January 1 could be interesting thanks to congress.

[sreader3]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Now that is a textbook case of catastrophizing. The IRS audits roughly 0.3% of returns (3 of every 1000). The IRS initiates criminal investigations against fewer than 2 percent of all American taxpayers.

Like you I had a legal practice for many years and got many 1099s. I suppose practicing law for 25+ years made me an expert at "catastrophizing." But I would say for good reason. I don't like this 1099 expansion one bit. Perhaps, as you say, the IRS in the recent past has only audited 0.3% of returns. However, past is rarely prologue. The Orwellian-named "Inflation Reduction Act" just added funding for thousands upon thousands of new IRS auditors (we can argue about the exact number). So we can all safely chuck that 0.3% number out the window. Yes, this new regime will result in some incremental revenue to the feds from tax cheats. However, it will come at a nontrivial cost in terms of time, cost, effort and worry to non-cheats. There are almost never solutions. There are only trade-offs. The feds are encroaching on new turf. Everyone should admit that.

Let me add that I enjoy your blog. Thanks for starting that.

Edited to add: Same comments to Bob C. Yes I am serious. I am very concerned about federal encroachment. I do not place unqualified trust in federal authorities, although I know many good people who work for the federal government. Neither did our founders repose trust in centralized authority. Apparently you are not as concerned, which is your right. It is still a free country.

[jamest206]

Plenty of opportunities for deferments, don’t forget that fellas. I won’t file until October and am not worried at all about this. I will have everything lined up as well.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by sreader3

Like you I had a legal practice for many years and got many 1099s. I suppose practicing law for 25+ years made me an expert at "catastrophizing." But I would say for good reason. I don't like this 1099 expansion one bit. Perhaps, as you say, the IRS in the recent past has only audited 0.3% of returns. However, past is rarely prologue. The Orwellian-named "Inflation Reduction Act" just added funding for thousands upon thousands of new IRS auditors (we can argue about the exact number). So we can all safely chuck that 0.3% number out the window. Yes, this new regime will result in some incremental revenue to the feds from tax cheats. However, it will come at a nontrivial cost in terms of time, cost, effort and worry to non-cheats. There are almost never solutions. There are only trade-offs. The feds are encroaching on new turf. Everyone should admit that.

Let me add that I enjoy your blog. Thanks for starting that.

Edited to add: Same comments to Bob C. Yes I am serious. I am very concerned about federal encroachment. I do not place unqualified trust in federal authorities, although I know many good people who work for the federal government. Neither did our founders repose trust in centralized authority. Apparently you are not as concerned, which is your right. It is still a free country.

+1. The IRS expansion plans are to more than double its workforce. It seems clear that they will be coming after as many people for as many things as possible for as much money as possible. Our tax system is a pain in the rear for people who don't specialize in it; do anything wrong in the process made to be as convoluted as possible and they get to take more from you. I understand many here like this, but it seems very difficult to see how it isn't clear they will be targeting to get as many people as they can. That's the entire point of doubling in size, to route more money to the state and away from the citizens. There is an extremely long history of the IRS coming after low and middle class people for trivial things.

[sreader3]

Originally Posted by G1911

+1. The IRS expansion plans are to more than double its workforce. It seems clear that they will be coming after as many people for as many things as possible for as much money as possible. Our tax system is a pain in the rear for people who don't specialize in it; do anything wrong in the process made to be as convoluted as possible and they get to take more from you. I understand many here like this, but it seems very difficult to see how it isn't clear they will be targeting to get as many people as they can. That's the entire point of doubling in size, to route more money to the state and away from the citizens. There is an extremely long history of the IRS coming after low and middle class people for trivial things.

+2. Thank you.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by sreader3

Edited to add: Same comments to Bob C. Yes I am serious. I am very concerned about federal encroachment. I do not place unqualified trust in federal authorities, although I know many good people who work for the federal government. Neither did our founders repose trust in centralized authority. Apparently you are not as concerned, which is your right. It is still a free country.

My question to you about being serious had absolutely nothing to do with whether we can trust the government or not, it was solely directed at your comment that, and I quote, "the situation you are describing where deducting basis from the revenue shown on the 1099 triggers an audit". That is not even close to anything Adam/Exhibitman said or ever implied.

Simply deducting one's basis from the proceeds they got from something they sold, to determine their net taxable income/gain, is NOT just in and of itself ever going to trigger an IRS audit. In fact, the IRS pretty much fully expects everyone reporting such sales on their tax return is also going to be deducting the basis of what they sold. I just didn't want someone reading what you stated in your post to think that by doing what they are supposed to be doing on their tax return, deducting their tax basis of an item sold, it was suddenly going to trigger an IRS audit for them. That comment/thinking is totally wrong!!!!!

I probably have no more, and maybe even less, trust in our government and politicians than you, and also am not a big fan of encroachment and even more government oversight and regulations. I am merely speaking to the tax laws and requirements/reporting in place, and what people need to be aware of in complying with what is out there. I am not commenting on and either approving or condemning our government and the tax laws they passed, just trying to better explain them and how they are supposed to work for people, especially in regard to how those tax laws can impact their collecting activities.

[sreader3]

You Said: Simply deducting one's basis from the proceeds they got from something they sold, to determine their net taxable income/gain, is NOT just in and of itself ever going to trigger an IRS audit. In fact, the IRS pretty much fully expects everyone reporting such sales on their tax return is also going to be deducting the basis of what they sold.

Will you personally commit to that for the next 5 years? Will you commit to paying the attorney fees of anyone who is audited for failing to pay their claimed tax liability under an IRS audit for noncompliance with the new 1099 rules if they are ultimately found innocent?

You Said: I probably have no more, and maybe even less, trust in our government and politicians than you, and also am not a big fan of encroachment and even more government oversight and regulations.

I doubt it.

You Said: I am merely speaking to the tax laws and requirements/reporting in place, and what people need to be aware of in complying with what is out there. I am not commenting on and either approving or condemning our government and the tax laws they passed, just trying to better explain them and how they are supposed to work for people, especially in regard to how those tax laws can impact their collecting activities.

Great. Carry on.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by sreader3

You Said: Simply deducting one's basis from the proceeds they got from something they sold, to determine their net taxable income/gain, is NOT just in and of itself ever going to trigger an IRS audit. In fact, the IRS pretty much fully expects everyone reporting such sales on their tax return is also going to be deducting the basis of what they sold.

Will you personally commit to that for the next 5 years? Will you commit to paying the attorney fees of anyone who is audited for failing to pay their claimed tax liability under an IRS audit for noncompliance with the new 1099 rules if they are ultimately found innocent?

You Said: I probably have no more, and maybe even less, trust in our government and politicians than you, and also am not a big fan of encroachment and even more government oversight and regulations.

I doubt it.

You Said: I am merely speaking to the tax laws and requirements/reporting in place, and what people need to be aware of in complying with what is out there. I am not commenting on and either approving or condemning our government and the tax laws they passed, just trying to better explain them and how they are supposed to work for people, especially in regard to how those tax laws can impact their collecting activities.

Great. Carry on.

You were the one who said deducting the cost of items you were selling on your tax return would get you audited by the IRS. That is 100% false, and I simply posted a civil response to correct your error, so some unsuspecting Net54 member reading your comments wouldn't mistakenly think what you said was correct when it comes to filing their income taxes. I can just see someone reading, and believing, what you wrote is true, so that when they get their 1099-K form next year and go to do their taxes, they remember what you said and don't deduct the costs of what they paid for the items they sold. Because they think that if they do, based on what you said, it will automatically get them audited by the IRS. The end result being that because they don't claim a perfectly valid tax deduction on their return, they end up overpaying their income taxes. I was merely trying to help and save those innocent people from making a mistake.

And what the heck is with this ridiculous commitment you want me to make? Simply deducting the cost basis of items you sell on your tax return will never of itself trigger an IRS audit. But someone that doesn't properly or accurately report the 1099-K information they get on their tax return, or maybe just ignores the 1099-K form entirely and doesn't report it on their return at all, is probably going to hear from the IRS, and have a much greater chance of actually getting audited. Not properly or accurately reporting the 1099-K info on your return versus not deducting the cost basis of items you are selling, are two completely and entirely different things. I never said or implied that ignoring or misreporting the info you get on a 1099-K form sent to you would not potentially result in an IRS audit. I said deducting the tax basis cost of items you sold on your tax return would not in and of itself get you audited. Heck, the tax cost basis of items you sell don't even get reported on the 1099-K forms, so what does what I said about them have to do with getting audited for not properly or accurately reporting info you do get on a 1099-K on your tax return? Do you really not understand that? So no, I'm not going to make such a stupid commitment because what you're asking me is totally whack. What you're asking me to do is basically the same thing as me saying if you don't speed, you won't get a speeding ticket. And then you turn around and want me to commit to pay everyone's costs that does get caught and ticketed for reckless driving, and then somehow beats that reckless driving ticket in court. It is two entirely different things!!!!

Not sure why you would doubt what I said. Won't be the first, and probably not the last time either, I have someone on the forum claim they know what I mean or how I think, better than I know myself. It is totally impossible, but still makes me laugh when someone thinks they can know a person better than that person knows themself, especially when the only interaction they've ever had is over the internet and they've never even met in person.

And I will carry on. And if someone else makes more erroneous and incorrect tax statements on here that I see, I will go ahead and correct them for everyone else's benefit. Whether they like it or not!