5 ms·

Didn't the legislature try to introduce a bill to prevent using the new agents/funding against lower earners, and it flopped? So it turns out all along no one

Didn't the legislature try to introduce a bill to prevent using the new agents/funding against lower earners, and it flopped? So it turns out all along no one actually wants to keep anyone accountable to such "promises." https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1172/vote_117_2_00296.htm https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1... Statement of Purpose: To prevent the use of additional Internal Revenue Service Funds from being used for audits of taxpayers with taxable incomes below $400,000 in order to protect low- and middle-income earning American taxpayers from an onslaught of audits from an army of new Internal Revenue Service auditors funded by an unprecedented, nearly $80.000.000.000, infusion of new funds. Vote Result: Amendment Rejected

ortusdux 3y ago
I don't take the legislature's failure to pass a bill as a sign of anything other than their general incompetence.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> legislature try to introduce a bill to prevent using the new agents/funding against lower earners Money is fungible. This was a messaging bill. If they were serious, they'd create an independently-funded agency within the IRS with the sole mandate of going after high earners.
- notch898a 3y ago
  If the bill was a message, so was the response. "Fuck you, we'd rather not be hindered by such promises." ----------------------------------- RE: below [due to timeout] >The original bill already passed. factcheck: false. Original bill passed almost 12 hours later on the same day[0] [1]. The (above) amendment was voted on in the early morning, with the unamended increase passing in the afternoon. >Congress has more important things to do. factcheck: false. All 100 senators voted on the floor for a full vote on the amendment. None found they had something more important to do that would cause them not to cast a vote. >The executive has stated its position. factcheck: True. Either congress ignored the position, or they followed the privately endorsed position rather than the publicly endorsed one. [0] https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1172/vote_117_2_00325.htm [1] https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1172/vote_117_2_00296.htm
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > so was the response Not really? The original bill already passed. The executive has stated its position. Congress has more important things to do.
jksmith 3y ago
So less than 400k is designated as high net worth? 200k will be the new threshold at some point.
- ashwagary 3y ago
  Inflation will ensure almost everyone is in a higher tax bracket and is auditable in 1-2 decades.
  - jksmith 3y ago
    Then more money will have to be printed. So we get a raise, but the raise still doesn't match the hurdle rate, while demand remains the same. That's some dystopian fucked up shit there.

ortusdux 3y ago

I don't take the legislature's failure to pass a bill as a sign of anything other than their general incompetence.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> legislature try to introduce a bill to prevent using the new agents/funding against lower earners Money is fungible. This was a messaging bill. If they were serious, they'd create an independently-funded agency within the IRS with the sole mandate of going after high earners.

notch898a 3y ago
If the bill was a message, so was the response. "Fuck you, we'd rather not be hindered by such promises." ----------------------------------- RE: below [due to timeout] >The original bill already passed. factcheck: false. Original bill passed almost 12 hours later on the same day[0] [1]. The (above) amendment was voted on in the early morning, with the unamended increase passing in the afternoon. >Congress has more important things to do. factcheck: false. All 100 senators voted on the floor for a full vote on the amendment. None found they had something more important to do that would cause them not to cast a vote. >The executive has stated its position. factcheck: True. Either congress ignored the position, or they followed the privately endorsed position rather than the publicly endorsed one. [0] https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1172/vote_117_2_00325.htm [1] https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1172/vote_117_2_00296.htm
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > so was the response Not really? The original bill already passed. The executive has stated its position. Congress has more important things to do.

jksmith 3y ago

So less than 400k is designated as high net worth? 200k will be the new threshold at some point.

ashwagary 3y ago
Inflation will ensure almost everyone is in a higher tax bracket and is auditable in 1-2 decades.
- jksmith 3y ago
  Then more money will have to be printed. So we get a raise, but the raise still doesn't match the hurdle rate, while demand remains the same. That's some dystopian fucked up shit there.