IRS Chief Says Agency Plans To End Free Filing Program (cnbc.com) 152
Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Bill Long said the agency will end its Direct File program after a limited pilot and one full filing season. From a report: President Donald Trump's massive spending and policy bill includes funding to research and "replace any direct e-file programs run by the Internal Revenue Service."
Already, the program is "gone," Long said at a tax professional summit on July 28, Bloomberg Law reports. "You've heard of Direct File, that's gone," Long said. "Big beautiful Billy wiped that out. I don't care about Direct File. I care about direct audit."
Already, the program is "gone," Long said at a tax professional summit on July 28, Bloomberg Law reports. "You've heard of Direct File, that's gone," Long said. "Big beautiful Billy wiped that out. I don't care about Direct File. I care about direct audit."
US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:US (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: US (Score:2)
So why don't we push back when politicians and economists tell us GDP growth is good, mmkay? Laziness?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I contribute to increasing GDP by randomly smashing windows [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
The UK is going that way as well - for businesses and some individuals [www.gov.uk], many individuals can still submit a tax return on paper of on-line (web) [service.gov.uk]. It is slowly creeping to engulf more people.
Re: (Score:2)
Annoyingly, the UK won't allow you to file electronically if you are non-resident.
Re:US (Score:5, Informative)
Re: US (Score:2)
Re: US (Score:4, Funny)
Re: US (Score:2, Troll)
It being 2025, I don't have any envelopes, stamps, or buggy whips around my house ready to put into use at a moment's notice. Additionally, anything that requires actual mail typically also requires tracking and/or a signature on receipt so I can prove that it was sent and received...your $0.48 isn't going to cover that, and the time taken out of m
Re: US (Score:2)
Given that the Pentagon can't pass an audit, how much of a rounding error is $114 million?
Re:US (Score:5, Insightful)
And last year was when Direct File started as a trial program. In order to limit its use, it was limited to people who would normally qualify for free filing by most tax tools.
So that $114M was likely a lot of startup costs to build out the servers, security and filing application to perform this. The goal was likely to expand it as time goes on so more taxpayers are included until it could be useful to everyone.
By your measure, no one should ever start a business because very few will make a profit in the first year, and if you don't make a profit in the first year, you're not going to make a profit at all. Bezos should've shut down Amazon decades ago with that logic.
Re:US (Score:4, Informative)
Last year, Direct File cost $114M to "save" taxpayers $21M; taxpayers ended up paying $93M more with the program.
Curious to know where those numbers came from. According to the US Treasury report [treasury.gov], "140,803 taxpayers successfully filed returns using Direct File, with users reporting a high degree of user satisfaction. Direct File users claimed more than $90 million in refunds and saved an estimated $5.6 million in tax preparation fees on their federal returns alone. ... Foundational technology and product development costs for the IRS were $10.5 million, and Direct File’s operational costs – including customer service, cloud computing and user authentication – were just $2.4 million. To build and run the pilot, the IRS also engaged the U.S. Digital Service (USDS) and costs associated with their work are not included."
I haven't been able to find anything on the USDS cost.
Before the pilot, the "IRS estimated [gao.gov] that Direct File could cost $64-$249 million annually". But then, apparently, it didn't.
The American Coalition for Taxpayer Rights [americanco...rights.org] opposed Direct File. And who are they? "a 12-member, voluntary coalition of the nation's leading tax preparation, tax software and financial services settlement companies. Each year, ACTR member companies serve approximately 110 million of the more than 150 million Americans who file federal income tax returns ...." They say that as if they think it's a good thing, while many people think it's not so good.
USA now devolved to Canadian status (Score:2, Insightful)
We never had anything resembling direct file with the Canadian Revenue Agency. You're as bad as us, you should be embarrassed.
I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Interesting)
Interestingly, no such company exists here in Brazil. The reason is that our government has been offering full tax filling apps for free since I remember filling taxes (about 25 years). It's written in Java and runs on Windows, Linux and Mac without any problem. And for people who a normal salary, without investments or anything complicated, there's also free simplified tax filling apps for Android and iOS.
If the person has extra-complex stuff going on with their earnings, they can hire an accountant to fill the taxes for them. That accountant, in turn, will use the same app on their end, or take advantage of the free public API.
And if one's extra fancy, one can sign their submission with a publicly available encrypted token. This one is paid for, but it's also fully optional, and only people who do LOTS of stuff involving governmental systems get one, as it makes signing into those services faster and easier. So if one already has one for other uses, using it to sign their tax submission is a no-brainer.
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Insightful)
If we were not so busy adding books of tax law in for social engineering, I'm sure we could have free tax filing as well. Instead, we have an extremely convoluted tax regime AND the private tax industry owns the politicians.
Shame. Shame. Shame.
Re: (Score:2)
What part of "or take advantage of the free public API" wasn't clear?
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Informative)
Intuit spent $3.8M on political lobbying in 2024.
Client Profile: Intuit Inc [opensecrets.org]
Re: (Score:2)
And just how much did Intuit and HR Block donate to Trump?
I'm thinking more like there's a "Trump Tax Service" in the works ...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"I don't care about Direct File. I care about direct audit for poor people"
Most audits are for people with Sched-C or K-1 income.
Those aren't "poor people"
Top income brackets are ten times more likely to be audited than people at the bottom.
What triggers IRS Audits? [nolo.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most audits were for people with Sched-C or K-1 income.
Those aren't "poor people"
Top income brackets were ten times more likely to be audited than people at the bottom.
Fixed that for you.
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:4, Informative)
And that is why Trump and Musk cut the budget to the IRS, to reduce the number of audits of wealthy people.
Re: (Score:3)
Trump is aiming to reduce the audits of wealthy people (and everyone else) to zero. He wants to abolish the IRS. Pay attention when he speaks, eventually you will hear it. He said it during the election and he's said it since the election. Tariffs, other taxes, but no income taxes.
It would put rocket engines on the economy.
Re: I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:3)
That golden period nearly ended democracy in the us as the government was captured by industrialists. Tariffs and subsidies both are good tools to protect industries you want to grow. You don't do it forever though. The goal is to make them strong enough to compete globally (which means you have to make them compete internally first). When they can compete globally, you withdraw the tariff protections and cease the subsidies and hand them to the next sector you want to grow. Except titans of industry don't
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:4, Interesting)
Eliminating the income tax will put rocket engines on the economy because rich people _do_ spend, but more importantly, rich people do invest. Instead of getting taxed away and spent, often wasted by the government, rich people will instead invest that money which will result in the construction of more manufacturing in the USA
You said a lot of stuff there. Point 1: "Eliminating the income tax will put rocket engines on the economy"
Top marginal income-tax rates in the US [fidelity.com]:
1932-1935: 63%
1936-1963: 79% to 91%
1964: 77%
1965-1981: 70%
1982-1986: 50%
Seems like the economy somehow managed to struggle by, despite high income-tax rates.
Also: "The tax rate Americans actually pay is much lower than the top tax rate."
Point 2: "rich people will instead invest that money which will result in the construction of more manufacturing in the USA".
Evidence? Maybe that was the case in the 19th century, but I don't believe it's true today.
Total Construction Spending: Manufacturing in the United States [stlouisfed.org] over the past 20 years: slow growth until suddenly it tripled between 2022 and 2024. Want to guess what happened there? It wasn't a change in income taxes.
My understanding is that most investment goes into the finance, insurance, and real-estate sector, not manufacturing, because the US is now a "post-industrial service economy [wikipedia.org]". These tables from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis [bea.gov] might be relevant:
Table 14. Gross Domestic Product by Industry Group: Level and Change from Preceding Period: Manufacturing, $2.9 trillion; Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing: $6.19 trillion.
Possibly more relevant to income tax, Table 8: Personal Income and its Distribution:
Goods-producing industries: $1.9 trillion
Services-producing industries: $7.7 trillion
Table 17. Gross Output by Industry Groups
Manufacturing: $7.28 trillion
Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing: $9.87 trillion
Those are GDP, not investment, but they give an idea of the relatives sizes of those sectors of the economy.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would tariffs affect the low income people? Imported stuff is most usually luxury stuff.
Where did you get that idea? Where do you think Walmart gets its low prices? And why do you think cheap stuff is cheap? About one-third [nasdaq.com] of Walmart's products are imported, about 60% of them from China. I doubt that all of those are luxury goods.
Re: (Score:2)
Most audits are for people with Sched-C or K-1 income.
Today.
What the IRS chief appears to be saying is that there will be more audits, which implies more audits for people with lower incomes. In other words: many ordinary Trump voters.
Re:I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:5, Informative)
Mostly correct, but subtly wrong on the details. Top brackets are 10x more likely than the national average of individual taxpayers. Report from the GAO, 2022 [gao.gov]
But curiously, folks at the bottom are nearly 2x more likely to be audited than the national average. Claim the Earned Income Tax Credit? 3x more likely.
It makes sense to audit the very highest earners, though: that's where the money is, where the most...creative...filings occur, and thus the greatest gap between tax owed and tax reported/paid. In other words: auditing those folks recoups the most. GAO-24-106112 [gao.gov].
Best to take a look at those reports now, before the Ministry of Truth makes them disappear.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't care about Direct File. I care about direct audit for poor people", Fixed your quote for you Bill.
"I don't care about poor people," Fixed your version of his version of the quote for him.
Re: I don't care about Direct File. I care about (Score:2)
Why don't they put a checkbox on the tax form, "Yes I want to be thrown into a furnace to power AI"?
My kid had a two months job (Score:5, Insightful)
The company was pretty terrible and they never got w-2s to my kid and my kid being a dumb young kid like all kids didn't think it was that big of a deal so they didn't file that W-2.
I have now helped them with about $700 in legal expenses because the IRS is so incredibly understaffed that my kid has been completely unable to get through to anyone in order to sort out something as simple as an unfiled W-2 and a few hundred dollars in taxes.
The Republican party figured out in the 90s that if they sabotage the government dumb people would come to believe the government was bad and not that the act of sabotage was the problem.
So every year a bunch of dipshits vote Republican to tear down the government because government bad and the Republicans make the government worse for those people so they vote Republican because government bad and the cycle continues.
I do think the cycle will collapse soon with the total collapse of all Democratic institutions and the institution of a Christian theocratic State similar to Saudi Arabia but with a different book.
But hey at least those 14 trans girls in the midwest can't play field hockey right?
Re: (Score:2)
I think you're understating the odds a bit. The average person meets 80,000 people in a lifetime. If your numbers are correct and trans women are 0.35% of the population, then on average you will meet 280 in your lifetime, which is a far cry from it being easy to go your whole life without meeting one.
This ignores social aspects, where in some parts of the world, you may go your whole life without being aware that you've met one because they all go out of their way to hide it, or where in some places you
You're really stretching the definition of meeting (Score:2)
So you might have technically met a trans person but there's a high probability you didn't even notice you met them depending on where they were in their transition and how good a job they did "passing" (in quotes because I hate that phrase and I don't yet have a better one)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's better to say you will never in your life notice a trans person. I mean unless a multibillion dollar propaganda Network goes out of its way to make sure you do...
Yeah, likely true. Also, if you're intentionally looking for them, half the people you think are trans probably aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't care about Direct File. I care about direct audit for poor people", Fixed your quote for you Bill.
For or against? Because poor(er) people probably don't make (or fake) enough to warrant an audit. On the other hand, very rich people do, and are apparently very good at paying their accountants/lawyers to game the tax system in their favor. Rich people *definitely* don't want to get audited, but are the ones who should be and the return on the IRS time/effort would probably be worth it.
IRS tops $1 billion in past-due taxes collected from millionaires [irs.gov]
Turns out IRS audits of wealthy offer terrific ret [harvard.edu]
well (Score:2)
Re:well (Score:4, Insightful)
How about those Epstein files?
Re: (Score:2)
Haha. We'll never see them. Today they transferred Ms Maxwell to a random prison camp in Texas. Any bets on when she'll get sick and die out there?
Re:well (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe when third-parties stop nominating nutballs and cranks.
Re:well (Score:4, Funny)
but the nutballs and cranks are the entire appeal!
Re:well (Score:4, Informative)
For all practical purposes, until our actual voting system changes, voting 3rd party is probably the worst option. The math essentially makes a third party vote one for the person you like the least.
I've always liked this video on FPTP (first past the post) voting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] (especially at about the 5 min mark and the "spoiler effect")
And then some additional detail on the "alternative vote": https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Not that the AV is necessarily the "right" answer - but FPTP isn't it. People in the US are obviously free to vote for whichever candidate they choose, but our system will basically never allow a third party candidate any kind of reasonable chance to win without a drastic overhaul.
Re: (Score:2)
In the presidential elections, because of the Electoral College, for most states, it doesn't matter who you vote for. Your state will reliably and predictably go to the Republican candidate, repeatedly, or the Democratic candidate, repeatedly. So voting for a third party isn't "wasting your vote".
You can have more effect at the local, county, and state levels.
There's also the problem of the infinite loop: nobody votes for third parties because they can't win -- because nobody votes for them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
paper forms (Score:5, Interesting)
We should all do the IRS a favor and print out the forms and fill them out by hand. We should all mail them in for manual processing. See there is still a free option, its just not software and is more work for everyone including the IRS. Bury them in their own work.
Re: (Score:2)
You have my vote!
Re:paper forms (Score:5, Insightful)
Stamps aren't free. (And hand delivering will involve some kind of transportation cost.)
There's no such thing as a free lunch.
(But I agree, except this doesn't seem to be about free filing through third party sites, only about direct free filing.)
Re: (Score:2)
Stamps aren't free but neither is internet access. So there is always a cost. We are talking about the actual filing cost, not the cost of delivery to the IRS.
Re: (Score:2)
Stamps aren't free but neither is internet access.
Starbucks has free WiFi.
And most libraries have free internet access, including the computer to do it on.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe not for much longer. Libraries are cutting back on staff and services after Trump’s order to dismantle small agency [apnews.com]
Re: paper forms (Score:3)
What kind of $100-hammer-contracting is making a simple internet app into a $114 million boondoggle?
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, keep telling yourself that you don't NEED to work to pay your bills, and if there aren't a lot of available jobs within 80 miles of you, then chances are that starting your own business won't bring in enough business to eliminate the need to work for someone else to pay the bills. The entire system is designed to force people to work in jobs where the management doesn't respect the employees.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm onboard for this plan. The inconvenience to me is definitely worth the disruption to the IRS.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't have a problem with filling out the forms by hand. The problem is that you need to know *how* to fill them out, which in the past, when I had to fill them out by hand, took hours of reading IRS publications. If you just worked at a job, didn't own anything, and had no deductible expense, not a problem. But if you own anything, whether stocks, bonds, house, or even a car, or give things to charity, lotsa luck reading all those publications. Or, if you moved for your job, or had expenses related t
Re: (Score:2)
TBF if you have your previous tax returns and your financial situation hasn't really changed, you should be able to more easily figure it out by referring to the previous guys
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have a problem with filling out the forms by hand. The problem is that you need to know *how* to fill them out, which in the past, when I had to fill them out by hand, took hours of reading IRS publications. If you just worked at a job, didn't own anything, and had no deductible expense, not a problem. But if you own anything, whether stocks, bonds, house, or even a car, or give things to charity, lotsa luck reading all those publications. Or, if you moved for your job, or had expenses related to your job. Or had a side gig. Or any number of other things where it's not obvious how to handle them for taxes.
That's really entirely the fault of laziness by the IRS and/or Congress. We should have laws requiring all of those companies to provide the complete set of information necessary to file your taxes in a computer-digestible form. There's no excuse for having to manually change several *hundred* lines one at a time to tell TurboTax that they are short-term or long-term gains, or whatever the one random piece of information that it needs from my Edward Jones statement every f**king year on a third of the tra
Re:paper forms (Score:4, Interesting)
I do this every year. It takes me about 30 minutes to complete both state and federal tax forms.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell good does that do? (Score:4, Insightful)
You're complaint is with the people actively sabotaging that civilization. Or it should be but I suspect you are heavily distracted by whatever moral panic you think is the more important than having clean drinking water and disaster relief.
Re: What the hell good does that do? (Score:2)
"Money that you want because that's what pays for a functioning civilization."
When have taxes ever paid for more than a quarter of what the government spends? Does the fact that the Pentagon can't pass an audit mean they are writing blank checks without feeling restricted by Congressional authorization, which the Fed, ultimately, cashes?
Why do we even need an IRS?
Re: What the hell good does that do? (Score:4, Interesting)
When have taxes ever paid for more than a quarter of what the government spends?
Uh, most (if not all) of this country's entire existence?
For example, in FY2024 federal taxes paid for about 3/4ths of the government expenditures, and that is historically pretty high. State and local governments tend to generally break even ("balanced budget") as a matter of law.
But let's not facts get in the way of your hyperbole.
Re: What the hell good does that do? (Score:4, Insightful)
The assertion was "When have taxes ever paid for more than a quarter of what the government spends?"
I answered that. ("approximately always", where the exceptions were during existential crisies such as, oh, WW2. but even then I imagine )
So you moved the goalpoasts with "Can you please look at that and tell me tax receipts are not any kind of limitation on spending?"
I also answered part of that ("state and local governments generally have to have balanced budgets as a matter of law"). the federal governement doesn't have that sort of direct restriction (beyond the "debt limit" political football that only seems to matter when Democrats are in charge), but the feds still have to pay back their own debts -- debts nearly entirely owed Americans, I might add. Levied taxes (which includes tariffs) is effectively the only way they can do that. Technially there are other ways, eg investment profits (including interest on loans given out) or direct gifts to the government, but those are a proverbial drop in the bucket.
As for your "print the money and index inflation away", that only works when they keep the actual inflation rate below the rate of return on treasury bonds. When we have competent, reality-based elected officials that work to better the nation as a whole, that tends to happen. Not so much at the moment.
So I once again repeat my point about not letting facts get in the way of your hyperbole.
Now you just don't understand how America works (Score:3)
So most of the debt is held by Americans and is more or less money supply. In other words it's just money in the economy.
What we all overseas is about 20% of the debt. It would be very easy to pay it off just by taking back some of the money we gave to the 1% in the last decade let alone the last 50 years.
But the trick is we absolutely do not want to pay it off. That debt artificially props up the value of the US dollar.
That lets us
Re:paper forms (Score:5, Informative)
That is the point of a protest. Pressure on productivity forcing the hand of a business or government.
You block roads, you don't buy products, you tie up the customer service lines. You throw the fucking tea in the harbor.
Re: paper forms (Score:2)
Ending Direct File hurts people who are required by law to file their taxes, but it's also a self-inflicted wound to the IRS, because they're likely to be dealing with more pap
Re: (Score:2)
94% of users cited "excellent" or "above average" (Score:5, Informative)
From the linked to article:
The IRS is reportedly ending the Direct File, but a report obtained via the Freedom of Information Act says that 94% of users rated their experience as “excellent” or “above average.”
TFA is light on details, but the article it links to is solid. And it makes me curse the currently corrupt GOP all the more.
Re: (Score:2)
The GOP has been corrupt for 30 years. They've promoted oligarchy from Reagan onward, with fascism being acceptable to US congress, before Reagan.
Shocked (Score:2, Insightful)
My shocked face when a shitty person campaigned on doing shitty things and follows through.
Republicans are deranged about the IRS (Score:5, Insightful)
My entire life i've heard about defecit this and debt that, debt crisis, we're going off the cliff yadda yadda yadda but yet for my entire life Republicans in Congress, Presidents, their media, Fox, AM talk radio has always been anti-IRS, they're evil, they're bad "because taxes are bad" therefore "the agency that collects the taxes is bad" as if the IRS passes or set the tax policy.
The "tax gap" or the amount of collected taxes verusus what we should expect to correct is approx $540B a year [irs.gov]. We are leaving a half a trillion dollars per year on the table because we don't want to fund the IRS to collect it.
That $8B a year for 10 years for the IRS to close that gap was already working, it was already very profitable then we shit canned it because "taxes bad!".
Hilariously these same folks love love love to compare the government budget to a business yet overlook the idea that if you were unable to collect money from like 1/5 of your customers you would rather cut staff than just go and collect that money to balance your budget. Un-fucking-real. "My job only pays me for 4/5 of my hours worked. Oh well! No problem here! Guess we should just accept that!"
If you want lower taxes, fine then lower taxes but you should still want as close to 100% compliance with your tax code. having some people not paying their taxes is just societal and budgetary rot. At this point it's clear thats the goal of these rubes and ghouls.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Republicans are deranged about the IRS (Score:5, Insightful)
You did the thing! This is completely irrelevant to the point, again, the IRS does not set how taxes work. The complexity of the tax system is a Legislative issue. They are just there to collect it and they can collect it if we fund them. The purposeful conflation of these things is part of how the IRS has had it's budget slashed for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Republicans are deranged about the IRS (Score:5, Informative)
100 damn percent and that extra funding from the IRA was primarily used to audit the wealthy I.R.S. Upheld a Biden Pledge: More Audits, but Only on the Wealthy [nytimes.com]
Non Paywalled: https://gvwire.com/2025/06/05/... [gvwire.com]
But new data released by the IRS last week suggests that the agency upheld Biden’s promise in 2024. With an audit rate of 0.8%, people making over $500,000 on their latest return were more than twice as likely to be audited compared with the same point in the audit cycle in previous years.
Meanwhile, the matching audit rate for taxpayers making under $500,000 declined slightly. The figures covered 2022 tax returns that were filed in 2023 and audited during the 2024 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30.
Re: (Score:3)
If they'd simplify the tax system and make it a basic: "You earn X, pay Y% regardless of income source"
This would lead to situations where someone getting a raise could potentially lose money. It should be first x amount of income is tax free. Next x amount of income is taxed at this higher rate. After that, income between x and y is taxed at this rate. And any income beyond that is taxed at this rate. This is how it currently works, although tons of people don't understand that and are convinced that them getting a small raise will lower their take home income.
But the poor don't want this because the current system makes them pay 0
This could still very easily be implemented. In
Re: (Score:3)
This could still very easily be implemented. Income $100,000/year, tax rate is 0.
Milton Friedman suggested that the lowest tax brackets could be tax-negative, to give poor people a little extra help. Bonus it removes the economic incentive to stay on welfare (because currently you lose it if you find a job).
Re: (Score:2)
As I said last week. (Score:5, Insightful)
There was no way in hell something which was simple to use, which people liked, and was free, was ever going to last in this regime.
Who Wanted This? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Other than Dicknuts and the tax preparers, who wants this?
Libertarians and MAGAts. The former because the Federal Gov't shouldn't be doing anything that isn't expressly defined in the constitution. The latter because their choice in media told them it was bad.
FreeTaxUSA is a free and proven alternative (Score:5, Informative)
At the risk of sounding like both a shill for a real company, AND a shill for something that sounds like a scam, FreeTaxUSA has been a viable alternative to TurboTax and H&R Block and KreditKarma for 10+ years now. Federal filings really are free, and state filings are around $15. For a few years I was doing my complex taxes and my simple taxes on both TurboTax and FreeTaxUSA and they always came out the same, except for the price I was paying for the software.
I agree that the IRS removing their free Direct Filing program is a bad but predictable move for this bad but predictable administration, but there are still great options out there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and several years ago when I used it, they were storing user credentials, and god knows what else, unencrypted. I didn't even file through them that year, I simeply used them to do the calculations.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you know it was unencrypted on their end, storage?
Re: (Score:2)
At the risk of sounding like both a shill for a real company, AND a shill for something that sounds like a scam, FreeTaxUSA has been a viable alternative to TurboTax and H&R Block and KreditKarma for 10+ years now. Federal filings really are free, and state filings are around $15. For a few years I was doing my complex taxes and my simple taxes on both TurboTax and FreeTaxUSA and they always came out the same, except for the price I was paying for the software.
I agree that the IRS removing their free Direct Filing program is a bad but predictable move for this bad but predictable administration, but there are still great options out there.
DirectFile was nowhere near as good as the services you listed so it is unclear why removing it is bad
Gift to the rich -MAGA!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Eliminating "free" methods for filers of non-complex taxes forces regular payers to purchase or use tax filers. This is just more mandated corporate profit. We're being fleeced by the GOP/MAGA cult.
We need to get rid of the income tax (Score:2)
Go to a consumption tax. No more 1040 forms, no more April 15, no more deductions from your paycheck and biggest of all, no more having the government know how you earned every penny.
Before someone one-note-nelly's that the consumption tax is regressive, so is an income tax. They fixed the income tax, they can fix the consumption tax.
Replacing the income tax with a consumption tax would also allow major cuts at the IRS since they would only need to focus on businesses.
Billy Long is a crook (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Restore FreeFile for the top 3% (Score:2)
Very little is lost here (Score:2)
DirectFile was a nice effort but it wasn't as capable as the multiple free federal and state tax filing services available out there. It cost millions of dollars to create and would have cost millions more to support and enhance. It really didn't make sense.
Re: (Score:3)
They have awesome healthcare courtesy of the tax payers.
Re: Why (Score:4, Informative)
Starting in 2029, those making $30,000 a year or less would see a tax increase, while the top 0.1 percent would get a $309,000 tax cut, on average â" an annual tax break that is more than three times what the typical American household earns in an entire year.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Why (Score:2)
Why can't they fully legalize suicide? Why such blatant hypocrisy? Just because they can?