6.1 Billion Hours Spent Complying With Federal Tax Code

[red states rule]

Just think how this time and money could be better spent if the current tax cose was put in the trash can and replaced with a simple flat tax

All of that time and money would be pumped into the US economy which would mean a growing economy, and MORE revenue flowing into the government from the LOWER tax rates






In her annual report to Congress today, National Taxpayer Advocate Nina E. Olson branded growing tax code complexity as the most serious problem facing both taxpayers and the Internal Revenue Service and called on Congress to enact tax reform and then institute a regular “sanity check” over future tax code changes.

As a measure of how unwieldy the law has become, Olson’s staff found the tax code had grown to 3.8 million words as of Feb. 1, 2010, compared to the 1.4 million words the Joint Committee on Taxation reported in 2001. (That doesn’t include tweaks Congress made to the tax code in 2010—some 579 in all, according to a count kept by tax publisher CCH, a division of Wolters Kluwer.)

While the burden of complying with all those words has been calculated in different ways, Olson multiplied the IRS’ own estimates of how much time taxpayers spend collecting data for and filling out each individual tax form by the number of forms filed to estimate that Americans (both individuals and businesses) spend 6.1 billion hours a year complying with the code. That’s the equivalent of more than 3 million workers toiling away full time, all year. By way of comparison, the Federal government employs the equivalent of 2.1 million full-time civilian workers and Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private employer, has 1.4 million workers in the U.S., although not all are full time.

Complexity is also raising individual taxpayers’ out-of-pocket costs for filing their 1040s, Olson noted. About 60% of individual taxpayers now pay CPAs, enrolled agents, H&R Block or other services to prepare their returns while another 29% use software, such as Intuit’s TurboTax. According to a recent IRS study, the median individual taxpayer (as measured by income) spent $258 in 2007 for tax prep, up from $220 in 2000, in constant, inflation-adjusted dollars.

http://blogs.forbes.com/janetnovack/2011/01/05/tax-waste-6-1-billion-hours-spent-complying-with-federal-tax-code/

[KSigMason]

The IRS and tax codes are out of control. We need to just enact a fair/flat tax and be done with the wasteful IRS.

[red states rule]

The IRS and tax codes are out of control. We need to just enact a fair/flat tax and be done with the wasteful IRS.

The lost productivity and investment capital used to comply with this bloated government is insane

Government is draining more and more from the private sector and we are seeing the end result

[johnwk]

The IRS and tax codes are out of control. We need to just enact a fair/flat tax and be done with the wasteful IRS.




There are several fundamental problems I see with a flat tax upon income.

1.

The first problem encountered with a flat tax on income is a working definition of “ taxable income”. The current definition of “taxable income” is both arbitrary and capriciously invented from day to day by those who hold political power and it keeps alive Congress’ love affair with the class warfare game. We need to put an end to class warfare when raising a federal revenue.


2.
A tax calculated from “income” ___ which I imagine would include earnings realized by our productive members of society ___ is a tax under which government force is intentionally used in a fashion which penalizes and punishes our productive members of society for every increase in their productivity while it rewards the unproductive members of society by allowing them to escape from shouldering an equal burden in supporting the functions of our federal government.

Keep in mind there was a time in America when everyone was expected to shoulder an equal share in supporting the functions of government A wonderful example of this principle is exhibited in the public laws of Maryland’s Dorchester County, under which all able bodied residents of the county above twenty and under fifty years of age were “compelled to labor two days at least in every year in repairing the roads of said county, with the privilege, however, of furnishing a substitute or paying to the road supervisors seventy-five cents for each day such person may be summoned to labor, the money thus paid to be expended in repairing the roads.”

And the law went on to indicate that “anyone neglecting or refusing to perform such labor, or to provide a substitute, or to pay seventy-five cents per day for each and every day he may be summoned to work, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon trial and conviction before a Justice of the Peace, shall be fined seventy-five cents for each day`s delinquency and costs, and shall stand committed until the fine and costs are paid.”___ SEE SHORT vs. STATE OF MARYLAND, decided February 27th, 1895, upholding the law and not violating (a) the 13th or 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, or (b) the 40th section of Art. 3 of the Constitution of Maryland.

And what is today’s standard? Our tyrants in Washington force the productive to pay taxes so they can spread their wealth and buy votes, but the Washington Establishment does not force their beloved 40 % who pay no income taxes to work for the taxes they get.




3. A tax calculated from “income” keeps the federal government's iron fist around the necks of America’s businesses and laboring class people [audits, record keeping, etc.] and also keeps alive a weapon used by the Washington Establishment against political foes (the threat of audits).


4.
An income tax imposed as a general tax among the States also violates the Great Compromise made during the framing of our Constitution which commanded representation in Congress, but only with proportional obligation!. The people of the those states contributing the lion’s share under a “flat income tax” would be denied their representation in Congress proportionately equal to their State’s contribution. Of course, this rule does not apply to imposts and duties (taxes at our water’s edge), nor internal excise taxes laid on judiciously selected articles of consumption. But if Congress ever found it necessary to lay a general tax among the states to meet an emergency such as war or extinguishing an annual deficits, the rule of apportionment was to be strictly enforced! But let our founding fathers speak for themselves:

Pinckney addressing the S.C. ratification convention with regard to the rule of apportionment :

“With regard to the general government imposing internal taxes upon us, he contended that it was absolutely necessary they should have such a power: requisitions had been in vain tried every year since the ratification of the old Confederation, and not a single state had paid the quota required of her. The general government could not abuse this power, and favor one state and oppress another, as each state was to be taxed only in proportion to its representation.” 4 Elliot‘s, S.C., 305-6 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=004/lled004.db&recNum=317&itemLink)

And see:
“The proportion of taxes are fixed by the number of inhabitants, and not regulated by the extent of the territory, or fertility of soil”3 Elliot’s, 243 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=003/lled003.db&recNum=254&itemLink),“Each state will know, from its population, its proportion of any general tax” 3 Elliot’s, 244 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=003/lled003.db&recNum=255&itemLink) ___ Mr. George Nicholas, during the ratification debates of our Constitution.

Mr. Madison goes on to remark about Congress’s “general power of taxation” that, "they will be limited to fix the proportion of each State, and they must raise it in the most convenient and satisfactory manner to the public."3 Elliot, 255 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=003/lled003.db&recNum=266&itemLink)

And if there is any confusion about the rule of apportionment intentionally designed to insure that those states contributing the lion’s share to fund the federal government are guaranteed a proportional vote in Congress equal to their contribution, Mr. PENDLETON says:

“The apportionment of representation and taxation by the same scale is just; it removes the objection, that, while Virginia paid one sixth part of the expenses of the Union, she had no more weight in public counsels than Delaware, which paid but a very small portion”3 Elliot’s 41 (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=lled&fileName=003/lled003.db&recNum=52)


But keep in mind that when the apportioned tax is used, remember that each State’s congressional delegation is to return home with a bill in hand for their State’s governor and legislature to deal with, which creates a very real movement of accountability for every State’s Congressional Delegation. That moment of accountability, when members of Congress must bring home a bill for the pork they have bought is lost under both a flat income tax and a national sales tax!

Unfortunately, who among the following list has ever taken the time to discuss our Constitution’s original tax plan as our founding fathers intended it to operate? Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley …. WHO? Have you ever seen our founder’s original tax plan discussed on FoxNews or in another part of our big media? Something stinks like a fish!

And which of our Republican presidential hopefuls will discus our founding father’s solutions which in fact were designed to make Congress our servants and not our masters? Have any of the following even suggested taking a second look at our founders ORIGINAL TAX PLAN (http://townshipnews.org/?p=1360)? Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty, Ron Paul? Perhaps the most important agreement arrived at during the Convention of 1787, [I]demanding representation with proportional financial obligation, goes unnoticed today, and goes unnoticed by each of our Republican presidential candidates who constantly make references to abiding by our founding father’s wisdom.

For a group which touts abiding by our founding fathers wisdom, our presidential hopefuls sure seem eager to ignore the great compromise of the Convention of 1787 with regard to taxation, the rule of apportionment, which if followed today would surely make every State’s Congressional Delegation immediately accountable if Congress spent more than was brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes.

Sorry for rambling on, but I believe a return to our founder’s original tax plan is key in returning fiscal accountability in the Halls of Congress.


Regards,
JWK


We are here today and gone tomorrow, but what is most important is what we do in between, and is what our children will inherit and remember us by.

[red states rule]

a simple flatb tax could grow the economy, put millions back to work, and put most of the IRS out of business

Waht the hell could be better?

[fj1200]

There are several fundamental problems I see with a flat tax upon income.

Oh geez. You are the enemy of the better for the unattainable.

[KSigMason]

The lost productivity and investment capital used to comply with this bloated government is insane

Government is draining more and more from the private sector and we are seeing the end result
For the Freemasons and my college Fraternity, I've either sat on or presided over the financial committees in charge of reviewing the books and filing the taxes, and, Holy God, what a pain in the ass. I'd say my biggest headache was when I became a member of the Board of Directors for a Masonic building in Idaho and the state lost our tax file.

[red states rule]

For the Freemasons and my college Fraternity, I've either sat on or presided over the financial committees in charge of reviewing the books and filing the taxes, and, Holy God, what a pain in the ass. I'd say my biggest headache was when I became a member of the Board of Directors for a Masonic building in Idaho and the state lost our tax file.

Even a long time liberal will admit they are wrong - when they experience the laws they passed first hand

Take George McGovern for example




snip


Q: Someone mentioned to me that you tried to open up a bed-and-breakfast, and you ran into a lot of rules and regulations that made being a small businessman difficult. Can you talk about that?

A: I had a 140-room hotel in Stamford, Connecticut, for about three years, and it just didn't work. You know, the hotel business may be the most difficult place in the world to make a living unless you happen to own the Waldorf-Astoria. It was not a success.

I got sued a couple times by people who had accidents, one out in the parking lot of the hotel and one leaving the restaurant. I saw all the difficulties -- record-keeping, keeping track of the tax applications, paying the help. It gave me a new appreciation for the problems of small businesses.

Q: Someone like me would argue that many of those problems are a result of too many government rules, regulations, mandates.

A: It's possible that small business should be exempted from some of those things. Who can be against anything called the Occupational Safety and Health Administration? But maybe some of the requirements should be eased off a little bit


Read more: Still George McGovern - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/columnists/steigerwald/s_204920.html#ixzz1PiHIUpg2