IRS Math: $600 Million = $4 Billion

A few years back, we argued that Americans should want more IRS audits, not fewer. ”Still, unless you are personally cheating by one-fifth or more, you should be mad at the I.R.S. — not because it’s too vigilant, but because it’s not nearly vigilant enough,” we wrote. “Why should you pay your fair share when the agency lets a few hundred billion dollars of other people’s money go uncollected every year?” Now, the IRS may be doing even fewer audits, thanks to political efforts to cut the agency’s budget. In fact, “IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman told the committee Tuesday that the $600 million cut in this year’s budget would result in the IRS collecting $4 billion less through tax enforcement programs.” On the other hand, it will make tax cheating a bit more attractive.

http://www.freakonomicsmedia.com/...4-billion/

*shakes head* Do you understand what the IRS does? they collect taxes

they dont spend $1 to collect $1 in taxes.

Suhweet! Charitable contributions through the roof in 2011 baby

Seriously though, I understand this isn't a great economy but I don't understand all the cuts in programs that make $$ both by the gov't and in the private sector.

I was going to get married at this place and it was owned by a church (who actually knew??). They decided to shut it down to "save costs" yet the place had been well in the black for years! So not only do they have the property to keep up but now they no longer have any private events or conferences to bring in any $$. But hey, as long as it saves $2M in salaries or whatever it was seen as a good solution.

Quote from LivninSC : I was going to get married ... [as a] charitable contribution

Congratulations, man!

Based on this news, I support the conservative agenda of cutting funding to government agencies, especially the IRS. In fact, they need to completely cut all funding to the IRS.

Quote from Lilian : Based on this news, I support the conservative agenda of cutting funding to government agencies, especially the IRS. In fact, they need to completely cut all funding to the IRS.

easily done if we switch to a flat tax that applies across the board to everyone and everything....that would just eliminate the need for the IRS, leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats.

easy billions to save there, plus kick start the economy into a much better state without the heavy weight of the regulatory nightmare that the Revenue Code is, and the consequent need for literally armies of lawyers and accountants to keep up with it, the billions of dollars and manhours everyone spends preparing and filing their taxes, which is completely wasteful and unproductive use of resources, time, and money...

Quote from Radeck : easily done if we switch to a flat tax that applies across the board to everyone and everything....that would just eliminate the need for the IRS, leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats. easy billions to save there, plus kick start the economy into a much better state without the heavy weight of the regulatory nightmare that the Revenue Code is, and the consequent need for literally armies of lawyers and accountants to keep up with it, the billions of dollars and manhours everyone spends preparing and filing their taxes, which is completely wasteful and unproductive use of resources, time, and money...

Not to mention a dramatic shift of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class (if there still is one).

Quote from Radeck : easily done if we switch to a flat tax that applies across the board to everyone and everything....that would just eliminate the need for the IRS, leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats. easy billions to save there, plus kick start the economy into a much better state without the heavy weight of the regulatory nightmare that the Revenue Code is, and the consequent need for literally armies of lawyers and accountants to keep up with it, the billions of dollars and manhours everyone spends preparing and filing their taxes, which is completely wasteful and unproductive use of resources, time, and money...

watch out, this would mean flat tax for social security and medicare as well, something conservatives do not want. its current state is just fine for them, cut off at $100k.

Quote from Gotchaforce : *shakes head* Do you understand what the IRS does? they collect taxes they dont spend $1 to collect $1 in taxes.

More like $1.00 to collect $7.50 in taxes. Pretty inefficient operation.

Quote from Radeck : easily done if we switch to a flat tax that applies across the board to everyone and everything....that would just eliminate the need for the IRS, leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats. easy billions to save there, plus kick start the economy into a much better state without the heavy weight of the regulatory nightmare that the Revenue Code is, and the consequent need for literally armies of lawyers and accountants to keep up with it, the billions of dollars and manhours everyone spends preparing and filing their taxes, which is completely wasteful and unproductive use of resources, time, and money...

I agree 100%. The money siphoned off the economy to stay compliant with the tax code is absolutely incredible.

Quote from 124nic8 : Not to mention a dramatic shift of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class (if there still is one).

To shift the burden, you would have to assume that the wealthy are paying their actual tax rate now. I think you would agree that that's not happening. On its face, a flat tax is regressive to be sure. In reality, I think it would be hugely progressive as it would bring in a ton more revenue from the rich that dodge taxes anyway.

Quote from Radeck : easily done if we switch to a flat tax that applies across the board to everyone and everything....that would just eliminate the need for the IRS, leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats.

I think a flat tax is certainly worth debating, but it's a bit of a red herring in the discussion of the very politically feasible idea of funding the IRS more to punish tax cheats, discincentivize future tax cheating, and collect established taxes that will help a little with the government's debt.

Quote from Radeck : that would just eliminate the need for the IRS

A total lie. Oh wait, you admit so in the same breath:

Quote : leaving a small entity to make sure everyone is paying and to chase down the cheats.

Quote from loop610bob : To shift the burden, you would have to assume that the wealthy are paying their actual tax rate now. I think you would agree that that's not happening. On its face, a flat tax is regressive to be sure. In reality, I think it would be hugely progressive as it would bring in a ton more revenue from the rich that dodge taxes anyway.

Don't know about that. Elmer keeps claiming he has no way to avoid a 50% tax rate.

Quote from 124nic8 : Don't know about that. Elmer keeps claiming he has no way to avoid a 50% tax rate.

Does anyone actually believe him? He keeps offering those stupid bets only a fool would take.