Xaxaxe wrote:Deadlord36 wrote:And be realistic: 99% of audits are conducted on individuals making $100K or more a year. For businesses, it is $500K. There is simply no profit in auditing the little guys; on the contrary, the IRS LOSES money on small-time audits.Sorry, but those are both myths ...Take 2003, for example: * 54.5 percent of all audits were performed on individuals with LESS than $25,000 reported income.* 76 percent of all audits were done via correspondence (no face-to-face contact at all). These are incredibly profitable for the IRS — one study from 1999 found that the average "audit-by-letter" ended up putting $2,700 back into Treasury's coffers.Another thing to keep in mind: the IRS has computers, too. Many auditing victims are chosen by nothing more complicated than a random-number generator ... "rich man/poor man" doesn't enter into it at all.As to how this applies to the current discussion ... well, it doesn't really change anything. I'll paraphrase what I said a few posts ago: if eBay is paying your rent, go see a tax professional; if it's not, I don't think it's worth worrying about.
Deadlord36 wrote:And be realistic: 99% of audits are conducted on individuals making $100K or more a year. For businesses, it is $500K. There is simply no profit in auditing the little guys; on the contrary, the IRS LOSES money on small-time audits.
Badmike wrote:Interestingly, the IRS came out with a report today saying they are losing millions upon millions to tax cheats they can't catch. Another problem is like you say they are auditing far too many people under $100,00 and the audits are resulting in either no change in fees or very little to the IRS, making them incredibly ineffective...their solution is to start this year auditing more people over $100,000 (wow. what a concept, audit rich people instead of poor people.....). Another blurb said that due to the IRS computers not being programmed properly, for the last two years interest fees were not added onto tax payers who sent in late payments or who were on payment plans. They lost millions here also. Incredible.Mike B.
bclarkie wrote: ...... Auditing someone who makes $50,000.00 a year and may have shorted the government $1,500.00 in taxes, when you are paying your agents $3,000.00 to figure out the discrepancy and get the money back, just doesn't make good business sense......
Deadlord36 wrote:Tax ManFrequency: Rare......
tsrart wrote:So you are all already tax cheats and criminals, so no need to worry about it . . . .
tsrart wrote:You'll all find out soon enough anyhow . . . .
tsrart wrote:if you've bought ANYTHING online from anywhere and haven't paid sales/use tax on it (unless you live in a state with no sales tax) you are already in violation of the tax codes.
dave wrote:If a law is impractical it won't be enforced(at least not consistently) but it could easily sit on the books without the legislature bothering to do anything about it.
That guy is probably going to take a hit. My question, though, is what is Albany doing about the other God-alone-knows-how-many other New Yorkers who happened to buy a CD, or a book, or a module, or a Chia Pet,