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

#51
#51
lawgator1 said:
The Fourth Amendment does not ban all searches, only unreasonable ones.

You've already disclosed this information to a third party, the bank, and so you have no standing to contend that your privacy is violated by the bank sharing it with the IRS. Same as with a deposit of $10k or more in cash.
Click to expand...
Wtf. Ccoming from a lawyer that 3rd party bs is rich.

Goodbye any confidentiality ever for anyone.

What does it matter if the government taps your phone calls with a client. They were already telling someone else, so what's the issue with a third party knowing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DynaLo, InVOLuntary, tbwhhs and 4 others
#52
#52
lawgator1 said:
The Fourth Amendment does not ban all searches, only unreasonable ones.

You've already disclosed this information to a third party, the bank, and so you have no standing to contend that your privacy is violated by the bank sharing it with the IRS. Same as with a deposit of $10k or more in cash.
Click to expand...
600 bucks over a year is pretty darn unreasonable.

Hard to argue you are going after the rich when you include people making below minimum wage in the catch basin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz, tbwhhs, Orangeburst and 3 others
#53
#53
LouderVol said:
What if I am just moving that 300k from an account I already had?
Click to expand...

Then there's no problem. Easily shown.

The issue is your premise starts with the assumption fo guilt. If the IRS needs to look at an account there are means for them to do that.
Click to expand...

Not if they don't know the account exists.

Defaulting to requiring it is just Big Brother upping the game, not closing some loophole.
Click to expand...


You are conflating "loopholes" with intentionally not reporting income. They are different things.

The former is legal, the latter is not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH
#54
#54
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...
Well…. You’re reaping the rewards of voting for an incompetent F
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz, davethevol and C-south
#55
#55
lawgator1 said:
Then there's no problem. Easily shown.



Not if they don't know the account exists.




You are conflating "loopholes" with intentionally not reporting income. They are different things.

The former is legal, the latter is not.
Click to expand...
It's not just income that gets caught. So the search is unreasonably broad.

And when you are catching every account with 600 bucks of TOTAL transactions that's a lot of people having to prove their innocence every year, which is wrong.

I am more worried about protecting the innocent, rather than helping the government spy on all of us.

Also it's going to be real easy for the government take advantage. Another 600 buck stimulus check. Every account pinged is now reporting to the IRS.

Its waaaaaaayyyyy too broad for what it is supposedly generating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and Wireless1
#56
#56
lawgator1 said:
The Fourth Amendment does not ban all searches, only unreasonable ones.

You've already disclosed this information to a third party, the bank, and so you have no standing to contend that your privacy is violated by the bank sharing it with the IRS. Same as with a deposit of $10k or more in cash.
Click to expand...
I disclosed something to my Dr yesterday.

Since I already disclosed it to a 3rd party, my Dr, I guess Doc Brown is good to share said info with the Federal Gov’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#58
#58
lawgator1 said:
If a person making $25,000 a year is hiding income to avoid taxes then that is unacceptable, just as it is unacceptable for a person making $2 million.

May differ in degree. And the person making $2 million is much more likely to be using accounts to maneuver around reporting. But its not a simple question of wealth.
Click to expand...
So what you are saying is that this policy is most focused on making sure the servers and laborers that receive cash as a portion of their income will be most impacted. This does sound like the work of racist republicans.
 
#60
#60
lawgator1 said:
The Fourth Amendment does not ban all searches, only unreasonable ones.

You've already disclosed this information to a third party, the bank, and so you have no standing to contend that your privacy is violated by the bank sharing it with the IRS. Same as with a deposit of $10k or more in cash.
Click to expand...
So we'll see an explosion in the underground banking system?
 
#61
#61
lawgator1 said:
I am sure it can be done electonically, to be reviewed by a person when an irregularity of any real size shows up.
Click to expand...
Sure… just throw another compliance guideline at the banks and make them pay someone to handle it.
 
#62
#62
Wireless1 said:
So what you are saying is that this policy is most focused on making sure the servers and laborers that receive cash as a portion of their income will be most impacted. This does sound like the work of racist republicans.
Click to expand...
Sir, are you implying that Severs, Bartenders, Painters, Construction, Door Men, Valets and the like don’t report all their income???

Wonder how many of them will be caught up in this “non-nefarious” sweep of private data. 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, Wireless1 and hog88
#65
#65
wouldnt worry about this, most banks are incompetent anyway and the IRS supposedly is so short staffed on low paid employees that wouldnt care
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH
#66
#66
508mikey said:
wouldnt worry about this, most banks are incompetent anyway and the IRS supposedly is so short staffed on low paid employees that wouldnt care
Click to expand...
Biden has already said he wants to drastically increase the size of the IRS. I wouldn’t dismiss this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs
#67
#67
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...

There’s no defense for stupid overreaching bs like this that does nothing but spy on people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JOEY'S ALL VOL !!!
#69
#69
Godfatha said:
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.
Click to expand...

The point is to target small and midsize business owners. For almost all others, IRS already has good data. If you are a worker bee, then you are reported by your employer. For the truly rich, they have accountants who take care of it all. It is only the business owners who have multiple accounts of multiple sorts and rarely get their primary income from salary. Your dairy queen owner, the guy who owns 3 piggly wiggly supermarkets, the retiree who owns 3 or 4 rental properties and a towing business, the farmer with several cash crops and an internet business. This is who they are looking for - who also happens to employ ~ 50% of the US workforce
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top