Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet The Almighty Buck

Swiss Tax Office distributes Mozilla and OpenOffice 186

Posted by CowboyNeal from the taxman-downloadeth dept.
David Gerard writes "From Heise (via Mozillazine: taxpayers in the Swiss canton of Geneva are being given a CD with a French version of Mozilla 1.2.1, OpenOffice.org 1.0.1 and tax program GEtax 2002. Rough English translation from Google." This strikes me as a really cool idea. I already get the cards that tell me to file online rather than fill out paper forms, but it still forces me to buy tax software every year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Swiss Tax Office distributes Mozilla and OpenOffice More

Swiss Tax Office distributes Mozilla and OpenOffice

Comments Filter:

  • And in the U.S. of A. (Score:3, Funny)

    by ArkiMage ( 578981 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:40AM (#5308597)
    The US Post Office schills for Microsoft...

  • Terrific! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Azureflare ( 645778 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:40AM (#5308598)
    This is a step that should be made be more governments, to ease the tax process for people who don't want to spend money for a tax program. Jeez, we have to pay the taxes, why do we have to pay for a tax program to pay the taxes??

    • Do you really believe (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      that if the government were to provide a free tax program, that it would find your best result or offer tax saving features?

      Chances are, the software would include features advantageous to the irs only. It would include things you *don't* want the irs to necessarily know.

    • I would much rather see... (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      a much simplified tax system. Create a flat tax with a high minimum. (you make less than the minimum, and you pay no taxes).

      Eliminate all the deductibles.

      Everyone's tax form would look like:

      Your total income for 2002:
      x
      subtract the minimum of y:
      x-y = z
      multiply z times the tax rate:
      z * rate = total tax
      Tax you paid:
      paid
      find the difference:
      total paid - total tax = your refund
      OR
      total tax - total paid = tax owed

      Much simpler.

  • Tax office... Hrmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by slashhax0r ( 579213 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:41AM (#5308603)
    I'd rather see governments switching to open source and either using the saved dollars for something ie: education/heathcare, or just give us some tax rebates.. Neat idea though. P.s. fp?
  • Windoze, Linux, Mac?

    Ciryon

    • Re:For which platforms? (Score:5, Informative)

      by willll ( 635932 ) <.yakgoatcamel. .at. .myrealbox.com.> on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:50AM (#5308633)
      according to the babelfish translation: "OpenOffice.org 1,0,1 in French for Windows and Linux as well as the Webbrowser Mozilla 1,2,1 in French for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X."

    • Re:For which platforms? (Score:2, Informative)

      by maan ( 21073 )
      I can't find the maillist post anymore, but I remember reading that it was for at least linux and windows. Not sure about Mac.

      Also, the tax software itself is in java, and known to run in windows and linux. So I guess there's a possibility that it can run on mac too.

      Maan
    • Assuming my (rusty) French is correct, GETax software isn't offered specifically for Linux, but there's a PDF version that's usable with Mandrake (and other distros with XPDF).

      All three versions of OpenOffice and Mozilla will fit on one CD-R.
      • Being a citizen of Geneva, I can tell you the tax software (GEtax) is a POS full of calculation errors. I filled my tax declaration with it and then by hand, and found errors that would have made me pay at least 15% more tax in the electronic version (doesn't let you fill in all the deducible items, among other bugs). The error is known by the tax office but they never informed anybody of it openly.

        Furthermore, this system's purpose is only to make the input easier, there's no transmission of electronic documents since you end up printing the whole thing to send it. Still better than manual input (which field do I fill in?), but there's still work to do.

        Otherwise, it's a nice change from the previous system that required you to have MS Excel and then sending the floppy containing your data - I guess having at least 40% of the floppies infected with some virus decided them to change the system (I did complain that I found weird that I had to buy an expensive piece of foreign and buggy software to fill my tax declaration...).

        The sad thing is our dear Federal administration recently (about a year ago) signed a 5 years contract with MS for the renewal of the whole IT infrastructure. Scary!

        Cheers,
        max

  • Not quite on topic, but... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Akardam ( 186995 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:48AM (#5308623)
    ... CowboyNeal is posting... ... is this right? I thought he was only a mythical figure featured prominently in Slashdot polls since the beginning of Slashtime?

    Mommy, I'm scared...

  • tax program GEtax 2002 (Score:5, Informative)

    by SonOfSengaya ( 582624 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:52AM (#5308640) Homepage
    It's nice to see that the tax program is also available for Linux and Mac OS 9 + X
    http://www.getax.ch/dyn/ledossier.php?id_rubrique= 18 [getax.ch]

  • headline (Score:5, Funny)

    by willll ( 635932 ) <.yakgoatcamel. .at. .myrealbox.com.> on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:52AM (#5308643)
    The headline of the babelfish translation: " OpenOffice and Mozilla distributes Swiss revenue office " They forgot to say In Soviet Russia.

  • Cool! (Score:5, Informative)

    by sepluv ( 641107 ) <blakesley@@@gmail...com> on Saturday February 15, 2003 @10:54AM (#5308645)
    Giving out tax software is of course a very helpful and good thing and all governments should do it. It would be pretty cheap for governments to do (almost free when they have made the software). It also means that there is an offical, piece of software which uses the correct methods (and no arguments).

    I am not sure what platforms the actual GETax program is available on and whether it is open source - IMO as offical software given out by the government it should be.

    Mozilla and OpenOffice are, of course, really great additions, and should bring the wonders of good open source software to the public there (and a standards-compliant browser that actualy works and doesn't live in the Dark Ages)(although I guess people there are probably already quite open-minded).

    If only the governments of other MEDC's would start doing this kind of thing (and werent in collusion with M$). It would be a start if they could start storing personal data we entrust them with in non-prorietary formats on open-source OS's - doing anything else seems crazy in a democratic society.

    Kudos to the Swiss (who tend to be a more sensible European government). Also

    • Yeah it's too bad that companies like Intuit would scream bloody murder. I seriously doubt that the current incarnation of US government would make such an anti-business move.

  • IRS and corporate welfare (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kkirk007 ( 304967 ) <kkirk007NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:00AM (#5308667)
    The IRS this year was considering releasing its own tax software, available for free. Then the major tax software distributors (TurboTax, TaxCut, TaxAct, etc) cried foul..."if you release an electronic 1040 for free we'll go out of business!" and so instead the IRS struck an accord with them that they would give away their product to people with incomes under $30K /year.

    Since when was the IRS responsible to the software companies to keep their revenue stream going, rather than providing a useful tax service to the public?

    • As much as I wish that the US Govt would invest heavily in such free and possibly OSS, I can't really say I blame them.

      If you think of the Govt as a business (which it really is) then producing software that puts patrons out of business (tax paying companies, taxes on purchased software) isn't smart for them in the short term.

      Of course, in the long term, that money will likely get reinvested back to them anyway as people have more money to spend on other things.

      On a sort of off topic note, it seems to me that we as (self-perceived) enlightened OSS advocates should lobby (send letters) law makers to require all agencies that produce software for any purpose to put it in the public domain. Of course if national security is at stake, they don't have to release it.

      • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        If you think of the Govt as a business (which it really is)
        No.

        Let businesses do business, and the government, govern. Sorry, but plenty of things (Education, Science, Law enforcement...) are not business, not to be decided by "business" criteria.

      • Of course if national security is at stake, they don't have to release it.

        Better yet, they can just release it to me... ;)
      • I do not think that your argument that the IRS was motivated by a simple desire to boost tax revenues works, given that the cost of tax preparation software is tax deductable to individuals and that amount of tax that software companies would pay on their profits on such software would almost certainly be less than the value of the tax deduction to individual taxpayers.

      • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:4, Interesting)

        by An Onerous Coward ( 222037 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @07:24PM (#5310975) Homepage
        On the other hand, unlike other businesses, you don't have a choice to not "do business" with the government by not paying your taxes. It seems lame for them to create the burden on the public and then force us to rely on third parties to comply with them.

        The IRS certainly has sufficient expertise to create and maintain income tax software. I really think it's something that they should be doing.

        Also, there's an issue of accountability. Supposing a major error was found in a highly popular tax prep package, which caused people to file inaccurately. I don't know what sort of guarantees the vendors make, but one thing that they can't say is that the IRS would honor the inaccurate evaluation. With the IRS as the vendor, the taxpayers might have greater assurances.

        I believe that the government has a duty to make it as easy to comply with tax laws as humanly possible, and I'm heavily in favor of anything that accomplishes that goal. Whether that means creating helpful software or simplifying the tax code itself, such simplifications make life easier on hundreds of millions of people.
    • This unfortunate circumstance doesn't just apply to tax software companies. There are plenty of other businesses which should be put down for the common good, but the nature of our republic keeps them suckling at the public teat. For instance...

      Tobacco farmers
      Telemarketers
      The RIAA

      • Re:Exactly! (Score:2, Interesting)

        by entrigant ( 233266 )
        I had to pay $20 a week for 10 weeks to a drug rehabilitation program because I got caught with 2 grams of weed. This program had struck a deal with the state to get the courts to do this. I'm sick and tired of corporate welfare.

    • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Gerry Gleason ( 609985 ) <gerry&geraldgleason,com> on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:24AM (#5308750)
      Yes, and the truely objectionable thing about this is as long as the "major tax software distributors" are in control, there is zero prospect that we will be able to do our taxes securly on our OS platforms. I don't even care whether they give away the actual tax software, but what the IRS should do for us is create an open tax platform so they can release all the rules, regulations, forms and proceedures in a form that can be used directly by "generic" tax software.

      What I am imagining here is a system of XML files and XML document types that would have all the data that changes year to year as they update tax laws. This would make and OS tax program practical because you would just have to implement the generic software that uses this raw data, and you wouldn't need an army of tax lawyers and accountants to first digest the tax laws (and do this again each year). Most people would still use the commercial packages on the typical platforms, and this isn't even a guarantee that and OS version would emerge, but at least it would be possible.

      A full OS reference platform might be nice too, but it isn't a requirement.

    • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Hollins ( 83264 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:41AM (#5308809) Homepage
      I'm a little more cynical. While I have no doubt Intuit et al. raised a fuss, I think the government also realized that they would lose money through more widespread distribution of tax prep software. With all the talk about tax fraud, it is seldom mentioned that most people overpay their taxes. Tax prep software always reduces how much I pay over what I would have computed by filling out the forms manually. The software's interview process this year helped me find an educational deduction I wasn't aware of, optimize our IRA contributions, run different scenarios for next year, etc. It's virtually impossible to figure all this stuff out with a 1040 and a pencil, which is how most people do their taxes. If prep software were free, officially sanctioned by the IRS and as full-featured as TurboTax, I suspect revenue from individual and joint returns would drop substantially.

      • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Zzootnik ( 179922 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @01:08PM (#5309112)
        Okay---You're not gonna believe this one, but for 2 years running now, I've studiously worked out my taxes, mailed it all in, gotten my refund back and then received another check in the mail for the corrected adjustments the IRS figured themselves. Yeah- that's right--they didn't LET me overpay...how's that for odd...
        • This may be a good sign that you could save money by having somebody prepare your taxes.

          I'm not flaming you though, I had the same thing happen once, the first year after my first child was born, because I doubted I would qualify for the $500 tax child credit (most of those are for American Indians, farmers, handicapped, whatever). I had already counted him as a dependent, so it seemed like double-counting. Obviously I should head over to H&R Block myself :)

      • I don't want to be too much of a nay-sayer here; I just have one personal experience to speak from, and it may well be the exception to the rule. However, a few years ago, I gave a copy of a commercial tax program a try. (I don't remember which one, but it was one of the leading versions in any software store, or I (rather my mom) wouldn't have bothered.) Anyway, as opposed to doing it by hand, the computer version would have actually cost me about $200.00. I went through it a couple times to make sure I didn't miss a key question in some wizard, but never really figured it out. I filed the paper-and-pencil version that year, and every year since. (Granted, it isn't like my returns are *that hard* yet, so I'm willing to change as does my filing situation.) At any rate, don't just blindly trust the programs. Once you get it's best scenario, it may be worthwhile to pencil-and-paper the thing out with the instructions and worksheets just to double-check things yourself.

    • Re:IRS and corporate welfare (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jaaron ( 551839 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:47AM (#5308830) Homepage
      Actually, it's a tricky situation because you're talking about the line between the government and the market. Should the government compete or even enter areas of the private sector where firms are currently conducting activities? In some cases, it might make sense, but it's not something that should be happening often or you end up with a bloated government that runs and produces everything.

      Taking this to extremes (forgive me for a moment), but if the government will provide free (or low cost) tax software, why not give me free or low cost online access so I can file online? And why not give me a computer too. And hey, I need an operating system for the darn thing. Oh, and throw in a printer while your at it. Perhaps this seems silly, but when you deal with public services, you have to consider the long term consequences these trends can begin. Bloated services often start lean and mean and well intentioned.

      Generally, in any case that the private sector is offering a viable product, then the government shouldn't come in and replace them. Now the case of tax software is a little odd since that market is essentially feeding off of the tax service the government offers to begin with. One could also argue that the increased competition of the government might help the situation by forcing the current private firms to better their service. In some markets like education and mail/package delivery such competition works.

      My point here is that just because some nation starts offering open source tax software doesn't mean it's a great idea for the US. There are pros and cons that should be weighed.
      • it does not compete.
        in germany, there is a free government tax software, too. the difference between this and commercial software is that commercial software helps the user to pay less tax. the government software is just the same as tax sheets on plain paper.
      • Along the same lines, we can easily infer that if the US government were to propose actually dropping the personal income tax, that it would be opposed (and I guarantee you it would) by the same people on the grounds that it would cause so many people to lose their jobs.

        Similarly we can expect the "War on Drugs" to continue forever not because there is a "Serious Drug Problem" but because it would cause all those prison guards and cops and lawyers and so on to lose their jobs.

      • You have no right to make a profit at providing tax services. If the government decides that it would save tax payers more money to contract out to write its own software for free public use then that's it's obligation, not privelege. Taxes cost us money. Paying $50-$100 for tax software adds to that. If the IRS decides that it'd be easier and cheaper for the public to get free software from the government to streamline taxes then so be it.
      • What if I started a business selling custom-printed 4-color tax forms, could I sue the govt to stop mailing out the IRS-prepared tax packets so people would have to pay me money to prepare their taxes?

        The current situation truly is corporate welfare because setting up a free, official website would increase the rate of e-filing, and that would save the govt. tons of money on tax processing, not to mention publishing all those tax forms and instruction books.

        It's a simple matter of conduction govt. business in the most efficient and effective way. Purposely creating govt. inefficiencies so private companies can make money is dumb.

      • The government spends millions if not billions of dollars processing all the tax returns each year. Not only do all tax returns have to be processed, but many of them have to be audited.

        I've heard many cases of tax software saying that a person owes less to the government than they actually do. So the government evaluates this return from the tax software, and either runs it through its own program to check it or hires an expensive accountant to check it. Then the goverment figures out that the return is in error, and has to contact the tax payer to reconcile the difference.

        Most problems of this sort would be totally avoided if the government published a program that represented the corpus of knowledge of the tax system. Hell, they practically do it already. If you look at tax forms, it looks like program pseudo-code.

        The only reason makers of tax software get so much money is that gathering all this information is a big pain in the ass for the average citizen. It would be a pain in the ass for the government to do it as well, but they already do it.

        So really, the private tax software packages are just duplications of the government's work.
      • And why not give me a computer too.

        Years ago, Newt Gingrich had this project of giving computers to poor people, to somehow kickstart them.

    • This didn't stop the United States Postal Service from running advertisements where they dissed UPS and FedEx for being way more expensive than their own services. ("Fly like an eagle...")

    • 1) You, as a taxpayer, pay to have tax software developed by a monopoly (the government). This is a recipie for bloated software and bloated organizations full of middle-managers.

      2) You, as a consumer, pay the company of your choice to develop tax software in the way that best fits your needs. In this scenario, multiple companies compete for your money, which keeps them efficient and keeps their products evolving to meet the needs of the most people possible.

      Or, just maybe... 3) A bunch of OSSers get together and write tax software and give it away for free. Wouldn't that be grand? Unfortunately, AIUI, tax software has to be certified, and certification costs money, so I'm not sure this will ever happen. (That is kinda stupid... it's the output that should be certified by the taxpayer (sign here...), not the software that should be certified by the government.)

      • But it`s highly likely, as evidenced by other areas of the software industry, that you would only end up with a single software company (a monopoly) offering a single bloated product at an over inflated price and full of bugs, and ofcourse charging you for a new version each time the tax rates change or such.
        What`s more, a commercial company would want to write the most generic software possible, so it can be sold in as many countries as possible, so you will need to configure it to the way your tax system works, and may lose out if you make errors. The IRS would have software which is specifically designed for the american tax system, just like the software produced by the swiss.

      • 3) A bunch of OSSers get together and write tax software and give it away for free. Wouldn't that be grand? Unfortunately, AIUI, tax software has to be certified, and certification costs money, so I'm not sure this will ever happen.

        It costs 37 cents to file the application, and that's only if you want the software to connect to the IRS modems to e-file. It might not ever happen, but if it doesn't, it's not because of the certification costs.

        Help me make the software, here [sourceforge.net], and I'll gladly get the software certified. I'm already an authorized IRS e-file provider.

  • Free Tax Program for US (Score:4, Insightful)

    by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:01AM (#5308671) Homepage Journal
    While would be great, i dont see it happening, as we have 50 state tax rules and sets of forms to deal with. Then you have the thousands of pages of tax code for federal..

    Its why places like HR-BLock can make so much $$ on what *should* be a simple process.

    If they just would goto a "flat tax" the entire problem would go away.. Thousands of hours, millions of dollars wasted....

    • Re:Free Tax Program for US (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If they went to a flat tax system, then corporations and the top .5% of people would actually have to pay taxes. So no, we're never going to a flat tax system.
    • A "flat tax" would not make the entire problem go away, it would just mean that the poor would pay even more tax (or the rich pay less, or both).

      A flat tax is no simpler than a progressive tax. Both take a few seconds to work out on a calculator or with pen and paper for the brave (forgetting to carry that 1 could be an expensive exercise :).

      The problem is tax credits, rebates, exemptions, etc, etc. Of course each little exemption or rebate looks simple on its own (and benefits someone), but taken together it's a pain.

      Of course charities wouldn't like the idea of doing away with the tax deductions that go with donations.

      The system in the middle ages was pretty simple too. The tax collector just looks at your stuff and tells you how much you owe and the big guys with swords take it from you...

      • Poor v rich (Score:3, Informative)

        by mgkimsal2 ( 200677 )
        I think it was Dick Armey's proposal from a few years ago that income under $30k not be taxed, and everything over that be taxed at 10% (or maybe 15%?)

        I really don't see how 'the rich' (great label there) would pay *less* than they do now. Not much to hide behind when it's basic math that a 10 year old should be able to do.

        You made $200,000 last year? Pay $17,000 (10% of $170,000).

        Why is that so hard or evil?

        'The poor' wouldn't pay anything. Someone earning $50,000 would pay $2,000. What's wrong with that?

        Also, what is seldom pointed out is that *activity* is taxed. Money sitting under my bed isn't taxed, but when I transfer it to someone else (purchase/gift) that activity is taxed. More money in people's pockets means they will engage in more activity, which is what is taxed.

        • Re:Poor v rich (Score:4, Insightful)

          by gorgon ( 12965 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @02:24PM (#5309454) Homepage Journal
          The tax you're talking about above would not bring in enough money. The rich and much of the middle class would pay a lot less than they do now.

          Your person making $200k probably pays $30k+ right now, so your are talking about roughly a 50% tax decrease. I make a little over half of that $200k, and I am paying just a little less than the $17k.

          There's nothing inherently evil about a flat tax, but I think that it is a stupid idea. The rich get the most benefits from the current system and they have more money to spare, so they should pay more in income taxes. The poor have to pay enough on the local level in most areas on sales and property taxes. If anything, I think that the current system isn't progressive enough. We should be increases the tax rate on the higher levels. And if you want to cut out taxes on dividends then I think that the taxes should be cut out on interest from bonds and savings accounts as well.

          • There's nothing inherently evil about a flat tax, but I think that it is a stupid idea. The rich get the most benefits from the current system and they have more money to spare

            That's not "stupid", just incompatible with your personal sense of social justice.

            Let's put more nuance into it, just for fun. Let's say there's an 18-year old taxpayer who makes $1M a year, because his dad is rich. Let's say there's a 30-year old hard-working entrepreneur with sixteen adopted kids, who makes the same $1M working 60 hours a week. Even under your graduated tax plan, they'd still pay the same taxes. Some people might feel that a young playboy should pay more.

            On the flip side, does either $1M taxpayer really use more fire or police resources than you do? Why shouldn't firefighter or police salaries be evenly divided among the people who live in their district? In fact, you'll probably find that poor neighborhoods consume more police attention. The millionaires may also buy their own books, and never visit a public library. Is it fair that they should pay more to get less?

            That's where the problem is: trying to use taxes as a social equalizer. This results in endless complications and exemptions that benefit some and irritate everybody.

            Personally, I don't have a problem with the rich paying more, but trying to create social justice with a tax plan is plainly doomed to failure. Collect the taxes, and then spend the money on social programs.

        • I think it was Dick Armey's proposal from a few years ago that income under $30k not be taxed, and everything over that be taxed at 10% (or maybe 15%?)

          That's not a flat tax. That's a two level progressive tax, one level has a 0% tax rate and one level a 10% (or 15%) rate.

          A more progressive system would have more levels, but the justification for that is very much a take from the rich and give to the poor, which is porbably not what capitalists like...

          I really don't see how 'the rich' (great label there) would pay *less* than they do now. Not much to hide behind when it's basic math that a 10 year old should be able to do.

          I had 'middle class' at first, but since I used the term 'poor' I thought 'rich' was a better opposite term so I changed it.

          If you switch from a progressive tax to a flat tax, then people whose income was at an effective tax rate below the new flat rate pay more tax, and those whose was above it pay less. Hence those at the bottom end up paying more, and those at the top less (and those in the middle the same). That's assumming you want tax revenue to stay the same (and that people aren't evading tax...).

          Of course in reality we have tax deductions and credits and so forth which if removed would increase tax revenue and hence allow a smaller tax rate for the same revenue. But that's a different issue, you can remove those with a non-flat tax as well.

          Personally I would prefer a progressive tax system with more than two levels but more importantly I would prefer if all the exemptions and encouragements from the government to do certain things (by giving a tax break) were removed. I would much prefer a flat tax with tax free threshold (the simpest progressive tax) with no deductions and rebates then the current system we have in Australia, a progessive system with huge numbers of rules and regulations to do with deducations, etc.

          Yes I won't be able to pay less tax by claiming some of the money I spent on the computer I do work from home on, so my employer will have to pay me enough so I can afford it. Same with uniforms, etc. There'd be no financial incentive to give to charity, so hopefully people are actually nice and not just in it to save some tax.

          Of course things get complicated anyway, by fringe benefits (how much tax do I pay if my employer pays me $50,000 a year, but also provides me with rent free accomodation and a company car?) but that complication could be moved to the employer easily enough.

    • in switzerland it is not much better...
      we have 26 cantons with different tax rules
      and this program is just for about 400'000 citizens
      it should not be so hard to make a application with rulesets for the different states and not to expensive if you think of millions of people using it

  • Ah ha! (Score:3, Funny)

    by ArmenTanzarian ( 210418 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:04AM (#5308679) Homepage Journal
    All you have to do is be a poor college student like myself, there are a myriad of free resources for filing for my meager return online.

  • Free Online Tax Filing (Score:5, Informative)

    by flyingV ( 72384 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:13AM (#5308711)
    There is a list of places to file online for free (or a small fee) right from the IRS website.

    http://www.irs.gov/app/freeFile/jsp/index.jsp?

    I, for one, am trying out Free Tax USA [freetaxusa.com].
  • "I already get the cards that tell me to file online rather than fill out paper forms, but it still forces me to buy tax software every year."

    Can you believe that there are countries in which your God-given right to a market is not vigorously protected by the government!? To think that these Swiss goons feel like they can just give away tax software.... I hope the IRS doesn't get any crazy ideas about spending .000000000024% of their revenue to produce a free tax package. How would poor Intuit survive then?

  • (slightly) better translation from a human being (Score:5, Informative)

    by zztzed ( 279 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:19AM (#5308732)
    Hopefully this will make more sense than the Google translation. :P
    Swiss revenue office distributes OpenOffice and Mozilla

    The revenue office of the Swiss canton of Genf is furnishing all taxpayers who are "natural persons" in the canton with a CD for electronically filing their tax returns for 2002. Along with the tax return program GEtax 2002, which was developed in connection with DV Bern AG, open source programs like OpenOffice 1.0.1 in French for Windows and Linux as well as the web browser Mozilla 1.2.1 in French for Windows, Linux and Mac OS X can be found on the CD.

    With this, the government of Genf is one of the first governments worldwide to provide its citizens with open source products. OpenOffice.org contains, among other things, a word processor, a spreadsheet, presentation software, and Zeichenprogramm [I have no idea what that means. "character program"?]. The web suite Mozilla 1.2.1 includes a web browser, and email and chat clients, as well as an HTML editor.

  • You know... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Spazntwich ( 208070 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:20AM (#5308736)
    This really doesn't change the fact that if we just had a more simple and less convoluted tax system, we wouldn't even need to worry about complex deductions, brackets, taxable income, credits, etc.

    I'm not advocating a flat tax. Hell, I'm not even sure what I'm advocating, but if we had a more simple tax code, we wouldn't need to spend that money on tax software every year.

    This brings up an interesting point though. Would the makers of Turbo Tax make a move like the RIAA and try to sue the government if we moved to a simple tax system people didn't need software for?

    After all, it would technically be destroying their business model.

  • this may not be such a good idea... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    If many taxpayers are installing this software to file their taxes, then there definitely will be a few where the software doesn't install cleanly or well. Something used for this purpose definitely has to be "turnkey." I really hope that they have the bugs worked out of this process. They must have a lot of confidence in the software. I just know how many times I have been frustrated by relatively simple software that must be used to file a government form.

  • Why not simplify so no software is necessary? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The Mutant ( 167716 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:27AM (#5308765) Homepage
    IMHO this misses the fundamental problem; tax codes in most countries are just too damn complex.

    In the United States they've managed to create such a complicated system that with few exceptions, the services of a professional - or the use of sophistcated and costly software - are necessary. This is ridiculous!

    My situation is a little bit more complicated than most since I'm American and live in London. Last year my US tax return alone was 88 pages! Unbelievable.

    And yeah, I have to use an accounting firm to complete my return even though I've got a Masters in Finance. The cost of an honest mistake discovered years later would be far too high for me to risk it.

    So I get to pay KMPG about two thousand Pounds to complete my US and UK tax returns. Great.

  • What's REALLY interesting about it... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by koi88 ( 640490 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:28AM (#5308766)
    ... is that OSS is distributed together with the tax software and that every adult gets a copy.

    This way many people who are often too "lazy" to download new software and stick with their included Internet Explorer can try a different browser.

    Same with OpenOffice: I know a lot of people who are CONVINCED that there is no alternative to MS Office... I'm sure many will give it a try-- in the end it means you can save a lot of money...

    ps: Hey! I posted this story yesterday, but it was rejected... I know, don't complain...

  • I just checked the Localization page [mozilla.org] on the Mozilla website again, and I still can't find the French translation of version 1.2.1.
    Anyone have a pointer?

  • The canton of Berne, too. (Score:5, Informative)

    by de la mettrie ( 27199 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:32AM (#5308782)
    The Swiss canton of Berne [www.be.ch] has been distributing the TaxMe Software for two years now. It's a Java app, so it runs on any OS. You fill in the tax data, it creates PDF tax forms for you to print out and sign. Or you can even do it all online through a web interface [fin.be.ch], using the ID/password printed on the physical forms everyone gets by mail. Very slick.

  • Lots of wasted CDs? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by melonman ( 608440 )

    So just to get our story straight here, AOL sending out lots of unwanted CDs is bad, but the Swiss government sending out lots of CDs is good?

    Actually, given the Swiss government's rabid stance on recycling (at one point the genevois were smuggling bags of garbage into France to avoid paying garbage tax), this whole project could be considered to be a form of stealth tax, ie they send you the CD, and if you don't dispose of it properly they fine you...

  • Buy software?? (Score:5, Informative)

    by aka.Daniel'Z ( 586849 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @11:45AM (#5308824)
    but it still forces me to buy tax software every year.

    Buy software? Here in Brazil, we can download the software from Receita Federal [fazenda.gov.br] for free, and send them the information online, or go to the nearest Banco do Brasil [bb.com.br] and give them a floppy disk (for those that don't want / can't send online)
  • In the Netherlands we get the free program for your taxes from the Taxoffice since at least 1995, the first year I did my taxes electronically. You can choose to print it out, send the disk back or sent a signed file back. Too bad the recent versions are Winonly.

  • The swedish government (Score:3, Informative)

    by Jugalator ( 259273 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @12:45PM (#5309018) Journal
    Hopefully, the swedish government will start switching soon as well. :-) There's been quite a bit of talk about it lately, so at least they seem to give it some serious consideration.

  • UK Self Assessment (Score:3, Informative)

    by Tanami ( 601011 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @12:48PM (#5309034)
    In the UK the self assessment tax form can now be completed entirely on-line (not sure how long this has been the case - last year was the first time I needed to complete one).

    It will even calculate the tax and national insurance constributions owed.

    Can't say I like paying tax (or more specifically, the way it is spent), but they certainly made it pretty straightforward.

    As a corollary to the above however, I believe you have zero chance of using any of the british governments online services if you don't have Microsoft's Java VM - which is a bit of a bugger if you use Linux, or it recent enlightenments, have XP SP1a!
  • I keep seeing a bunch of Microsoft banner ads on Slashdot and other Linux-friendly sites.

    Can we support our favorite Linux site with Microsoft $$$ by clicking( back/forth ) on those banners?

    LoB
  • This is the link to the offical site of Departement des Fiances [geneve.ch] of the State of Geneva.

  • Why not distribute GnuCash too? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mgkimsal2 ( 200677 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @01:25PM (#5309177) Homepage
    I don't think there's a Windows version currently, but if they're distributing OO and Mozilla, giving people a copy of GnuCash as well wouldn't hurt. Maybe it's not 'internationalized'?
  • This has bugged me for the last few years.

    It's in the government's INTEREST to have people file electronically. I cringe when I imagine the number of people working in Ottawa (I'm Canadian) just doing DATA ENTRY, never mind auditing/reviewing of our returns. I have no idea how many people or how long it takes or how many tons of mail are involved, but I'm pretty sure it's better for _everyone_ (well, maybe not the aforementioned data entry people) to provide free electronic filing software.

    Nothing like wasting tax money to unnecessarily process tax returns. =)
  • The Australian Tax Office (and The UK Inland Revenue, I think) were recently criticised for security issues in their free tax software. This despite the fact that you have to jump through several hoops to download it, and provide lots of ID verification before you can upload your return.

    Does anyone know what this Swiss one does to protect people's personal details?

  • Why don't AOL do this? (Score:3)

    by -tji ( 139690 ) on Saturday February 15, 2003 @03:04PM (#5309633) Journal
    They send out MILLIONS of CD's already.. I haven't looked at the contents lately, but I assume there would be some free space. Stick a few cool Free Software packages on there as a nice little "fuck you" to microsoft, and also a benefit to the citizenry, to offset the annoyance of the spam-CD.

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (1) Gee, I wish we hadn't backed down on 'noalias'.

Close