The only way for the IRS to recover money is for people to have not paid the taxes they owe. Likely on accident, but still.
Which does not change that these people are paying money to the IRS representing their - and any preparer’s - good-faith effort to follow the IRS’ labyrinthine code, a thing you seem to pretend isn’t happening.
By definition, taxes were paid, until such a time as zero dollars are transferred, and by benefit of the doubt, the amount was everyone’s best understanding of the amount due.
The best argument you can make is the IRS independently, at a later date, came to a different conclusion regarding the amount due and is holding someone liable for the increased amount.
And this is a bad thing how? Now we know where the property line is and we have more security/police to remind people to stay off it. Who would be angry at that?
Are you seriously asking how the concept of entrapment is bad?
The property line didn’t change, it just got clarified.
And yet again, its “clarification” was a deviation from everyone’s long-running understanding of where it was.
I’m going to put this bluntly: fuck em. Pay your taxes.
I’m going to put this bluntly: Don’t be dumb. They already are.
The only people mad at this are people who support tax evasion, which is a large amount of people.
You’re mad about paying taxes? Fuck you, pay your taxes. It makes my life worse when your greed steals money from our government.
Is it truly so inconceivable to you that people could be rightfully-pissed about potential future liabilities resulting from an incomprehensible code despite their best attempt to follow said code and continue to do as they already are and pay their taxes?
Do you truly believe a good-faith effort to pay one’s obligations is somehow “greed” or “stealing … from our government”?
The best argument you can make is the IRS independently, at a later date, came to a different conclusion regarding the amount due and is holding someone liable for the increased amount.
And the IRS is the authority. It’s not a discussion, it’s not a negotiation, there’s no bargaining. There’s no “oh but I already paid $10, why can’t that be good enough?” Take it up with Congress. Tax code says you owe $12. You’ve paid $10. You still owe $2. That’s fact.
And yet again, its “clarification” was a deviation from everyone’s long-running understanding of where it was.
"Which does not change that these people are paying money to the IRS representing their - and any preparer’s - good-faith effort to follow the IRS’ labyrinthine code, a thing you seem to pretend isn’t happening.
By definition, taxes were paid, until such a time as zero dollars are transferred, and by benefit of the doubt, the amount was everyone’s best understanding of the amount due."
And the IRS is the authority. It’s not a discussion, it’s not a negotiation, there’s no bargaining.
And “everyone” was wrong.
"Is it truly so inconceivable to you that people could be rightfully-pissed about potential future liabilities resulting from an incomprehensible code despite their best attempt to follow said code and continue to do as they already are and pay their taxes?
Do you truly believe a good-faith effort to pay one’s obligations is somehow “greed” or “stealing … from our government”?
I how your next paycheck is short, and your boss tells you “too bad, that’s what I thought you were supposed to get, you’re SOL”. Because apparently that’s how things work in your fantasy land.
Which does not change that these people are paying money to the IRS representing their - and any preparer’s - good-faith effort to follow the IRS’ labyrinthine code, a thing you seem to pretend isn’t happening.
By definition, taxes were paid, until such a time as zero dollars are transferred, and by benefit of the doubt, the amount was everyone’s best understanding of the amount due.
The best argument you can make is the IRS independently, at a later date, came to a different conclusion regarding the amount due and is holding someone liable for the increased amount.
Are you seriously asking how the concept of entrapment is bad?
And yet again, its “clarification” was a deviation from everyone’s long-running understanding of where it was.
I’m going to put this bluntly: Don’t be dumb. They already are.
Is it truly so inconceivable to you that people could be rightfully-pissed about potential future liabilities resulting from an incomprehensible code despite their best attempt to follow said code and continue to do as they already are and pay their taxes?
Do you truly believe a good-faith effort to pay one’s obligations is somehow “greed” or “stealing … from our government”?
How incredibly narrow-minded.
And the IRS is the authority. It’s not a discussion, it’s not a negotiation, there’s no bargaining. There’s no “oh but I already paid $10, why can’t that be good enough?” Take it up with Congress. Tax code says you owe $12. You’ve paid $10. You still owe $2. That’s fact.
And “everyone” was wrong. Pay your taxes.
For the final time: They already are.
"Which does not change that these people are paying money to the IRS representing their - and any preparer’s - good-faith effort to follow the IRS’ labyrinthine code, a thing you seem to pretend isn’t happening.
By definition, taxes were paid, until such a time as zero dollars are transferred, and by benefit of the doubt, the amount was everyone’s best understanding of the amount due."
"Is it truly so inconceivable to you that people could be rightfully-pissed about potential future liabilities resulting from an incomprehensible code despite their best attempt to follow said code and continue to do as they already are and pay their taxes?
Do you truly believe a good-faith effort to pay one’s obligations is somehow “greed” or “stealing … from our government”?
How incredibly narrow-minded."
I give up. You’re just being dense.
I how your next paycheck is short, and your boss tells you “too bad, that’s what I thought you were supposed to get, you’re SOL”. Because apparently that’s how things work in your fantasy land.