VinnyVeritas
Libertarian Sage
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2022
- Posts
- 2,842
IRS goes back on promises: Remember when the nation's tax collectors promised they wouldn't increase the audit rate for people making less than $400,000 annually? (How did that work out in 2022?) This was a critical part of the fight over the $80 billion infusion of cash the IRS received as part of the Inflation Reduction Act*. But now, quoting from a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report, Reason's J.D. Tuccille explains that "the IRS's current default definition of high-income taxpayers is $200,000 and above" and that it doesn't intend to tweak it.
"The IRS does not have a unified or updated definition for individual high-income taxpayers," said TIGTA on August 31. "The current examination coding scheme uses $200,000 as a main threshold even though it is no longer a reasonable standard for high earners given inflation since 2005."
"The report recommends the definition of 'high-income' be revised," writes Tuccille, "so that the term means the same thing to IRS agents as it does in press releases from the Department of the Treasury and the White House." Amazingly, the IRS said no to TIGTA's request for revision; doing so would somehow "deprive the IRS of the agility to address emerging issues and trends." (Note that this is the same agency that was required by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen back in February to submit a report detailing how it would spend its new $80 billion, which it failed to do until 48 days after the deadline.)
Liz Wolfe, Reason.com (Libertarian)
* The Joe Biden Slush Fund
"The IRS does not have a unified or updated definition for individual high-income taxpayers," said TIGTA on August 31. "The current examination coding scheme uses $200,000 as a main threshold even though it is no longer a reasonable standard for high earners given inflation since 2005."
"The report recommends the definition of 'high-income' be revised," writes Tuccille, "so that the term means the same thing to IRS agents as it does in press releases from the Department of the Treasury and the White House." Amazingly, the IRS said no to TIGTA's request for revision; doing so would somehow "deprive the IRS of the agility to address emerging issues and trends." (Note that this is the same agency that was required by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen back in February to submit a report detailing how it would spend its new $80 billion, which it failed to do until 48 days after the deadline.)
Liz Wolfe, Reason.com (Libertarian)
* The Joe Biden Slush Fund
