IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel has a message for high-wealth tax cheats who are wrongly deducting private jet travel and otherwise shorting the government on their taxes: Pay your fair share so “others aren’t shouldering the burden of funding our government.”

He also has a thought for ordinary taxpayers putting off the inevitable with less than a month left in tax-filing season: “Get it done.” (And double-check your work.)

Werfel, who will hit the one-year mark at the helm of the IRS in April, said in a wide-ranging interview with The Associated Press that the agency will expand its pursuit of high-wealth tax dodgers with new initiatives in the coming months and is using tools like artificial intelligence to ferret out abuses and taking the fight to sophisticated scammers.

That doesn’t mean the IRS has undergone a complete image makeover. There’s still plenty of criticism to go around, including from Republican lawmakers who accuse the agency of heavy-handed overreach.

  • bassomitron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s 100% by design. Republicans love to try and cut funding to the IRS as well as block any increases to their budget:

    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/10/house-republicans-have-voted-to-cut-irs-funding-.html

    And then they finally got their way this year:

    https://thehill.com/business/4395737-republicans-win-faster-irs-cuts-in-funding-deal/

    But this isn’t anything new, Congress has been suppressing the IRS’s funding for years and years: https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-need-to-rebuild-the-depleted-irs

    The simplest solution to avoid all this bullshit is to abandon our ridiculous gargantuan tax code system and implement a flat tax rate system. The same percentage for everyone with no loopholes or exemptions except for the most extenuous of circumstances.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      A flat tax is a terrible idea. 10% of the salary of someone who makes $50,000 a year is a lot bigger hardship than 10% of the salary of someone who makes $500,000 a year.

      • bassomitron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Look, I’m not a damn policy expert, all I know is our current tax code is completely fucked and benefits the wealthy and screws the middle class as is. Make it a 50% tax on anything above $500k, I don’t know. Just make it less garbage than it is now, where I’m getting screwed and have to deal with filing taxes every year. I had friends in Norway that didn’t have to deal with tax returns because it was already all accurate and taken out of their pay. What a crazy concept.

        • QuiteQuickQum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          That’s, uh, not a flat tax, then. You figured out the better approach immediately. And I agree, simplify the tax code while keeping it progressive.

    • Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      A simple uncheatable tax doesn’t need to be flat.

      Years ago I came up with an algorithmic progressive tax that tracks the income distribution curve.

      Using the 2011 numbers I could get 1% increments for. With a top tax rate of 40%, the bottom ~85% of people had a tax rate below 5%, and the budget that year would still balance.

      And being a fixed algorythm, it’s completely closed to manipulation. Unless you lie about your income, but that’s already a felony.

      • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        But what if you creatively identify your income? And then get a bonus of a bunch of stocks, which you then leverage with a bank loan?.. oh right, that’s how a lot of them do it already.

        • Steve@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          But what if you creatively identify your income?

          That would be the lying part.

          And then get a bonus of a bunch of stocks

          Eventually those shares would be sold, or inherited. That income would be taxed at whatever the algorithm dictates.

          • ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            So, we’re back to playing the “algorithm” with what defines income, and what defines inherence, sale, etc of shares.

            Sounds like essentially what we’ve got, just with the handwaving of “algorithm” instead.

            • Steve@communick.news
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              It eliminates the picking and choosing of tax brackets. What you’re talking about is making definitions. There is no way to mathematically fix that.