Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States Government Privacy Social Networks

The IRS Decides Who To Audit By Data Mining Social Media (typepad.com) 232

Posted by EditorDavid from the peekaboo dept.
In America the Internal Revenue Service used to pick who got audited based on math mistakes or discrepancies with W-2 forms -- but not any more. schwit1 shares an article from the Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law describing their new technique: The IRS is now engaging in data mining of public and commercial data pools (including social media) and creating highly detailed profiles of taxpayers upon which to run data analytics. This article argues that current IRS practices, mostly unknown to the general public, are violating fair information practices. This lack of transparency and accountability not only violates federal law regarding the government's data collection activities and use of predictive algorithms, but may also result in discrimination. While the potential efficiencies that big data analytics provides may appear to be a panacea for the IRS's budget woes, unchecked these activities are a significant threat to privacy [PDF]. Other concerns regarding the IRS's entrance into big data are raised including the potential for political targeting, data breaches, and the misuse of such information.
While tax evasion cost the U.S.$3 trillion between 2000 and 2009, one of the report's authors argues that people should be aware âoethat what they say and do onlineâ could be used against them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The IRS Decides Who To Audit By Data Mining Social Media More

The IRS Decides Who To Audit By Data Mining Social Media

Comments Filter:

  • It makes sense. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @08:22PM (#55106975)
    After all, if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000 and your Facebook page is full of pictures of you taking vacations in Hawaii, Fiji, Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you. As long as they're searching public information only (eg. your PUBLIC Facebook profile and Twitter account) and not using special government powers to look at private information which would not be viewable by the general public, then I don't see a problem with this. You have no expectation of privacy when you post your vacation pictures to your public Facebook profile.

    • After all, if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000 and your Facebook page is full of pictures of you taking vacations in Hawaii, Fiji, Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you. As long as they're searching public information only (eg. your PUBLIC Facebook profile and Twitter account) and not using special government powers to look at private information which would not be viewable by the general public, then I don't see a problem with this. You have no expectation of privacy when you post your vacation pictures to your public Facebook profile.

      I've often wondered whether this sort of data can be used as evidence.

      Recently someone live-streamed themselves driving drunk (in Miami, IIRC) and posted it to youtube, and were subsequently arrested and charged. I can suppose that he was also caught on traffic cameras, but what if he wasn't?

      There's no reason why this sort of information can't be faked - I could easily make up a FB account to presents myself as much richer than I actually am, I could fake a live-stream drunk driving video, and I can simply

      • Well, suing the police for false arrest is very unlikely to go your way, as they have rather broad authority to make mistakes. I'm pretty anti-cop, as a general rule, but there's pretty much no way around this problem if you don't want your cities to devolve into mass chaos. Police have to make snap decisions based on very limited information, and you don't want to live in a world in which they are punished for making a wrong one, because the result is anarchy (and not the good kind).

        Social media posts are
        • The position that "ignorance of the law is no excuse" should apply to civilians but not law enforcement professionals is absurd, as is the notion that holding police to the same standards as everyone else will lead to anarchy. Lack of accountability is one of the reasons our justice system is so terrible. What's worse, you're responding to a question about social media posts, not even an exigent circumstance, so any mistake is blatant negligence, since there's plenty of time to ask if they can do it. And yo

          • The position that "ignorance of the law is no excuse" should apply to civilians but not law enforcement professionals is absurd

            True. Now tell us, who's promoting that position?

            (Hint: not the person you're replying to.)

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

        If someone fakes a drunk-driving video and is arrested, can the police then be sued for false arrest?

        Not successfully, if it was plausible and actually intended to be deceptive. It's the sort of "dickish but legal" maneuver that judges will not take kindly. Similarly, people making prank videos that end up getting punched in the face when they jump-scare someone can sue, but they're unlikely to collect. They initiated it for the lulz, it went wrong, too bad.

    • Re:It makes sense. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @09:48PM (#55107351) Journal

      Some years ago, the Italian equivalent of the IRS sent some of its agents to go round marinas, looking at the boats moored there, then compared the estimated value of the boat with the declared income of the owner.

      • Don't worry, that's never gonna happen in the US. That would certainly hit the wrong kind of people.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by swb ( 14022 )

        I can't back this up with any citations, but I'm pretty sure I read about an IRS agent who did pretty much this. He would see an expensive sports car, note the license plate, and then check out the owner to see if their tax filings lined up with owning a sports car.

        I have to admit being somewhat torn. My gut reaction is its kind of shitty that a lone agent can operate in an almost personally vindictive manner. My other reaction is that this might be surprisingly effective and people who practice tax evas

        • If an IRS agent can just decide to audit someone that could allow all sorts of abuse. If they can simply report that they discovered that someone owns a sports car but doesn't seem to have the income to afford it, that should be ok.

          I wonder if the DMV could forward to the IRS a list of people registering very expensive cars.

      • They did something similar with expensive cars around ski resorts.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mysidia ( 191772 )

      if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000
      ....Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you.

      False.... your vacation can very well be funded from savings or by someone else. IRS audits the WAY those work is too serious an injury to inflict upon someone from some idle observation that isn't a reasonable cause to suspect a thing.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000 ....Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you.

        False.... your vacation can very well be funded from savings or by someone else. IRS audits the WAY those work is too serious an injury to inflict upon someone from some idle observation that isn't a reasonable cause to suspect a thing.

        Well, they'd take into account those things. At the very least, they'd send some

        • :%s/IRS/Gestapo/g

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Whibla ( 210729 )

        False.... your vacation can very well be funded ... by someone else.

        Wouldn't that still potentially count as taxable though?

        Certainly in the UK there's a limit on the size of gifts you can receive before they count as taxable. There are exceptions and riders, of course, but they only apply in very limited situations. Were a random someone to give me £10,000, for example, I would be liable to pay tax on it as though it were income.

    • No, you ignorant douche. People misrepresent themselves on social media all the time. They make themselves look happier, healthier, and richer all the time.

      You are advocating increased audits based on data known not to be reliable. Not effectual. At all.

      Ignoramus.

    • After all, if you declare on your tax return that your annual income is $30,000 and your Facebook page is full of pictures of you taking vacations in Hawaii, Fiji, Bermuda, etc., as well as photos taken from your first class seat in the airplane, then they have good reason to audit you

      You just described my girlfriend. She's a teacher who gets paid fuck all. We go on vacation a lot (it's actually really cheap typically $100 for airfares and $100 accommodation for a week) but most of our photos are from the beach or famous landmarks so you don't realise that we're slumming it in a hostel. Oh and we've been upgraded to business twice and to first class once.

      They can come audit away. They'll likely be disappointed though.

    • Often a lot of people who are taking all these vacations are actually service members who are posted in or near all these locations and are taking some time off. Or they are on a business trip paid by the company and use some of their time for sight seeing.
      Also a lot of social media posts are just people lying with photoshop pictures. Or look at me in my new car, where they were just in a car show and decided to get a picture of a car.
      Finally people have different priorities if you are making 30k a year and

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The only times I've flown business class it has been at someone else's expense.

      That's the problem - social media is both fake and incomplete information.

      • If I posted my travel photos to social media it would look like I was one hell of a party animal. The photos I take are during the brief 3-4 hours I get between work being done and bedtime during non-travel days. So it's nighttime shots of a different city every couple of months, generally including a nice restaurant and some drinks. If I took photos of the other 20-21 hrs per day I travel for work, it would look far less glamorous. Yet another generic hotel room, yet more time spent sitting in airports, an

  • Works for me (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Snotnose ( 212196 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @08:25PM (#55106995)
    No facebook, no snapchat, no tinder, no grinder. Fact is, I'm as close to 100% out of social media as can be. I don't understand people who are into social media, I don't hang out with them. They're like smokers were 10-20 years ago. You want to take a pic of me and post it to FB? Um, no, I'll just step out. I find out you put a pic of me on FB without my knowledge and best case, you ain't my friend. Worst case I sue you.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The next that'll happen is people who DON'T have social media will be targeted. Hell, it probably already happens but we don't know because those people can't post about it!

      "Well, why don't you want to share every aspect of your life? You MUST have something to hide!" --Da Gubbamint

      • The next that'll happen is people who DON'T have social media will be targeted. Hell, it probably already happens but we don't know because those people can't post about it!

        "Well, why don't you want to share every aspect of your life? You MUST have something to hide!" --Da Gubbamint

        So use them but post occasional innocuous stuff. Oh wow, you like cats.

        • This.

          I have a Facebook page. And Google+. I think there's even some Myspace page collecting dust (is that still on? I should maybe check once in a while). On these pages you'll find out that I'm a renowned security researcher, rubbing shoulders and shaking hands with the greatest minds in the field. My hobbies show off my sainthood where I selflessly offer my rare spare time to the needy and poor. And my hobbies are just good wholesome activities like watching sports like every good citizen and having a BBQ

    • No facebook, no snapchat, no tinder, no grinder.

      That would make a catchy chant for a demonstration.

      We could start a movement of disaffected Slashdot users, call it the "Green Bloc" and wear polo shirts with Penguin symbols. Show those filthy hippie Antifa guys how it's done.

      "No facebook, no snapchat, no tinder, no grinder."

      I'm available for organizing meetings, but not on Thursday, because mom makes meatloaf on Thursday, and not on Saturday, because we have a little group that does board games on Saturday.

    • [...] I find out you put a pic of me on FB without my knowledge and best case, you ain't my friend. Worst case I sue you.

      I was under the impression that you need to have suffered damages to sue.

      Is that no longer true?

    • DOesn't matter (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @08:46PM (#55107103)

      There is also the Medical Information Bureau, the credit bureaus, ChoicePoint, retailers, and so many other databases out there. And this is been going on for many many years. Back in '91, I dated a lawyer and she made a comment one time - "With someone's social security number, you can find out anything about that person." And that was 26 years ago when storage and computers were expensive.

      This shows how government without breaking the law on spying on Americans (yeah, I know - like they care) can build a dossier on folks that would be an East German Stasi agent's wet dream.

      And it also shows this filing taxes is just one big stupid waste of time for folks who have W-2 jobs. They should just do what is done in some European countries. At the end of the year, you get a statement saying how much you paid.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mspring ( 126862 )
      Maybe having a limited social media presence is an indication to the IRS to audit you?
    • You must be a blast at parties.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Holi ( 250190 )
      "I find out you put a pic of me on FB without my knowledge and best case, you ain't my friend. Worst case I sue you."

      Sue? for what? You have no expectation of privacy when you are out and about.

  • Fair game (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ebonum ( 830686 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @08:47PM (#55107109)

    This is no different than people who post on facebook themselves water skiing while taking big buck in worker's comp payments and have multi-million dollar lawsuits in the works.
    I'm sorry. Anything you post is fair game. If you are a bad criminal, it is survival of the fittest. Dumb ones go to jail. Smart ones live comfortably in Costa Rica.

  • It's not private information (Score:5, Insightful)

    by chuckugly ( 2030942 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @08:48PM (#55107117)
    Looking at publicly available (and in most cases self published) information isn't a violation of privacy by any sane definition. It may legitimately constitute something we don't like and may want to proscribe our government from doing, but it's not a privacy issue. Words; they used to mean things.

  • ... is legally special stuff, with severe penalties for misuse. (Well, unless you support Republicans or something. Then it's fine to misuse yours, "hater"!)

    Anyway, yes, social media stuff is public, but data mined, finely sifted repositories of it stored in government data centers are not. I think we can make the case that they are "IRS tax data" and thus deserve the strict protections.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mal-2 ( 675116 )

      Anyway, yes, social media stuff is public, but data mined, finely sifted repositories of it stored in government data centers are not.

      And an identical repository in Google or Facebook's hands is distinguishable how? I mean if the government can collect that data easily, so can a lot of other people. How would you ever determine whether someone looked you up in the government's repository, or someone else's?

  • "argues that people should be aware that what they say and do online could be used against them." Now that's going to be news to many people. Especially if you think you are a right thinking individual.

  • It's OK...... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tulsa_Time ( 2430696 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @11:05PM (#55107609)

    It was fine when all the IRS did wrong was screw conservative non-profits... no one got fired or punished.

    Making the tax collector a political weapon was not a problem for Obama.

    Why worry now ? Oh... you don't like it now that Trump is in.... I see.....

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bongey ( 974911 )
      Insane that was basically swept under the rug and nobody went to jail.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mvdwege ( 243851 )

        You advocate against government taxation and you whine about getting audited?

        Boo fucking hoo. Cry me a river.

        • Right? Look, there is no legal right to not get audited by the IRS. Sure, if they audit you every goddamned year you might be able to cry about harassment, but that sort of behavior is rare unless you're ultra-rich and using all the loopholes. If a Liberal group set up an anti-tax, anti-government platform, I'd expect the IRS to pay some extra attention to them too.

    • He's desperate to keep his finances hidden. I wonder why?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by trawg ( 308495 )

      It was fine when all the IRS did wrong was screw conservative non-profits... no one got fired or punished.

      Making the tax collector a political weapon was not a problem for Obama.

      haha yeh I too remember that 8 year period under Obama where not a single American complained about taxes, ever

      you idiot

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dwpro ( 520418 )
      How do you know they were conservative, when engaging in political activity causes an organization to lose its favored tax status?

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by k6mfw ( 1182893 )
      Though another problem most don't know about is budget cuts of IRS meaning less staff such as competent auditors to quickly tell difference of simple math mistakes from tax evaders. I was talking with a accountant who said couple auditors she has interacted with (they were not the "out-to-get-you" types) that occasionally call her for a tax audit. They were competent, reviewed the figures just to confirm some info then quickly close the case.

  • Comment removed (Score:3)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday August 29, 2017 @11:05PM (#55107613)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Of course the government's job is to hold down inflation. If they just started printing money for everything, inflation would sky-rocket which would screw up the economy in a ton of different ways.

    • Taxation is also useful to demoralize the masses, manufacture criminals, protect oligarch-controlled companies from competition, reduce socioeconomic mobility, and penalize disfavored groups.

    • While you are not explicitly suggesting precious metals, it's worth a look at how they behave as currency.

      Aside from the obvious inconveniences, they are also need to be standardized. This makes them subject, in practice, to chaotic manipulation. This transcription [mises.org] of a very libertarian historian's lecture recounts the tale of manipulation and inflation in ancient Roman currencies.

      The lecture was intended as a cautionary tale about economic government management, but one important aspect of it is that, de

  • And now we know why...

  • Good! (Score:3)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @03:01AM (#55108225)

    First I like it because it's another reason not to give your data to so-called 'social' sites.

    Second, it's ironic that now people snitch themselves to the IRS instead of their neighbor snitching to it.

    • > First I like it because it's another reason not to give your data to so-called 'social' sites.

      Just because you don't post photos of your backyard swimmimg pool doesn't mean that Google won't. The City of Hamilton (in Canada) uses Google Maps to catch building code infractions. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/... [www.cbc.ca]

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • The state I live in has a pretty generous workers' compensation insurance system, as far as the US is concerned, and there are a fair number who take advantage of it. Investigators routinely go around and follow up on some claims. Every so often you'll see a news story where they caught someone was supposed to be permanently disabled doing roofing work off the books, or posting Facebook pictures kite-surfing in some tropical destination. It's just enough enforcement to make people think twice about filing a

  • "The IRS is now engaging in data mining of public and commercial data pools (including social media) and creating highly detailed profiles of taxpayers upon which to run data analytics" (30 words)

    Removing redundancy, complex structures, etc:

    The IRS profiles taxpayers by mining data, including social media, then analyzes the profiles. (14 words).

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close