his Web site April 7. For Americans whose employers and financial institutions send all of their relevant tax data to the government, the IRS would calculate their bills and mail them completed returns, which he called “Form 1.” Filers could sign the form and return it, or reject it and file their own return if they disagreed with anything in the IRS’s calculations.
This goes beyond absurd - it is so completely and utterly asinine it is almost unbelievable! Edwards’ plan calls for the IRS - yes, those government employed bureaucrats - to prepare your tax return for you if you have a “simple” return (apparently about 60 millions Americans fall under this category). Then all you have to do is sign, seal, and return. Let’s examine this logic, shall we?
Problem: People spend a lot of time doing taxes, paying too much in taxes, and are cheated by an unfair tax code.
Solution: Increase government involvement in the process!
It’s typical, classic liberal thinking. Instead of truly simplifying the process (which is what the flat tax does) or giving folks a break in paying taxes (like tax-free savings) - instead of giving more power to individuals, John Edwards, Mr. Populist himself, would like to give more power to the government. The Chamber of Commerce and the CA Taxpayers’ Association fought against a similar proposal in CA recently, but when was the last time the Democrats really cared about the Chamber of Commerce or taxpayers themselves?
And no word yet how much Edwards plans to increase taxes in order to pay for all the extra work the IRS will be doing for us… and there’s also no word on how he expects the fat, bloated bureaucracy to be able to process 60 million of these things in a few months’ time.
So, as we as conservatives debate various ways of reforming the tax system here in America, let us stop and remember that we are united in our philosophy regardless of the differences in our proposals - and that our opponents are ready to unleash a wave of devastating “solutions” upon this country.
http://race42008.com/2007/04/17/at-least-we-have-decent-ideas/trackback/
April 17th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
Wow…this has got to be one of the more moronic ideas Edwards has floated…does anyone have a running list?
April 17th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
This is flat-out scary. Who on this green earth could possibly think this is a good idea? Oh yeah, John Edwards. The scariest part is that if I were forced to vote Democrat, I would probably vote for Edwards. That really doesn’t say much for my thoughts on Clinton or Obama, does it?
Hava
http://mittforpresident.wordpress.com/
April 17th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
He had a huge rally here in Tennessee yesterday, and came off looking great. Down here, he’s one of those guys that no one agrees with, but everyone really likes anyways. That’s why I get worried he could win the dem nomination. McCain was here too, but got almost no coverage. It was almost like a homecoming rally for Edwards.
April 17th, 2007 at 6:30 pm
Not to mention that if you disagreed with the IRA analysis, it would probably trigger an automatic audit. Quite a powerful incentive to fall in line, which may be the ultimate point of this.
April 17th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Absolutely bizarre. If you disagree with the IRS, and ended with a figure lower then there’s (the only conceivable situation where you’d want to “disagree” with them), the form would have to be returned to the IRS, to check all over again. It wellly and truly boggles the mind.
April 17th, 2007 at 6:53 pm
Ron Paul’s tax reform solution is to remove from the IRS the ability to impose a direct, uapportioned tax on the labor of American citizens.
Quixotic, you say? Unrealistic? Yeah, yeah, I know, the IRS says the 16th Amendment gives it the authority to impose the income tax directly on the working people of America. The IRS is on record as saying: “The 16th Amendment to the Constitution states that citizens are required to file tax returns and pay taxes.”
However, a research report by William Benson documents that the 16th Amendment was not ratified by the states and is a fraud. Benson’s findings, published in The Law That Never Was, make a compelling case that the 16th Amendment (the “income-tax amendment”) was not legally ratified and that Secretary of State Philander Knox was not merely in error, but committed fraud when he declared it ratified in February 1913. The fact is many state legislatures violated their state constitutions in ratifying the amendment, and many other states ratified differently worded versions of the amendment, thereby voiding their amendment votes. In Kentucky, for example, the state legislature voted 22 to 9 against the amendment, yet Knox counted Kentucky as having passed it. In Oklahoma, the legislature approved an amendment with significantly different wording.
And it won’t do any good for the government to try and get another copy of the 16th Amendment passed, legitimately this time, because that would entail admitting that all taxes under the illegitimate Amendment were illegally imposed and collected for the last 83 years, and would therefore have to be returned to all who paid them, or their heirs! Better they should just quietly stop continuing to require payment.
April 17th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
Nothing quite like getting your outrage juices ahead of the facts.
Edward’s proposal is not to have IRS bureaucrats do your taxes, but rather to have software in place to fill out the forms for simple returns, for which the IRS already has all the information (W-2s, 1099s etc). They would run your return through the software, then send you the results for your approval or modification if necessary.
It would save lots of people lots of hassle, but not reduce your control over the return at all.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Matt objects,
[if you disagree] “the form would have to be returned to the IRS, to check all over again”.
So? That means that for all the people who don’t disagree, they save all the time we spend doing their taxes. For those who do disagree, they are in the same situation as today.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
Tano, I just have to ask: have you ever been audited?
April 17th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
This is nothing more than an attempt to increase government. Most of you know that most government employees are union which are nothing more than a branch of the Democratic party. The scheme works like this:
The liberals propose big government programs (or expansion of existing programs as is the case here) on my tax dime. This employs their union constituency with my tax dime. The union constituency reciprocates back to the liberal politicians in votes as well as donations from union dues.
Sheesh, and they rip on Cheney. Nearly every liberal proposal boils down to my tax dime going toward their “constituency.”
April 17th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
cwpete,
Are you in the wrong thread or something?
What expansion of what government program are you referring to?
That the IRS may write a software program, and thus need to hire a few programmers?
Don’t worry, they will probably contract it out.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
The real problem with this is that we’re basically subsidizing CPAs for 1/4 of the country. Here’s an idea, if you have a simple return, then do your own d*mn taxes.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Tano, when, in all the history of government, have we ever managed to do something simple like “write a program” that will do a majority of the taxpayer’s taxes? Never. Government is in the business of making things more complicated, not less. There is just as much of a chance of this being a simple program that easily does half of America’s taxes in one fell swoop as there is a meteorite hitting Earth in the next 13 seconds.
*
*
Sorry, 13 seconds passed, I guess there is officially NO CHANCE of this happening.
Seriously though, when people talk about bureaucratic red tape, it’s because government loves to make things more difficult, throw more layers into things, and really tie people into knots trying to get things done. There is absolutely not a chance in h*ll I would sit still for something like this.
I’m hereby nominating this The Dumbest Idea in the Past Year. I would have to review tapes, but it may even qualify for The Dumbest Idea in the Past Five Years.
Hava
http://mittforpresident.wordpress.com/
April 17th, 2007 at 8:52 pm
JF,
No.
I dont really see the basis for your concern though.
IF your return today is at variance with the information that has been supplied to the IRS, then you might have a higher risk of being flagged anyway.
If you disagree under the Edwards proposal, it would most likely be because you have additional information tha thte IRS doesnt have (e.g. some deduction you qualify for that they are not aware of). I dont see how that would risk a higher probability of being audited.
I assume they flag for auditing those returns which dont make sense based on the information that they have, plus some random sampling.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:59 pm
Hava,
As I understand it, you could always do your taxes yourself if you wanted to.
You spout a lot of rhetoric, but that is really all it is.
A lot of people do their taxes using software already, if you are not aware…
And there really are a lot of pretty amazing things that are done with software - hey, hold on - GOVERNMENT software!
Like putting people on the moon. Or sorting through all your phone calls.
Doing a simple return is really not that hard.
As for the dumbest idea in the last five years…..heh. I dont really think you want to go there….
April 17th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
As far as mind-numbingly dumb ideas, this is no worse than a whole lot of things the Republicans did during their six years in power.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:11 pm
Richard Brodie,
Sorry, but William Benson is a con-man. The actual authority of the Congress to impose taxes on Americans are from Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the US Constitution which read:
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; . . .”
The Ammendment 16th, which itself does not authorize the Congress on taxing of incomes, only make it clear (in so few words) that it does not matter that the person has to pay the tax for his property AND tax on income he may make from the property.
For good reading of why Benson’s arguments are worthless, check http://www.fraudsandscams.com/Benson/benson.htm
So, yes, you will still need to pay your income taxes.
While, we are speaking of taxes, my concern is that regardless of what taxes each of the candidates may come up with, I am still concerned about the Congress demanding more and more over the years. I am wondering what y’all think of this, which I have posted on Mitt Romney’s Yahoo Question. What is the feasibility of having an ammendment which the Congress can only tax, or rather, bill the States for all of Federal Government’s services to States (not including military, foreign activities and such), and then the States will decide how to pay for it. That way, people will have more saying in how their State will pay for the federal tax, be it flat, sale, income or whatever. If the States do not agree with the certain “bill” of the services, they can decline the service. If enough States decline the service, then bam - there goes the department! You cannot have a department without any money.
I know that Constitution actually specifies what services the Federal Government can provide, and that the Government has already gone way beyond. With enough idiots out there keeping voting Legislatives like Ted Kennedry back to his seat again and again, we need to have some more control at a lower level, like at State level, to “decline” the services and refuse to pay for it. There need to be some balance between the States and Federal Government! That is, until the majority of Americans understand what Constitution is all about, and that most of the work has to be done by these people and lower governments, not by the Federal Government.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
This is standard practice in some other countries. Having lived in those countries I think it works quite well…
April 17th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
geez,
And to think that the title of this thread is “At Least We Have Decent Ideas”!
April 17th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
A lot of people do their taxes using software already, if you are not aware
Yes, thank you for making my point for me: The software currently out on the market was produced by a private company. This will be produced by the federal government. You make it sound simple, but the federal government will be involved, and absolutely NOTHING is simple then.
We need to simplify the tax code, not make government bigger. This is exactly the wrong direction to go.
Hava
http://mittforpresident.wordpress.com/
April 17th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Oh c’mon Hava..
They can buy software from private companies, if that makes you feel better.
The amount of government work that is done by private companies is enormous, if you dont know.
And where do you get this notion that private companies are any better than the government?
Let me guess - two factors.
One, an ideological predisposition.
Two. By looking only at the best accomplishments of the private sector, and comparing them to the worst screwups by the government.
If you did the opposite comparison, the results would be different.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Not that I want to be in the position of defending Edwards, but. . .
I’ve always wondered why we have to file tax returns in the first place. The 1099s and W-2s and all the other forms we get all say “this information is being furnished to the IRS.” All of our employers must furnish our payroll and tax info to the IRS. And we’ve been paying taxes all year long anyway. So they already have all the info. Why are we wasting our own time, not to mention billions of trees worth of paper, to do something they could easily be doing themselves right now? This reminds me of the old question of why the IRS can’t find people when the census bureau and draft board seems to know where everyone is. In this case, I would think that the cost of having the IRS compute all this stuff would be outweighed by the cost savings in the government would see once it stopped printing all the forms, instruction booklets, tax code books, etc.
I’d like to see a simplified tax system (not a flat tax but a fair tax) implimented at the same time as any reformed IRS system. I’d also like to see them ensure the security of this new system so we don’t have another Veterens Administration accidental loss of millions of records to deal with.
Edwards has had some dumb ideas but I don’t really think this is one of them.
April 17th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
Tano, have you used TurboTax, the best tax return software? It is a fantastic software, but, even then, it ends up having updates each time you open it, even until the very day your tax returns are due! Regardless of its being the best out there, there are many things it won’t touched, but rather, pointing you in the directions to http://www.irs.gov’s form instructions. And we already have the simple form calls 1040-EZ. Still, many of us people are even afraid to fill out this simple form! Now, you are asking us to trust the Uncle Sam to know what is best for us. Have you ever heard of “creeping features”? Ohhhh - a naughy thing we see in software idustry when we allow our customers too much saying throughout the development cycle! Who can claim that we won’t see the same with legislatives asking IRS to do so and so without telling us what they are doing?
April 17th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Jake, you are correct in that your argument would have merit if it is accomplished with the statement that the tax code be simplified. Unfortunately, Edwards is not saying anywhere in that direction. So, this fact of having IRS do the return for any of us is outragous! And it will be until we see a lot of line-chopping!
April 17th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
SGC, the Benson hit piece you referenced failed to address the most crucial issue, namely the illegitimacy of the 16th Amendment due to ratification irregularities.
There is a lot of terminological ambiguity in Article I, Section 8, Clause 1:
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises”
Some people say a tax on income is an “Excise”, in which case perhaps the writers really meant “direct Taxes” here instead of just “Taxes,” for otherwise there would be overlapping and confusion. Maybe they had the same colloquial notion that the common man has when he regards income tax as “direct”, i.e. paid directly by an individual to the government, as opposed to sales taxes which are paid indirectly through an intermediary.
Regardless of any hair-splitting legalese about what “direct” and “indirect” really mean, if it was possible in 1913 to attempt, bunglingly, to expand the range of permissible income taxation from wages to wages+property, it is certainly possible to contemplate contracting it to ~wages+~property.
Nullifying the 16th Amendment due to it’s having been improperly ratified (assuming the government would even allow the formation of a panel to conclusively decide that question), would automatically get rid of property income taxation, then we could decide whether a flat (i.e.) captitation tax should replace wage taxation, or whether all income taxation should be eliminated.
Ron Paul has observed that only one third of the federal government’s revenue comes from income taxes, which wouldn’t be an overly great percentage reduction in the government’s current bloated size.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:26 pm
Richard,
The argument against the 16th amendment has never, ever stood up in a court of law the dozens of times people have tried to invoke that argument to keep paying their taxes. As much as we’d all like for it not to be, it looks like this is a legitimate amendment to the Constitution. Sorry.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:30 pm
I’m not going to pull an “as an economist thus and so” but you guys are off the mark with Edward’s proposal.
It actually isn’t a bad idea. You’re cutting out the waste of vast IRS mail-rooms sorting out millions of tax returns.
Actually if you couple that with a guaranteed tax filing program on the IRS website you’d probably increase compliance enough to make up any costs.
Our tax collection methods are fairly inefficient with the technology that is available.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
(As a preface, I am in a family of accountants)
Tano,
Once again you have demonstrated the depth of the liberal mind as you defend Edwards and his lunatic idea. Edwards’ idea would involve nothing more than a bigger and more worthless IRS.
April 17th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
We as Republicans need to be careful in labeling every single government program as “big government spending.” As I mentioned earlier and as econ grad just stated, there could actually be substantial savings with a new IRS system similar to what Edwards is advocating. As an idea it’s not so crazy. I haven’t seen if Edwards went further with his proposal to show how it would help taxpayers beyond saving some time, but in theory it could work and provide a cost savings too. I’m willing to hear him out before flat out rejecting it as another govt disaster.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:08 am
Tano (#14), just because the IRS audits doesn’t mean it is correct. If you knew the stress of an audit (especially one that ends with the IRS admitting there is nothing wrong), you would probably be a little bit less willing to indulge the government. One thing that liberals seem to forget is that the government is not perfect and it has unlimited resources with which to pursue its mistaken agenda. Disagreeing with the IRS would only invite more scrutiny.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:14 am
MC,
You always do better on the second try.
So, give it a shot. Without the insults, without the baseless charges.
Try for a little substance.
(and at least acknowledge that some of your conservative friends here also see some merit in this).
April 18th, 2007 at 12:26 am
JF,
No one thinks the government is perfect.
If you disagree with the IRS calculation, it would be because you submit to them information (documented) that they didnt have. I still dont see why that would provoke an audit. Its not like they would have a built-in assumption that they have all your relevant information. The proposal is designed for those cases (tens of millions) where the do.
This is not a case of turning over to the IRS full responsibility for your taxes. It is a way for simple tax returns to be processesed quickly, with minimal burden on the taxpayer.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:32 am
The IRS has stated: “The 16th Amendment to the Constitution states that citizens are required to file tax returns and pay taxes”
No it doesn’t. Actually the 16th Amendment is very short:
“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
There is absolutley nothing in there about having to “file a tax return”. The entire burden of “laying” (specifying) and collecting is on the Congress, and the Congress is not given the power to transfer that responsibility to some Executive Agency! This Amendment lays upon the Congress the responsibility to tell you how much tax they want you to pay, and your obligation is simply to pay it when they come to collect it from you. There is nothing that says they get to make a slave out of you by requiring you to do a lot of extremely complicated bookwork without compensation. It does not even say that you are required to initiate sending it to them. They are only given the power to come and get it from you.
Do I advocate that you do no more than the Constitution says you are required to do? Of course not. These brutes, who have decided to ignore the constitution, have a lot more power than you do and they can hurt you very badly. The only power you have to get them back into their cages is to vote for someone like Ron Paul.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:37 am
If people are given a choice of whether or not they want to do their own taxes, then I’m all for it. I was up till 3am doing my taxes last night - anyone volunteering to do it for me at no additional cost is ok in my book.
Seriously, though, I’m sure there would be built in safeguards to ensure that the IRS can’t use the system for personal vendettas. I don’t see how this new idea leaves the IRS with more capabilities to go after taxpayers than they already have. They can audit anyone they want now, with the full support and finacial backing of the US government, so how is the new system any worse in that respect? It seems the only difference here is the one filling out the forms. I’m fine with having them do it.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:43 am
Wait a sec. . .just because it’s not specifically spelled out in the Constitution doesn’t mean it’s not a law. That’s where Congress and the courts come in to play. Where does it say we have to drive on the right side of the road? Where does it say we can’t smoke weed? Where does it say churches are tax-exempt? No where. We have a system of government (of the people, by the people, and all that) which uses the Constitutioon to devise a system of laws to govern the people. There are thousands of laws - maybe millions knowing the penchent og congressmen to come up with new ways to justify their jobs - which cannot be found expressly written in the Constitution.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:45 am
See what the IRS is doing to me? Now I’m defending liberals and big government! I hate tax time! It makes me nuts!
April 18th, 2007 at 1:04 am
Richard,
Sorry bud, but your argument is completely nutty.
The amendment gives Congress the right to write laws for the collection of income tax.
The executive carries out the laws. Duh.
April 18th, 2007 at 8:31 am
Tano,
“That the IRS may write a software program, and thus need to hire a few programmers?”
Do you really think just a few software programmers is all this will take? Let me enlighten you some. After development, there is testing, implementation, support for hardware from which your software runs on, support for the operation system that runs on the hardware, support for network, firewalls, proxies, security, help desk, project management. Let’s not forget the mailing out of the new “forms” most of which will probably just get trashed..
Might I mention that *none* of this government type work is allowed to be off shored.
There is a lot more here than what you acknowledge.
April 18th, 2007 at 8:39 am
Here are my priorities regarding this tax issue:
First, lower taxes.
Second, make current tax cuts prolonged or permanent.
Third, simplify taxes *without* expanding unions.
Here is my understanding of the Democrats priorities along this matter:
1) Fight all tax decreases like the plague.
2) Let current tax breaks expire.
3) Expand their union constituency in any effort to “simplify” the tax code.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:34 am
The very most fundamental flaw, in the Consitution itself, regarding taxation is the idea that human beings are not considered to be owners of their own selves. It is absurd to try and protect revenue from external property (land, stock, etc.) from unapportioned confiscation by creating for it the special classification “direct”, and then putting revenue from the renting out of one’s own body and/or mind into the diametrically opposite category “indirect”. The disastrous implication of this fatal dichotomization is that the individual must not be considered as the owner of that most basic of all properties, his own person. Such unfortuante language makes the whole concept of liberty, and thus the entire Constitution meaningless. It is what has led to such things as the IRS, conscription, the Patriot Act, Real ID, and all of those things compatible with the notion that the individual citizen is to be regarded as the property of the state.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Tano says: “The amendment gives Congress the right to write laws for the collection of income tax. The executive carries out the laws.”
The legislative branch does other things besides write laws. The GAO carries out laws and it is part of the legislative not the executive.
The 16th Amendment specifically tasks Congress with collecting income taxes. Absent another ammendment that would give that power to the Executive branch, the IRS is and has been functioning illegally.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
tano could you email me at caseylane at wowway dot com?
April 20th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Today is the 10th anniversary of a speech made by Congressman Ron Paul on the floor of the House of Representatives, in which he points out the reason why it was wise thing to put the Congress, and not the Executive, in charge of collecting taxes. Here is the relevant portion of that speech:
“While looking at the countless number of cases of the IRS being used as a political tool of administrations past and present may be interesting and even instructive, we should instead be focusing on what has allowed these cases to occur.
The problem is not with the IRS agents themselves, but with the policies behind the Internal Revenue Service.
First, under the state of the law, the IRS is a tool of the Executive Branch, the presidency. The IRS must follow - almost without question - the orders of the executive.
Second, the Internal Revenue Code is bulky, confusing and downright unintelligible: an individual of the absolute best intentions can violate major sections of the code without realizing it. The code itself makes it likely we all have violated something - we just haven’t been caught. And that is preciously what keeps so many people up late into the night worrying about - what they may have unknowingly done, and what the results may be.
Third, under the administrative law which governs the IRS and all other federal agencies, a person found to be violating the code must prove themselves innocent, a concept which runs contrary to our judicial system in virtually every other area of law. This has the real effect of forcing individuals to passively submit to the agency’s decrees not because the individual believes they did anything wrong, but simply because they do not have the resources to prove their innocence.
Taken individually, all three are bad. But when added together, the IRS becomes a recipe for disaster. Or worse.
The answer is not to simply revise the code, or to make the IRS more independent, or to have an added layer of judicial review, the answer is to fundamentally change the way we collect taxes in this nation. The nonsensical body of law which governs the IRS is too far removed from sanity to be saved. And the graduated income tax system is neither fair, economically sound, moral nor useful.
In my mind, the jury is still out on whether a flat tax or a national sales tax is the absolute best way to go (my main goal is for lower taxes, across-the-board), but both will go a long way toward eliminating the politically powerful weapon known as the IRS.
We need not only a simpler, fairer system to eliminate the second problem I described, but also a smaller, more inexpensive agency responsible for collecting the taxes to solve the first. Finally, by making Congress directly responsible for the levy and collection of taxes - as constitutionally prescribed - the third problem vanishes by placing legal questions squarely in the hands of the legitimate federal court system. And best of all, Congressmen - the direct representatives of the people - become more accountable.