Poll of the Day > FEDS/IRS backs down on plan for Banks to report Accounts with $600...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/democrats-to-scale-back-treasury-s-irs-bank-reporting-plan-amid-gop-uproar/ar-AAPFE2r

Damn, that's it?

Do you think it's a Good Idea? (Poll Question)

Wow, $600? So, everyone?

---

papercup posted...

Wow, $600? So, everyone?

Lol seriously. Basically everyone but the homeless

"Wealthy tax cheats"

"$600"

Even the $10000 mark they changed it to is pathetic. Literally every independent person spends more than that in a year unless you're homeless.

This is a smoke and mirrors attempt to pretend to crack down on the wealthy without actually doing anything at all. Everyone involved in this should be fired.

---

I don't understand what they're going for here, anyone with a job will be putting more than 600 hundred a year into their account. And they already track those people in other ways.

---

If the government could stop trying to stick their noses where they don't belong that would be great

---

Apparently the IRS hasn't finished auditing Trump's taxes yet after like 5+ years, and these geniuses think they have the manpower to basically monitor every American, lol

How about they focus on actually auditing all of the top 1% and then they can talk about looking into fucking $600 transactions?

What do they mean by report? Is it something as light as "acknowledge officially that it exists at all?" which is kinda a good idea... or something heavy like "You have $601 dollars go to jail!"

---

faramir77 posted...

Even the $10000 mark they changed it to is pathetic. Literally every independent person spends more than that in a year unless you're homeless.

This is a smoke and mirrors attempt to pretend to crack down on the wealthy without actually doing anything at all. Everyone involved in this should be fired.

So which is it, are you unable/unwilling to read and understand (bad) or purposefully misconstruing what's said in the article (worse)

---

Clench281 posted...

So which is it, are you unable/unwilling to read and understand (bad) or purposefully misconstruing what's said in the article (worse)

the new proposal will instead require the provision of additional information for accounts with more than $10,000 in annual deposits or withdrawals,

Explain to me what I'm missing here. That's less than $1000 a month in withdrawals.

---

Clench281 posted...

So which is it, are you unable/unwilling to read and understand (bad) or purposefully misconstruing what's said in the article (worse)

Remember when you said poor people should pay more for gas?
---

It was a fucking insane plan.

After a backlash, the new proposal will instead require the provision of additional information for accounts with more than $10,000 in annual deposits or withdrawals, a measure Democrats have been considering for weeks but have not formally endorsed, the people said

Oh, ffs... it's still a stupid insane plan, but they just upped the amount slightly. How the hell do these douchebags get elected? Well, I mean, a completely uninformed voting public helps, but still...

---

faramir77 posted...

the new proposal will instead require the provision of additional information for accounts with more than $10,000 in annual deposits or withdrawals,

Explain to me what I'm missing here. That's less than $1000 a month in withdrawals.

Probably this part...

The revised version of the bank reporting proposal will also weaken its scope by exempting all wage income from counting toward the $10,000 threshold withdrawal,

So it's going to be focused on money from sources other than your paychecks.

Note: I am not expressing an opinion on the plan, possitive or negative, just pointing out a detail from the article.


---

Trash plan. Burn it

---

Bugmeat posted...

Probably this part...

The revised version of the bank reporting proposal will also weaken its scope by exempting all wage income from counting toward the $10,000 threshold withdrawal,

So it's going to be focused on money from sources other than your paychecks.

Note: I am not expressing an opinion on the plan, possitive or negative, just pointing out a detail from the article.

Oh, so this is for things like bitcoin

---

$10'000 is pretty fair... there's already a law against structuring which is capped at $10'000 exchanges so automating the reporting system for people trying to bypass it makes sense...

...but I have no idea how they are planning to implement anything

---

I think $10K is fine (even though I easily transfer that much from my savings to my retirement every year, and I am far from a 1%er). $600 is just crazy, literally every tax paying American probably transfers at least that much every year.

---

$600 annually? That'd be incredibly easy to reach.

---

DrPrimemaster posted...

Oh, so this is for things like bitcoin

No, it's for all transactions outside of wages. That encompasses a lot more than bitcoin, and honesty bitcoin is a currency in and of itself so it bypasses banks completely unless you mean investing in then selling bitcoin for cash.


---

That's some serious Big Brother invasion of privacy shit there. Its just going to lead to more off-shore banking than there already is for wealthy people and its only going to hurt the less wealthy who don't have the resources to have that kind of setup.

---

OneGrumpyUncle posted...

That's some serious Big Brother invasion of privacy shit there. Its just going to lead to more off-shore banking than there already is for wealthy people and its only going to hurt the less wealthy who don't have the resources to have that kind of setup.

Yup and Crypto is Surging on the News...

I don't get it. Seems fine to me.

---

OneGrumpyUncle posted...

That's some serious Big Brother invasion of privacy shit there. Its just going to lead to more off-shore banking than there already is for wealthy people and its only going to hurt the less wealthy who don't have the resources to have that kind of setup.

Technically, it doesn't really "hurt" anybody, other than invasion of privacy (or, in some cases, outing people for tax evasion)

Judgmenl posted...

I don't get it. Seems fine to me.

Would you also be fine with the government installing a camera in your bathroom?

---

Zeus posted...

Would you also be fine with the government installing a camera in your bathroom?

Can I jerk off in front of it while moaning?

---

Zareth posted...

Can I jerk off in front of it while moaning?

Only if the democrats get their cut of the only fans proceeds.

---

streamofthesky posted...

Apparently the IRS hasn't finished auditing Trump's taxes yet after like 5+ years, and these geniuses think they have the manpower to basically monitor every American, lol

How about they focus on actually auditing all of the top 1% and then they can talk about looking into fucking $600 transactions?

Thats the thing, and this information is outdated because of when I went to school, but when I took my Tax Accounting class my professor (who worked for the IRS for 20 years before private practice) straight up said they dont have the manpower anymore to audit more than 3-4% of tax payers a year. Basically your information gets dumped into a computer and of it gets flagged then thats how they determine auditing processes for the most part. Edit: that was 2016.

Even the $10,000 change isnt great unless they limited it only an excess of wages. Because even at that point it seems like an unnecessary invasion of privacy.

My dealer is gonna be PISSED

---

Cacciato posted...

Thats the thing, and this information is outdated because of when I went to school, but when I took my Tax Accounting class my professor (who worked for the IRS for 20 years before private practice) straight up said they dont have the manpower anymore to audit more than 3-4% of tax payers a year. Basically your information gets dumped into a computer and of it gets flagged then thats how they determine auditing processes for the most part. Edit: that was 2016.

Even the $10,000 change isnt great unless they limited it only an excess of wages. Because even at that point it seems like an unnecessary invasion of privacy.

Yeah.
Republicans have spent decades intentionally trying to strip funding from the IRS (one of the only government agencies that brings in more money per dollar spent on it, due to its nature), so they simply don't have the man hours to audit all of the wealthy tax cheats.
Dems, as usual, haven't done anything to counter those maneuvers.

So...where the fuck are these IRS workers to review all of these transactions coming from, exactly? You'd think they'd focus on having enough people to audit all of the top 10% of earners w/ questionable tax returns before they even THINK of expanding their duties...

Metalsonic66 posted...

My dealer is gonna be PISSED

I imagine he's a cash-only business, so he should be fine.

---