[Fishndude]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/prepare-for-devastating-tax-season-irs-watchdog-says/ar-AA8bCMR

Interesting excerpts.

Approximately 200 million people deal with the IRS each year, and more than 100 million phone calls pour in on an annual basis. A decade ago, the vast majority of callers -- 87 percent -- could expect that a) someone at the IRS would answer the phone and b) they'd be kept on hold about 2.5 minutes, on average.

Not so in 2015. This year about half of all callers, and perhaps as few as 43 percent, will be lucky to get through, Olson stated. Those who do succeed are likely to stay on hold for 30 minutes on average.

Any questions about the tax code, which Olson describes as "overwhelming in its complexity," had better be simple. During the filing season, the IRS "will not answer any questions except 'basic' ones," she said. And once filing season ends, Olson reported, "it will not answer any tax-law questions at all." That will affect any of the 15 million taxpayers who file their returns later in the year, and who have questions about it.

Other collateral damage includes help for low-income, disabled and elderly filers. In fiscal year 2004, the IRS assisted taxpayers in preparing 500,000 returns; this year the IRS "has eliminated return preparation completely," Olson said.

 

[PerchPatrol]

Just like the sequester - cut a little bit of money & the govt will barricade the WW2 memorial to prove a point.

They are begging for a flat tax.

 

[john warren]

Just like the sequester - cut a little bit of money & the govt will barricade the WW2 memorial to prove a point.

They are begging for a flat tax.

i strongly aggree with the flat tax,,,, now convince all the tax lawyers to go along with ending their cash cow:fish:

 

[sourdough44]

Half the people out there won't give a hoot if it's a 'devastating tax season'.

 

[hunter62]

Wow, shocking, who would have thought? You mean there are consequences for cutting the IRS budget five straight years?

Who in their right mind thinks you can keep cutting funding, keep reducing the number of employees (20% since 1995) while seeing an increase in tax returns (15%) over that same period of time and be able to continue to offer the same level of services?

By the way, who's been cutting the IRS budget all of these years and aren't they responsible for the current situation?

Who thinks we won't need the IRS if we go to a flat tax? Those that do, are you of the belief that everyone is going to be honest about their income on the flat tax forms if there's no one to check their word? :lol: By the way, how's the weather in fantasyland today?

 

[hunter62]

I find these excerpts from the OP's link to be a little more intersting since they explain the cause of the current situation. I'm not sure why the OP didn't find this interesting enough to acknowledge.

The IRS has more work to do, and fewer people to do it. For instance, compared to a decade ago, the volume of returns filed by individuals has increased 11 percent, the volume from business entities has gone up 18 percent. This year, the agency also has to help implement the new health care law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

But budget cuts from Congress -- a 17 percent, inflation-adjusted reduction since fiscal year 2010 -- have forced the agency to shed nearly 12,000 employees. "It couldn't be worse timing," IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told the Associated Press in an interview about the cuts. He estimated that the U.S. could lose out on $2 billion in tax revenue this year because the IRS has fewer enforcement personnel.

​

 

[john warren]

Half the people out there won't give a hoot if it's a 'devastating tax season'.

true
:fish:

 

[frenchriver1]

An interesting comparison would be the reduction in the number of IRS personnel versus what I perceive to be the increase in the number congressional staffers for which we are paying. The staff size has to increase to ensure that congress writes more laws to confuse, confound and artfully hide special interest legislation, never losing sight of the fact that the lobbyists have to get their way for all the money they spend on congressional staffers and congressmen...

Both parties are equally to blame for this...

How about we limit staffers such that congressmen have to actually write proposed laws, and require reading proposed laws so they actually know what they are voting for or against? I know, way too radical an idea!!!!!!