Biden proposing requiring banks report to the IRS all transactions of all accounts worth $600 or more

#3
#3
Godfatha said:
The hits keep on coming with this President.
Click to expand...
I’m sure it’ll be spun as a way to track the wealthy money to make them pay their “fair share” and that’ll be eaten up but Jesus Christ man I had $600+ in the bank when I was in high school. This is tracking EVERYBODY. Glad I got out of the drug game when I did.

Said that in another thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and davethevol
#4
#4
Christian Lowe said:
I’m sure it’ll be spun as a way to track the wealthy money to make them pay their “fair share” and that’ll be eaten up but Jesus Christ man I had $600+ in the bank when I was in high school. This is tracking EVERYBODY. Glad I got out of the drug game when I did.

Said that in another thread
Click to expand...
I'd like someone to explain to me a good purpose for this move. Whoever is slurping this up is nothing more than a shill that I have zero respect for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, LargeOrange1 and 508mikey
#5
#5
Godfatha said:
I'd like someone to explain to me a good purpose for this move. Whoever is slurping this up is nothing more than a shill that I have zero respect for.
Click to expand...
Reagan would’ve loved it for his failed war on drugs, but that’s about the only purpose I could rationally see. Its really all about control. Big brother needs to know what you’re buying. Maybe it’ll turn to them determining whether you’re spending frivolously and thus should pay more taxes since you can afford luxuries.
 
#9
#9
Christian Lowe said:
Reagan would’ve loved it for his failed war on drugs, but that’s about the only purpose I could rationally see. Its really all about control. Big brother needs to know what you’re buying. Maybe it’ll turn to them determining whether you’re spending frivolously and thus should pay more taxes since you can afford luxuries.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure of the motive behind this, but it is an infringement on privacy. It's also impractical. As someone who works in a bank, I can't fathom how much time would be involved in complying with such a law. The Patriot Act over-burdens administrators as it is... this would overwhelm them. Setting the threshold at $600 is comical. Why not just say "every transaction"? There wouldn't be much of a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, CABVOL, McDad and 1 other person
#10
#10
BowlBrother85 said:
I'm not sure of the motive behind this, but it is an infringement on privacy. It's also impractical. As someone who works in a bank, I can't fathom how much time would be involved in complying with such a law. The Patriot Act over-burdens administrators as it is... this would overwhelm them. Setting the threshold at $600 is comical. Why not just say "every transaction"? There wouldn't be much of a difference.
Click to expand...
That's one thing I don't get. They say the purpose is to target tax evaders making over $400,000 a year. I highly doubt people making that much money just have $600 in the bank account.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, Septic, tbwhhs and 5 others
#15
#15
BowlBrother85 said:
I'm not sure of the motive behind this, but it is an infringement on privacy. It's also impractical. As someone who works in a bank, I can't fathom how much time would be involved in complying with such a law. The Patriot Act over-burdens administrators as it is... this would overwhelm them. Setting the threshold at $600 is comical. Why not just say "every transaction"? There wouldn't be much of a difference.
Click to expand...

You voted for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeeohdeeWood, marcusluvsvols, hUTch2002 and 14 others
#22
#22
A couple of points of clarification might be helpful here (not that you want to hear them since it undermines the shrill soapboxing itt):

1) The proposal is not reporting of every transaction of $600 or more. Rather, it is that if a given account has at least $600 in transactions in a given year, then the bank reports on the inflow and outflow.

2) The proposal has been touted by IRS chief Charles Rettig, who came form the Trump administration. The theory is that people are hiding income in accounts so as to avoid tax consequences.


In a letter viewed by CNBC, IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig told Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., that relying on banks to report basic information about their customers’ deposits and withdrawals could put a big dent in annual tax evasion.

A source provided CNBC access to the letter, which is expected to be released Thursday. The source disclosed its contents on condition of anonymity.

The IRS chief told Warren in Friday’s letter that years of budget cuts have left the agency unable to prosecute those who fail to pay their fair share in federal taxes.
Click to expand...

“Every measure that is important to effective tax administration has suffered tremendously,” Rettig wrote, referring to years of budget reductions.

However, President Joe Biden’s American Families Plan and the bipartisan infrastructure deal “would result in significant volumes of new data regarding financial transactions,” said Rettig, a Trump administration holdover. “The new data will provide the IRS with a lens into otherwise opaque sources of income with historically lower levels of reporting accuracy.”

Specifically, Rettig touted one provision in the American Families Plan that seeks to shrink the tax gap by requiring banks to report on their customers’ withdrawals and deposits instead of relying on the taxpayers themselves. The tax gap is the difference between taxes paid and taxes owed by law.

Rettig noted that for every 1% improvement in tax compliance, federal annual revenues are projected to increase by about $30 billion per year. Overall tax compliance — defined as, voluntary, accurate and on time — is estimated by the IRS to fall in the 82% to 84% range.
Click to expand...



If you want to avoid this i think you need to come to grips with two things. First, there are a lot of people out there intentionally underreporting income to avoid paying taxes they owe. Second, the IRS has had its legs taken out from underneath it, I think we all know by whom, and so the alternative is to increase the budget for enforcing, and to then actually do it.
 
#23
#23
lawgator1 said:
A couple of points of clarification might be helpful here (not that you want to hear them since it undermines the shrill soapboxing itt):

1) The proposal is not reporting of every transaction of $600 or more. Rather, it is that if a given account has at least $600 in transactions in a given year, then the bank reports on the inflow and outflow.

2) The proposal has been touted by IRS chief Charles Rettig, who came form the Trump administration. The theory is that people are hiding income in accounts so as to avoid tax consequences.








If you want to avoid this i think you need to come to grips with two things. First, there are a lot of people out there intentionally underreporting income to avoid paying taxes they owe. Second, the IRS has had its legs taken out from underneath it, I think we all know by whom, and so the alternative is to increase the budget for enforcing, and to then actually do it.
Click to expand...
You managed to accuse Trump of gutting and use his appointment as excuses in one post. Like double TDS
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeeohdeeWood, 82_VOL_83, -GiveHim6- and 10 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top