So, Admit It, You Want 87,000 More IRS Agents

[toddnjoyce]

No.

I'm only answering because , even though I suspect no one on TGT is this dim, I've actually run across people who think some positions at the IRS are paid on commission. Amazing, but true.

If they were you’d better bet your ass I’d be doing it.

I’d get filthy rich just by focusing on politicians and everybody with two degrees of separation or less from a pol.

 

[popper]

Maybe now you understand why Biden wanted tracking on (bank) transactions > 600$? Has NOTHING to do with drugs. Remember the IRS scandal with Lerner?
Same thing the Romans did. Learn from history guys.

 

[Sam7sf]

Maybe now you understand why Biden wanted tracking on (bank) transactions > 600$? Has NOTHING to do with drugs. Remember the IRS scandal with Lerner?
Same thing the Romans did. Learn from history guys.

Yuuuup.

 

[Sam7sf]

The democrats and the irs also want to look cool to youth and hipsters by allowing more bitcoin machines. A bitcoin machine is in Palmer. Freaking Palmer! We will see one of the final steps by getting rid of cash.

The democrats will also gain voters by offering universal basic income. You guys think things are bad now? Imagine how empty stores will be when people are given a loophole not to work.

 

[TX OMFS]

You're mixing up Judas and Matthew...but it's still a funny joke.

Judas was paid 30 pieces of silver. Where's the mix-up?

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using Tapatalk

 

[Axxe55]

The democrats and the irs also want to look cool to youth and hipsters by allowing more bitcoin machines. A bitcoin machine is in Palmer. Freaking Palmer! We will see one of the final steps by getting rid of cash.

The democrats will also gain voters by offering universal basic income. You guys think things are bad now? Imagine how empty stores will be when people are given a loophole not to work.

Just making the lazy and no-count welfare leeches even more so lazy and no-count.

 

[tangoparson]

Judas was paid 30 pieces of silver. Where's the mix-up?

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using Tapatalk

Uh, Doc, Matthew was a tax collector.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[oldag]

If they were you’d better bet your ass I’d be doing it.

I’d get filthy rich just by focusing on politicians and everybody with two degrees of separation or less from a pol.

No, you wouldn't. Your supervisor would not let you go after them. If you persisted, you would be fired. No salary, no commission.

 

[General Zod]

Uh, Doc, Matthew was a tax collector.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Yes, but to go to work for the current IRS political enforcement organization you'd be a traitor. That's why it's 30 pieces.

 

[TX OMFS]

Uh, Doc, Matthew was a tax collector.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I get it. Matthew is more appropriate because he was a tax collector.

I was thinking more along the lines of Judas being willing to sell out anyone for 30 pieces of silver, similar to IRS agents taking down their countrymen.

 

[Axxe55]

I get it. Matthew is more appropriate because he was a tax collector.

I was thinking more along the lines of Judas being willing to sell out anyone for 30 pieces of silver, similar to IRS agents taking down their countrymen.

Judas was a traitor. The analogy seems appropriate IMO.

 

[General Zod]

I was thinking more along the lines of Judas being willing to sell out anyone for 30 pieces of silver, similar to IRS agents taking down their countrymen.

...which is what I was thinking of when I typed the 30 pieces of silver reply.

 

[Axxe55]

The IRS is politically weaponized agency that needs to be treated like rabid dogs. They serve no purpose than that of their puppeteers.They collect money so that the puppeteers can use our own money in controlling us, and infringing upon our rights further.

 

[Texan79423]

Imagine this. Where is the payroll coming from. DUH

 

[Axxe55]

Imagine this. Where is the payroll coming from. DUH

Where do you think? Right out of our pockets.

We will funding our own oppression!

 

[benenglish]

I've taken a step back and tried to logic my way through the news headlines about all this. Something didn't add up. There's no way the IRS can bring on 87,000 new employees in any of the core positions. They don't have the ability to train more than about 10,000 a year, at best. That 87,000 must include support staff and be spread over some years in the future.

So I did a little looking and found a couple of places (mostly the WSJ) with a bit more information. The money, $80B, is scheduled to be metered into the IRS over the next 9 years. The hiring will, presumably, take place over that same time period. This works out to about a 45% increase in yearly budget for the agency.

In 1995, the agency employed over 117K people. Since then, it's been very politically popular to beat up on the agency. Nothing fits into a stump speech better than "Kill the IRS!" As a result, by 2021, budget cuts had brought total agency employment down to just over 81K people.

Lessee...the economy has gotten bigger, the population has gotten bigger, everyone but especially tax cheats have gotten more sophisticated, etc., while we let the agency that's supposed to enforce tax law shrink by about 30% during a period when the GDP essentially tripled. Now some money is going back into the agency to do lots of things, including hiring 10s of 1000s of new people, all while many, many 1000s of current employees are retiring.

Nobody likes the IRS; I get that. But it looks to me like, even if this thing passes, the IRS will never in my lifetime be as strong as it was 25 or 30 years ago.

We all lived through that, didn't we?

 

[oldag]

I've taken a step back and tried to logic my way through the news headlines about all this. Something didn't add up. There's no way the IRS can bring on 87,000 new employees in any of the core positions. They don't have the ability to train more than about 10,000 a year, at best. That 87,000 must include support staff and be spread over some years in the future.

So I did a little looking and found a couple of places (mostly the WSJ) with a bit more information. The money, $80B, is scheduled to be metered into the IRS over the next 9 years. The hiring will, presumably, take place over that same time period. This works out to about a 45% increase in yearly budget for the agency.

In 1995, the agency employed over 117K people. Since then, it's been very politically popular to beat up on the agency. Nothing fits into a stump speech better than "Kill the IRS!" As a result, by 2021, budget cuts had brought total agency employment down to just over 81K people.

Lessee...the economy has gotten bigger, the population has gotten bigger, everyone but especially tax cheats have gotten more sophisticated, etc., while we let the agency that's supposed to enforce tax law shrink by about 30% during a period when the GDP essentially tripled. Now some money is going back into the agency to do lots of things, including hiring 10s of 1000s of new people, all while many, many 1000s of current employees are retiring.

Nobody likes the IRS; I get that. But it looks to me like, even if this thing passes, the IRS will never in my lifetime be as strong as it was 25 or 30 years ago.

We all lived through that, didn't we?

And who said it should be that strong?

If they had to work as hard as the rest of us, they could get the job done with the staff they have.

 

[Big Dipper]

I've taken a step back and tried to logic my way through the news headlines about all this. Something didn't add up. There's no way the IRS can bring on 87,000 new employees in any of the core positions. They don't have the ability to train more than about 10,000 a year, at best. That 87,000 must include support staff and be spread over some years in the future.

So I did a little looking and found a couple of places (mostly the WSJ) with a bit more information. The money, $80B, is scheduled to be metered into the IRS over the next 9 years. The hiring will, presumably, take place over that same time period. This works out to about a 45% increase in yearly budget for the agency.

In 1995, the agency employed over 117K people. Since then, it's been very politically popular to beat up on the agency. Nothing fits into a stump speech better than "Kill the IRS!" As a result, by 2021, budget cuts had brought total agency employment down to just over 81K people.

Lessee...the economy has gotten bigger, the population has gotten bigger, everyone but especially tax cheats have gotten more sophisticated, etc., while we let the agency that's supposed to enforce tax law shrink by about 30% during a period when the GDP essentially tripled. Now some money is going back into the agency to do lots of things, including hiring 10s of 1000s of new people, all while many, many 1000s of current employees are retiring.

Nobody likes the IRS; I get that. But it looks to me like, even if this thing passes, the IRS will never in my lifetime be as strong as it was 25 or 30 years ago.

We all lived through that, didn't we?

But that was prior to Lois Lerner and using the IRS for political harassment!

 

[toddnjoyce]

And who said it should be that strong?

If they had to work as hard as the rest of us, they could get the job done with the staff they have.

Philosophically, the IRS should be capable of processing, in a timely manner, every US tax return. That politicians create byzantine tax rules making that job infinitely more difficult, then demanding ‘do more with less’ is not the IRS’ fault.

Want a small IRS? Make a small tax code. Flat, across the board rate based on GAAP income rules. Get rid of credits and subsidies ad nauseum. Then you get a small IRS.

 

[benenglish]

Want a small IRS? Make a small tax code.

QFT.

In the meantime, I think everybody could just...