I have two chickens and a Goat how much can you give me in exchange?
United States Biden administration policies and actions - megathread
- Thread starter Tyzuris
- Start date
Swiss account here I come!
Airedale260
Well-known member
There's no way that's remotely feasible. Given how many transactions fit that criteria there's no way to figure it out. Not to mention "fair market value" is a relative term.
bintananth
behind a desk
Practically every bi-weekly paycheque for a full-time job hits that threshold.
VicSage
Carpenter, Cobbler, Chirugeon, Dataminer.
If you work full time making $7.50/hr, you'd hit the $600 threshhold.
This basically means that everyone working a professional level job would have their income tracked.
The actual fuck?
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
Don't you care about the potential tens or even hundreds of dollars that go unreported by citizens every year because someone living paycheck-to-paycheck had a garage sale?
That's real money the IRS could be collecting to hand over to the bureaucracy to hand over to the Kennedy Center and General Electric!
Its not about taxes its about power and we all know it.
Computers make it possible.
Well yes, however it doesn't actually change anything as long as you're honest on your taxes.
I mean it will make it more obvious where money is going and coming from in accounts, but this is something that the IRS already had access to, if they actually needed to look at things.
This will however make unreported income and shenanigans related to it show up a lot easier, while justifying overtime for IRS employees.
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
'If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear' is shit justification.
It's shit justification for the IRS currently existing info-collection and account monitoring without warrant (as in literally, without the warrant such should require), it's shit justification for expanding that power because 'agents need overtime and an easier job'.
The IRS already had access to all this info anyway, thanks to the electronic nature of the banks these days; they could always track your bank accounts if they wanted to.
All this does is put people on notice that the IRS is openly watching what they used to track passively anyway.
The only people who have serious reason to fear this change are those who used the old reporting limit to try to dodge around tax rules.
Which frankly affects the wealthy more than anyone, because middle class and poor people are not the ones who usually find ways to evade taxes they should legally be paying.
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
Thus the 'currently existing' I used.
And yes, the IRS currently existing access to private information justified by the War on Terror is wrong and should be rescinded.
That's what warrants are for.
Well it won't be, and frankly as long as people are honest on their taxes, it shouldn't impact them at all.
I get feeling threatened by any expansion in the seeming power of the Federal gov, but this is not something to fret over unless someone's been doing shady financial shit and counted on the reporting limit to hide their activities.
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
Not with that attitude, no.
Unless you've been paying attention to how the IRS behaves towards disliked political groups or candidates, or how the convoluted nature of the US tax code makes it entirely possible for any citizen to be put under investigation and dragged into court/extended bureaucratic proceedings even without any intentional or even unintentional 'shady financial shit' done on their part and made to bear the burden of such--however unjustified it might be in reality.
4th Amendment? What's that!?
Airedale260
Well-known member
Actually, no. While transactions are recorded, the sheer volume of reporting required makes it impossible from a practical standpoint. Even if banks hired the armies of compliance people needed, there's no way for the feds to hire enough people to monitor everything.
4th Amendment? What's that!?
Actually this kind of regulatory reporting already exists under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970. So it would be legal (at least as an act of Congress) but it's the impracticality of it that would make it a nightmare for everyone involved.
They wouldn't monitor everything. The computer systems would. They'd program some things in the computer systems that send out flags over certain behaviors. Or they can just use what they have on you inconvenience people who they feel the need to harass. Step out of line, bam, they've got a database on you ready to go.
It would be 90% automated.
Yes it's very much doable. The amount of manpower needed for this is smaller than you think.
You think this isn't feasible, yet we are only a few years out from discovering the absolutely massive phone monitoring this country was taking part in. This would be easier than that.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Given how worried you are about some other subjects, I'm honestly bewildered by your inability to imagine ways in which the Democrat Party will weaponize this against their political enemies.
I mean, it's not like Trump's tax returns were leaked, which meant someone committed a Federal felony, and nobody was ever punished for it.