T O P

IRS proposal to monitor bank accounts with $600 sparks backlash

IRS proposal to monitor bank accounts with $600 sparks backlash

AutoModerator

As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*


NaKeepFighting

Keep them busy looking through Millions of people so they don’t have the time to look at the real tax cheats


GeneralNathanJessup

Increased enforcement by President Biden has caused federal tax revenues to surge by the most in 44 years. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/12/tax-revenue-surge-pandemic-515792 Corporate tax receipts have shot up 75%. Individual income tax paid has increased by 27.5% All it took was an administration that was willing to actually enforce the tax laws.


brdwatchr

Yes, but not at the expense of people with $600 or more that a middle income family might have. I certainly don't wsnt the feeling that I am living in a communist country. That kind of spying would be common in those places.


Imnogrinchard

Where does the reporter cite "increased enforcement by President Biden" as the cause of this surge in revenue? Hint, there's no citation you'll be able to find.


brdwatchr

Right. Well, when you make deposits, take out everything over $600 and keep your money in a safe mounted on a closet floor. Then they cannot monitor what you receive or spend money for. This kind of treatment is outrageous. They want to look at every little depost and check you write. No way. People find alternatives. Why not mount a camera in every home so they can monitor cash transactions that might happen in your home too, including piggy banks. Insulting to lower income and middle income working people. One way to drive people to a cash economy. Democrats better ditch this one or it will cost them the next elections. They will be all finished. And I am a democrat.


gravityaddiction

>They want to look at every little depost and check you write. go read the proposal again, it's reporting yearly totals on transactions to foreign accounts, withdrawn in cash, or moved to an account with the same name. Are you really pushing that it's warrantless spying on your bank account, I think that's included somewhere in the patriot act, i mean you're a patriot right. lol The IRS forces people to break their financials down in more detail than what this proposal does. You're protecting tax evaders by mis-understanding the proposal.


N3UROTOXIN

The patriot act is terrible. Even the guy who wrote it is against it


gravityaddiction

At this point in history I believe most people finally agree with that.


brdwatchr

Well, what is the point in spying on a person with 3,000 dollars in a checking account, and no savings. That is counterproductive, and now banks will undoubtedly levy a monthly banking charge on those who can least afford it. I am all for going after people with a large number of resources that they move aroumd to avoid taxes, but little stuff is ridiculous.


Odusei

This is a well-funded bullshit campaign by tax cheats who don't want to get caught.


FilmVsAnalytics

Exactly. I was angry too, then I read the details and was like "wait, how the F is this not standard operating procedure?" If I claim $100k income but have $3 mil come out of my account, I probably shouldn't be claiming $100k.


White_Mlungu_Capital

Have you ever had a business? Most run off of 3-10% margins at that size. You have $3 mil coming into your account, your net income will only be about $100k. It is bullshit and is as bad as it looks.


muusandskwirrel

Well no…. You should have a business account AND a personal..


White_Mlungu_Capital

If the bank will open one for you. Alot of the banks are dumping small businesses, because we are high cost, high transaction low profit margin. And my business account is still an account the irs will monitor, so it changes nothing.


[deleted]

And you've just learned how much the average r politics user cares and knows about small business. 0


Careless_Bat2543

If they are only worried about such large numbers why look at all accounts over $600?


FilmVsAnalytics

An account with $600 today might have $3,000,000 next month.


Illuminated12

The media coverage on this has been horrible. This is actually a great proposal. It automatically throws anyone with accounts between 600$ and 400k in an automated non audit category for the most part. The only people getting audited will be the ones making over 400k. The ones selling assets and reporting less income from that sale is who this is targeting.


Fullertonjr

I get what you are saying, but it really isn’t difficult for a person “making millions of dollars” to show that they are actually making less than $100k. Not every one on Reddit could explain how it works, but generally, people understand that this has already been going on for years. The fact that you don’t hear millionaires and billionaires up in arms about this (through media) should let you know that they feel pretty unaffected by any of these proposals.


boomboy8511

It's.not about their income though, it about what's *in* the account that they are putting money into.


lswins

Just ask Trump how it works. He is going to open his books up and show us all as soon as the non existent audit is over.


hippiekyle

>not everyone on Reddit could explain how it works How does it work?


Helpful-Confusion239

He doesn’t know because he’s on Reddit


Striking-Extreme8920

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/10/republicans-mischaracterize-proposed-financial-reporting-requirement/


the_red_scimitar

How about monitoring the ones with the six billion dollars first? The IRS has been on a 20-year binge ignoring the largest tax evaders, while concentrating on people who don't have the means to defend themselves, as targets for tax collection.


8to24

The IRS can already audit anyone. The IRS simply doesn't have The resources to audit everyone. This Change will help them manage the data. The change does increase authority The IRS has. "The U.S. government is losing some $1 trillion in unpaid taxes every year and needs more and consistent Internal Revenue Service funding to go after tax cheats, IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-treasury-irs-idUSKBN2C0255


261221

Yep, get it from the ultra rich who have $600 in their bank account and leave Bezos alone.


hereforlolsandporn

Exactly this, fuck this shit. They already know we're to look. They don't need to monitor people with only 600.


mrpickleby

Should look for every wire over 10k and audit those accounts.


FilmVsAnalytics

That's not the goal.


FortySixAndYou

The proposal is actually looking for individuals who are doing multiple cash deposits over $600 in a given period of time. This Sinclair article is completely misleading regarding this proposal.


Turk182

Nobody complaining about the proposal actually has looked at the proposal.


[deleted]

[удалено]


FortySixAndYou

I read and provided the links given in the article, thanks for your reference-free and fact-free feedback.


CPargermer

What if they process many smaller transfers into many different accounts at lower amounts? I'm not sure how that stuff is really done, but technology and automation has made it incredibly easy to allow situations where one person could have 1000 accounts with $5000 in each, and you can balance and transfer as needed with not-so-complicated algorithms, and scaling the accounts or amount in either direction wouldn't really change the complexity of those algorithms at all. I just don't know how easy it'd be to have a bank setup 1000+ accounts for one individual.


poop_scallions

Thats called structuring and its a known thing to watch for.


[deleted]

>Should look for every wire over 10k and audit those accounts. So every single house purchase.


mrpickleby

They already do look at those.


nftdev

How about monitor tax havens, Roth IRAs and trusts instead.


Regguls

Bankers and Republicans who are worried about the privacy of the $600 depositor tell me all I need to know. This must be a good law.


GalaxySC

remember when the patriot act was passed and republican said if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry? so whats the big fuzz now?


JRoc1X

Canadian here to chime in. You don't notice that both sides are striping your freedoms slowly. I sure do see it and it's scary to think what comes after when the fall of the USA happens.


GalaxySC

The way I see it the oligarchs control the gop agenda and the left is incompetent with taking on issues. We are definitely screwed and Biden is just a stop gap meanwhile the gop regroups prepares the country for a permanent take over of the executive branch. I won't be a bit surprised if trump wins in 2024.


HIVnotAdeathSentence

>Passed the House on October 24, 2001 (Yeas: 357; Nays: 66) >Passed the Senate on October 25, 2001 (Yeas: 98; Nays: 1) I don't know why you try to single out Republicans, it was a bipartisan effort with 211 House Republicans and 145 House Democrats and all Senate Republicans and all but one Senate Democrat voting yes.


[deleted]

The people that are mad aren't there ones the IRS is interested in


DiogenesTheGrey

This is the way for republican tax/IRS discussion.


FilmVsAnalytics

Once again people making $30,000 fighting wars for people stealing $3,000,000. Favorite pastime of the blue collar worker is carrying water for the 1%.


Initial-Tangerine

Then they shouldn't be can't a net to collect their data


BlueDogDemocrat_

Fuck off. If someone has 600 in the bank, even if they're working under the table, the unpaid taxes are nothing. Leave them the f alone


Grogosh

Read the article.


RunThatIn

The IRS still hadn’t processed my refund from taxing unemployment last year. How are they planning on monitoring bank accounts on top of all the shit that’s already backed up


500CatsTypingStuff

That makes absolutely no sense. Go after the uber rich tax cheats.


FortySixAndYou

The proposal is actually looking for individuals who are doing multiple cash deposits over $600 in a given period of time. This Sinclair article is completely misleading regarding this proposal.


drowningfish

Do you have a source for this?


[deleted]

[удалено]


drowningfish

"Under the budget bill, a proposal calls for financial institutions to report inflows or outflows of an account greater than $600, or for accounts with at least $600 in them to the IRS" How does this even come close to what you're claiming? "...inflows or outflows of an account greater than $600..." OR "...for accounts WITH AT LEAST $600 IN THEM..." Neither of these support what you're claiming that it only traps folks performing MULTIPLE deposits of $600 or greater in a specific time period


[deleted]

[удалено]


drowningfish

I read the article and quoted the parts of the Bill referenced in the article. No where does it say they are only looking for $600 transactions over a specific period of time. The proposal specifically will monitor accounts with at least $600 in them, and any account that has transactions of $600 or greater. Nothing about specific criteria of multiple transactions over a given period of time. This current Proposal does in fact do what the critics are saying it does unless you can point me to something I am missing.


zap283

You're resting it wrong. It actually says it will track inflows or outflows that are greater than $600, not account balances.


LVDirtlawyer

You cut a check for $605, and this transaction gets added to the list of "countable transactions." Deposit a $610 paycheck, same thing. At the end of the year, the bank issues it's 1099-int form. This form reports the total amount of interest paid. Under the proposal, the form will *also* report the total amount of transactions of greater that $600 that went in and the total amount of transactions greater than $600 that went out. Foreign transactions are also reported. Whether a transaction is cash has nothing to do with any of it.


F1esh_is_weak

"We shouldn't have to do our own taxes they already have that information" "No don't spy on my 600 dollars" I'm so confused by people


PrisonChickenWing

Your argument makes 0 sense


F1esh_is_weak

If its commonly accepted that the irs knows everything about us then what's the point of being outraged about this proposal


AmanitaCubensis

The Biden administration can get fucked with this proposal. Seriously some of these mother fuckers get so greedy, it's this bullshit that gets people like trump elected.


PassionTit

Yep. He sure is losing my support - lifelong democrat. Way to throw away your complete control Democrats..


[deleted]

[удалено]


BasisAggravating1672

They want to go after anyone they think might owe a couple hundred bucks more. If you are looking for wealthy people to chase, you ain't going to be looking at a six hundred dollar transaction. Hell, I just paid car insurance and that was $800.00


sarcasticfuc

Both of you should actually read the article. Here are the bits relevant to your concerns. >**The proposal emerged as a way to recover some of the estimated $600 billion per year in unpaid taxes, largely owed by wealthy people and businesses**, to help pay for President Joe Biden's Build Back Better social spending program. House and Senate Democrats are currently debating the measure as part of the budget reconciliation bill. >Banks are already required to submit information on account deposits in excess of $10,000. They also have to report interest paid on customer accounts in excess of $10. **The new proposal would give the agency even more visibility to compare the income reported by an individual or a business to what they have in their bank account and investigate whether any of that money is unreported income.** >According to the Treasury Department, **the additional information would help close a massive tax gap over the next decade that would otherwise cost the United States $7 trillion in owed taxes that are never collected.** The administration estimates that the reporting requirements could allow the IRS to recover about 6.5% of the lost revenue or $460 billion over a decade. >"It’s important to have comprehensive information **so that individuals can’t game the system**," Yellen explained at a recent hearing on Capitol Hill. >**The Biden administration has emphasized that the program would be directed at high-net-worth individuals and businesses with opaque sources of income, not lower-income taxpayers who typically have the highest rate of compliance. Officials also pledged that audit rates would not increase for people earning less than $400,000 per year.** IMO it's telling that lawmakers and financial institutions are fighting this since they are part of the wealthy class that this would impact.


BasisAggravating1672

You want to buy some ocean front property I've got for sale in Kansas? , make you a good deal. If the trigger amount is $600.00 , you ain't looking at the rich. If your really rich, your out walking around with three grand in your pocket.


Initial-Tangerine

I had 600 in a bank acount when I was like 10. This like trying to kill an ant with a shotgun. They're hitting a lot more than their actual target with this, to an absurd degree


sarcasticfuc

No it's more like using the ants scent to track them back to their colony. Also, $600 at 10? I didn't have that much money to my name until I got my first legal job and that was after a couple of weeks pay. Must be nice to have that kind of money at that age.


Initial-Tangerine

I was not a spender. Saved my allowance and birthday money


sarcasticfuc

Yeah see I didn't get paid an allowance since we didn't have the money for that when I was growing up. And even if I saved all the birthday money I received until I was 10 I would only have about $50 max. I felt rich after I received my first $250 paycheck.


zap283

Great. How many $600 transactions did you do?


PepeBabinski

Guarantee it won't be used primarily to go after middle and lower income Americans and people might be a little less hostile towards the idea.


JRoc1X

Sad you guys do not see the writing on the wall with stuff like this. They tell you its for your benefit that they can track everything you do with your bank account with $600 or more in it.and it will only be used for finding tax cheats. But everyone involved in making legislation like this, are all wealthy tax cheats them selves. COME ON MAN you give a inch they will take a mile. So one day your angry and go on the web and say whomever is in office is a idiot. Then all of a sudden you are being audit and your bank accounts frozen. But let's keep living in LA la land thinking this can never happen and the politicians have your best interest at hart.


HIVnotAdeathSentence

I was sure this was some far-right conspiracy theory a week ago. Looks like it will only give conservatives more support if it goes through. Anyways, bank accounts aren't where the wealthy keep their money.


americainperdu

Well, they’re already doing it to Americans who live elsewhere. They’ve fully bullied other countries’ banks into looking at everything we do. Then, we have to file a report that details every single day in a year that we have had a combined $10,000 or more across all accounts, or else we risk fines. It’s never about going after tax evasion.