Pelosi defends IRS bank-reporting proposal, says specifics open to negotiation

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Last edited Tue Oct 12, 2021, 02:42 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: The Hill

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday defended a proposal to increase the amount of information financial institutions report to the IRS about bank accounts, indicating the proposal would be a part of Democrats' social-spending package.

Pelosi's comments come as Republican lawmakers and banking groups have been increasing their criticisms of the proposal in recent days.

"Yes there are concerns that some people have, but if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes, one way to track them is through the banking measure," Pelosi said during a press conference.

The Biden administration has proposed requiring banks to report aggregate inflows and outflows of bank accounts in annual forms to the IRS, in instances where accounts have flows exceeding $600.



Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pelosi-defends-irs-bank-reporting-proposal/ar-AAPqEl1?li=BBnbfcQ&ocid=hplocalnews

---

Some people commenting need to read the full article at the link. Per DU's rules one is limited to posting only four paragraphs of the article.

[NotHardly]

1. Bullshit legislation... sic the IRS on wealthy people for christ sake...

... shit like this is just about soaking the little guy.

Anybody out there remember the Panama and Pandora papers... WTF is the IRS on wealth hoarders and tax dogers of the rich and famous???? Where???

[napi21]

2. Te problem I see with this is the $600 threshold. When you propose reporting on a segment of

something, you don't want a majority reported, you want the exceptions. t $600 all or almost all payroll deposits would be reported. Threshold needs to be higher...something like $2,000. Even at that, you'd likely snag a lo9t of monthly P/R deposits. Either raise the threshold or ignore all P/R deposits.

[in2herbs]

4. This proposed amount would snag/report everyone's SS check. What are the Ds thinking

when they propose this low amount? Fraudsters fraud in larger amounts.

[Rebl2]

24. Exactly!

[hedda_foil]

19. Here's the part nobody seems to be reading.

Democratic lawmakers have a tentative deal to raise that threshold to $10,000, and to exempt regular wage payments. Pelosi noted in her comments that the $600 threshold is not set in stone.

"That's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is," she said.

The administration has said that the proposal would strengthen the IRS's ability to crack down on wealthy tax cheats. The Treasury Department has estimated the measure would raise about $460 billion over 10 years that could be used to help offset the cost of new spending aimed at strengthening the social safety net.

Republicans and banks strongly oppose the proposal, arguing that it raises privacy concerns. Banks say their advocacy efforts against the proposal has resulted in an inundation of customer complaints about the idea, The New York Times reported.

[Sgent]

39. Just so we are clear

If I'm a tax cheat and get a US credit card, I should be able to charge 399,999 / year on it before the bank has to tell the IRS I might have income (like from an offshore trust) off the books? And I can repeat this across multiple credit cards?

This proposal isn't doesn't require anyone to pay $1 of additional tax that they don't currently owe, but it allows the IRS to match accounts to social security numbers and see if there is a wide disparity in reported income vs spending.

PS The IRS already knows about social security benefits.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. That will be a nightmare to monitor

In the era of ACH, $600 inflows and outflows are common. Now if they wanted to monitor cash, or inflows from new accounts, that might be a different result.

[Jose Garcia]

7. Banks already have to report aggregate cash deposits of

more than $10,000 per year.

[MichMan]

32. This isn't limited only to paper money

Applies to all deposits and withdrawals

[ZonkerHarris]

5. This legislation is designed to lose the House in 2022. Drop it like a hot fucking rock Nancy

[inwiththenew]

6. Got to make sure the unwashed masses aren't trying to pull one over

Because God knows there is never going to be anything done about the skirting of tax obligations by rich donor class and corporations.

[Ritabert]

8. Who came up with this nonsense?

Trump paid $0-$750 in taxes for 15 years and they're whining about the average citizen spending $600. Nonsense. Leave it at $10,000 and start auditing the rich.

[drexelkathy]

9. She's out of touch

This is absurd legislation that serves no legitimate purpose.

[manicdem]

10. Invasion of privacy

A lot of your life details can be found in how you spend your money. This is an invasion of privacy.

This will piss off a lot of people and will certainly lead to a crushing defeat in the 2022 elections.

[FoxNewsSucks]

11. I've already been seeing ads

on the TV where vile rightwing lickspittle Marsha Blackburn claims the BBB will give government control of what drugs you're allowed to have, and government will get a cut of every venmo, paypal and bank transaction.

I knew the drug lie was related to allowing Medicare to negotiate prices, but had no idea what the bank account monitoring was about.

Of course, she also screeches that this will bring about SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!!!! and turn us all into commies.

[BeyondGeography]

12. Whose bright idea was that ($600)?

Insane.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

13. Please read the linked to article

[drexelkathy]

14. Off the backs of the working class

"The Treasury Department has estimated the measure would raise about $460 billion over 10 years that could be used to help offset the cost of new spending aimed at strengthening the social safety net."

The wealthiest aren't going to get caught by this...they have attorneys, financial advisors, entities, etc.

This will snag the guy in your neighborhood that makes a couple of extra bucks doing crafts in his garage and the family that is doing gig jobs on the side to pay their bills.


Definitely, a way to lose the midterms.

[OneCrazyDiamond]

18. Making $2 on the side will not trip a $600 reporting requirement.

but working under the table and not paying your fair share might.
It is best to play by the rules when dealing with the IRS.

[drexelkathy]

23. I am not one to mess

With the IRS.

I just find this $600 threshold absurd and cannot imagine that it will be at all popular.

Completely targeting the wrong individuals and the optics are very poor.

[TexasBushwhacker]

40. That's already the threshold for giving a contract worker a 1099

There are people who have virtual garage sales on Craigslist and Facebook Marketplace and might make a few hundred bucks, which is less than what they paid for it, so no tax is due.

But there are people who buy pallets of returned merchandise from Walmart, Target, Amazon, you name it. They resell it at a profit and make thousands of dollars a month. Since they don't take credit cards, they either get paid by cash, which they pocket, or by Zelle, PayPal or Cash App. This is how they make a living. So starting next year, the proposal is that those apps have to report aggregate payments of $600 or more per year. Folks who are making their living this way should be paying taxes on their NET profits. That's their income. It's subject to income tax as well as self-employment tax.

And yes, I want the IRS to go after the big guys too.

[OneCrazyDiamond]

25. I think Hoyt's post 22 is right on the money.

Most people will never know.

[questionseverything]

37. Not a winning strategy

We will be all up in your business, making sure you don’t get an extra nickel you didn’t pay taxes on but don’t worry most people will never know how

Big brother

We have become

[BeyondGeography]

20. I did...and $600 isn't going to fly

We should never have put our fingerprints on that.

[NewHendoLib]

15. this is pure bullshit

[Wingus Dingus]

16. So the way to pay for the social spending package is to closely monitor our bank accounts--

the IRS is going to do the equivalent of turning us upside down and shaking us to see if any coins fall out of our pockets that we didn't report. Fuck this shit. I'd sooner have NO spending package.

[Igel]

35. It works.

Increasingly the populace is distrusting the government.

And the government is increasingly distrusting the populace.

[Fullduplexxx]

17. But I was told pelosi was "the boss" that she was a genius .. best speaker ever

Of course the hill picked this up

[OneCrazyDiamond]

21. It's not such a bad idea.

Democratic lawmakers have a tentative deal to raise that threshold to $10,000, and to exempt regular wage payments. Pelosi noted in her comments that the $600 threshold is not set in stone.

"That's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is," she said.

Beside 1/2 a trillion can do a lot of good outside tax cheating hands.

A lot of folks on the thread sound like banks and republicans:

Republicans and banks strongly oppose the proposal, arguing that it raises privacy concerns.

They might consider that Speaker Pelosi fights for the little guy.

[MichMan]

28. It was originally set as $600 in the BBB legislation

The only reason that they are now talking about making it $10k is due to all the backlash they have been getting. If the original deadlines were already met, it would have already been signed into law.

Remember that the ACA in 2010 had a provision that all business transactions over $600 would require a 1099. Lots of the same complaints we are hearing now.

A couple months after everyone started complaining, the very same legislators that voted for it acted shocked that anything like that was in there. It was quickly repealed before it could take effect.

[Igel]

36. Consider the estimate.

It's the one cited. It's Treasury's.

Treasury houses the IRS. This is a big lump of funding and authority increase for Treasury. Think "conflict of interest". Moreover, Treasury is hardly independent of the Executive branch. Recently President Biden exclaimed that he the bill. (Perhaps a draft outline, perhaps he supervised it ...).

The CBO estimate is much lower, is non-partisan, has no dog in this fight, and is more independent.

[Hoyt]

22. 95+% of people will never know it's happening.

[MichMan]

30. Those working for small community banks and credit unions sure will

They will be the one that have to implement it or risk being fined tens of thousands of dollars. Hiring all those extra employees will have a cost

[Hoyt]

34. It'll be handled by computer.

[cstanleytech]

26. Tracking accounts that deal in more than 100k and also tracking the total number of accounts people

have access to makes sense but wanting to know how much everyone has is a bit to much.

[slightlv]

31. Ye Gods! I agree!

$600 is just way too low a set rate. It captures absolutely everybody but the poorest of the poor... and it probably captures a goodly portion of those, considering some of the programs they might be on, like SNAP, etc. If they do continue with this and don't raise it to the 10k, the optics alone will kill us at election time, regardless of how they try to dress it up. Democrats are so bad at messaging. I don't understand it. We have excellent policy ideas. People are for our programs. WHY can't we have good policy craftsman AND good spokespeople to get the message out properly? It's worrying... these next few elections are going to be imperative to win, or watch our country fall to authoritarianism of one type or another. We don't need to be shooting ourselves in the foot. Right now, IMNSHO, we NEED to be concentrating fully on the Voting Rights Bills... period. Anything else can wait until we can negate all these changes the Repugs have made to voting laws - for example, the laws now that deliver electoral slates -they- like, regardless of what the voters have said. My hair is on fire, and I'm pulling it out. Can no one else see nothing else is gonna matter if we can't ever win another election? Popular vote won't count anymore... much as it doesn't now, nor has it for the last, what... 5 elections?

[msongs]

33. sounds like an election loser. nt