this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
560 points (96.2% liked)

Technology

59605 readers
3422 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

If you resold Taylor Swift Eras Tour tickets, the IRS is watching — A new rule from the IRS is punishing those who resold tickets for more than $600 in profit with a tax penalty::A new rule from the IRS is punishing those who resold tickets for more than $600 in profit with a tax penalty.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago (4 children)

But fuck fixing taxes to make billionaires and churches pay taxes.. eat the people as they say.

[–] hansl@lemmy.world 111 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you resell tickets for 600$ in profit, you’re not “the people”, you’re a scalper and I have no sympathy for you. This is a good rule.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's just capitalists capitalizing. The IRS just wants a cut, not to stop it.

[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago

IRS isn't in the business of stopping transactions (unless it's money laundering) anyway

[–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Agreed. Obviously, the tax code should be better enforced against wealthy people, but you can support one action without it meaning you don't support another.

[–] SARGEx117@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

And as long as they ACTUALLY do both, then it doesn't matter.

But they don't.

So it does.

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

On the other hand, if it's worth your time to scalp tickets then you aren't part of the upper class.

Edit: but I do agree, fuck scalpers

[–] cjsolx@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not well-versed on the subject, but is ticket scalping not a large-scale business at this point? Like, yeah individual ticket holders can be opportunistic, but don't bots buy tickets by the thousands as soon as they go on sale?

[–] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Most of those "businesses" are run by just one person, or maybe a few friends. And how much money do you really think they could be making?

With that logic, we can say scalpers are class traitors, then!

[–] somedaysoon@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For real, most of the comments are about the scalpers but this is the only thing that stood out to me. The IRS has consistently shown they would rather net the little fish that can't fight back than take down the whales. Another example of being beyond the law in this country if you have money.

[–] archiotterpup@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's cheaper than the big fish and the GOP has continuously underfunded the IRS. Their whole 2024 strategy is to make it look like the extra IRS agents from the Inflation Reduction Act are going after small folks instead of the big fish. Without those agents, lawyers, and staff the rich will always win with bigger guns.

[–] guacupado@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is it actually cheaper than the big fish though? You could have four people devote a full year to a single multi millionaire and you'd probably still net more than their annual pay. Hell even if you just matched it it'd be worth.

[–] wagoner@infosec.pub 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The little fish can't afford a high priced lawyer. A big fish has several and can pay to keep the IRS busy fighting for years.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

It is much cheaper. IIRC, the IRS went after Microsoft because they "sold" the Windows IP rights to a small CD/DVD printing factory in Mexico that MS used to print some installation discs, saving an absurd amount of money in taxes due to avoiding US taxes on the IP.

The IRS spent millions of dollars attempting to get MS to pay up. MS damaged the careers of the people in the government that gave the IRS the resources to go after MS, and cost the IRS an outrageous sum in legal fees.

Craziest part of it all: MS managed to get the laws the IRS was going after them on changed. Through political donations and lobbying, MS spent considerably more than the IRS was going after them for, to ensure the law was changed in MS's favor.

I'm probably getting a lot of details wrong but there are news articles about it you can look up. The IRS hasn't been given the resources to attempt any common sense obvious big wins since.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's super easy to implement, comply, and enforce this. Like almost automated levels of easy. It's significantly more complex and requires tons of resources and expertise to go after the whales as you say. Resources they just don't have. Resources that might be wasted if/when it turns out the taxpayer is fully compliant within reason.

It's not about double standards, it's purely logistics and resources - at least on the IRS side. Congress is responsible for their funding, or lack thereof, and it doesn't take long to figure out who's responsible for the lack of it. So I'd encourage you to focus your ire on the response political party, not the IRS itself.

[–] somedaysoon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Passing the buck in my opinion.

If you want to talk about political parties, each enable each other with their disgusting symbiotic relationship. The Democrats are just as responsible for being ineffectual and allowing the Republicans to enact their policies. They are responsible for losing to Trump in 2016. They are responsible for perpetually playing victim and pandering to voters like you, who are happy to be upset at just one side of the aisle, so they never have to actually be progressive or make any real changes that would upset their donors. It might feel good for you to vote for the lesser evil, but it does nothing; as evidenced by the last two decades. If voting actually changed anything, they would make it illegal.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Right, well, anyway, the IRS budget just got a huge increase under the Biden administration new budget. They're finally hiring a ton of new agents and updating their ancient tech etc. The R party fought tooth and nail against this and there's an active smear campaign to make the average person afraid they're coming after you. R's managed to reduce the budget increase which is going to reduce the IRS ability to go after the whales, as you were griping about in your original post.

[–] somedaysoon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I don't see any evidence that they would target the whales given proper funding. Your argument hinges on that and it has no basis as far as I've seen.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-announces-sweeping-effort-to-restore-fairness-to-tax-system-with-inflation-reduction-act-funding-new-compliance-efforts

The complex structures and tax issues present in large partnerships require a focused approach to best identify the highest risk issues and apply resources accordingly. In 2021, the IRS launched the first stage of its Large Partnership Compliance (LPC) program with examinations of some of the largest and most complex partnership returns in the filing population. The IRS is now expanding the LPC program to additional large partnerships...By the end of the month, the IRS will open examinations of 75 of the largest partnerships in the U.S. that represent a cross section of industries including hedge funds, real estate investment partnerships, publicly traded partnerships, large law firms and other industries. On average, these partnerships each have more than $10 billion in assets.

Believe me when I tell you a partnership with $10b assets is insane. Auditing that is extremely labor intensive and requires a ton of highly specialized skills and that all requires resources.

There's really nothing left to argue here so please just take this at face value and move on.

[–] solstice@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

All that happened here is they lowered the reporting threshold to cast a wider net and force people to reported income they otherwise could have just not mentioned. It's not quite like flipping a switch but it's relatively easy to comply with, and relatively easy to enforce. "Fixing taxes" is significantly more complicated, to say the least.

[–] Gargantu8@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago