Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States DRM GNU is Not Unix Government Open Source

FSF Urges US Government to Adopt Free-as-in-Freedom Tax Filing Software (fsf.org) 123

Posted by EditorDavid from the live-free-or-code dept.
"A modern free society has an obligation to offer electronic tax filing that respects user freedom," says a Free Software Foundation blog post, "and the United States is not excluded from this responsibility."

"Governments, and/or the companies that they partner with, are responsible for providing free as in freedom software for necessary operations, and tax filing is no exception." For many years now, a large portion of [U.S.] taxpayers have filed their taxes electronically through proprietary programs like TurboTax. Millions of taxpayers are led to believe that they have no other option than to use nonfree software or Service as a Software Substitute (SaaSS), giving up their freedom as well as their most private financial information to a third-party company, in order to file their taxes...

While the options for taxpayers have improved slightly with the IRS's implementation of the IRS Direct File program [in 25 states], this program unfortunately does require users to hand over their freedom when filing taxes.... Taxpayers shouldn't have to use a program that violates their individual freedoms to file legally required taxes. While Direct File is a step in the right direction as the program isn't in the hands of a third-party entity, it is still nonfree software. Because Direct File is a US government-operated program, and ongoing in the process of being deployed to twenty-five states, it's not too late to call on the IRS to make Direct File free software.

In the meantime, if you need to file US taxes and are yet to file, we suggest filing your taxes in a way that respects your user freedom as much as possible, such as through mailing tax forms. Like with other government interactions that snatch away user freedom, choose the path that most respects your freedom.
Free-as-in-freedom software would decrease the chance of user lock-in, the FSF points out. But they list several other advantages, including:
  • Repairability: With free software, there is no uncertain wait period or reliance on a proprietary provider to make any needed bug or security fixes.
  • Transparency: Unless you can check what a program really does (or ask someone in the free software community to check for you), there is no way to know that the program isn't doing things you don't consent to it doing.
  • Cybersecurity: While free software isn't inherently more secure than nonfree software, it does have a tendency to be more secure because many developers can continuously improve the program and search for errors that can be exploited. With proprietary programs like TurboTax, taxpayers and the U.S. government are dependent on TurboTax to protect the sensitive financial and personal information of millions with few (if any) outside checks and balances...
  • Taxpayer dollars spent should actually benefit the taxpayers: Taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund third-party programs that seek to control users and force them to use their programs through lobbying....

"We don't have to accept this unjust reality: we can work for a better future, together," the blog post concludes (offering a "sample message" U.S. taxpayers could send to IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel).

"Take action today and help make electronic tax filing free as in freedom for everyone."


FSF Urges US Government to Adopt Free-as-in-Freedom Tax Filing Software More | Reply

FSF Urges US Government to Adopt Free-as-in-Freedom Tax Filing Software

Comments Filter:

  • Yep (Score:3)

    by markdavis ( 642305 ) on Saturday April 12, 2025 @11:34PM (#65301973)

    >"In the meantime, if you need to file US taxes and are yet to file, we suggest filing your taxes in a way that respects your user freedom as much as possible, such as through mailing tax forms."

    Yep, unfortunately, that is what I end up doing every year. Fortunately my taxes are rather simple (well as simple as can be expected with the crazy tax system we have).

    The IRS at least puts out the tax forms as PDF. But without any math formulas added, and you can't even submit those filled-out forms electronically.

    I don't want some third-party involved in my taxes and privacy. It is insane that there isn't the ability to simply perform your tax data entry directly into IRS's website. They already have access to most of your data, already, anyway. They have your past and current W2's and W9's and other forms, as well as your past filings. We shouldn't need "software" to do it, and certainly not software that requires using a proprietary operating system or a third-party site/system.

    • Its been suggested that since they already have the information the IRS should fill out the return and just send people a bill along with a copy of the return. For most of us, that would be sufficient. If it wasn't, someone could submit an alternative return. The problem is that the people who make money doing people's returns would be outraged.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
        Well fill out as much as they have, do the preliminary calculations, and send out so people can add/correct as needed or just accept an E-sign it, the same system as we have here in Norway, and for a lot of people, esp those that the preliminary calculations show are owed money, 99% of them come back e-signed the same day and the money is in the taxpayer's around 1-3 business days later. Personally I love the system. What stops the IRS from implementing something similar? please note In norway all banks, s

        • The USA has the same requirements. Employers are all obligated to provide income information, retirement contributions, benefits, etc. Banks/etc must all supply interest. Trading companies must all supply info about sales/purchases/capital gain/loss, interest, etc.

          Of course, there is other information that the tax payer must provide, like expenses. But since the standard deduction was raised so high, very few people [individuals] can even itemize anymore. I am guessing for 90% of people [individuals],

          • The only thing the IRS doesn't have for my tax returns is how much money I spent that year on energy improvements like more insulation on my house. I usually spend a couple hundred dollars on that.
            For families, you might have who they get to deduct that year for child tax credits.
            But answer around a dozen questions, maybe provide a couple numbers, and 99% of people's tax returns would be done.

        • Re:Yep (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Dragonslicer ( 991472 ) on Sunday April 13, 2025 @10:30AM (#65302585)

          What stops the IRS from implementing something similar?

          Bribes. Or as we call it here, lobbying.

      • For returns that are not completely simple, IRS does not have all the information. First of all, they do not know anything about your deductions. Next, in many cases there are choices available to the taxpayer as to how to treat various things; for example, you have choices in how you want to treat a premium paid for bonds. You also have choices about filing married, where your domicile is, dependents, etc.

        However, the first step should be the IRS prefills your tax return with the information it does ha

        • I wonder too if there's not some issue with reporting thresholds and individual criminal/civil liabilities for inaccuracies. I feel like it's a bit different to prep your own and certify it than to just okay the IRS data.

          There is no IRS record generated for, say, dividends below $10, payments to your (potentially sole-proprietor) business below $400, wages below $600, etc. I don't know that I have any legal foundation for the assertion, but it seems your mistake/willfulness is indeed different in those sit

      • I was thinking the same thing. They send a return + bill, but if someone has deductions, they can send a return showing them. Worst that happens is they get denied.

      • They tried it, it went really well, so Intuit and H&R Block spent a ton of money to stop it.

        Dicks.

    • Current US tax law requires much information the IRS doesn't have, including taxpayer marital status (are you living in the same household with your spouse?), number and age of dependents (are they in school?), itemized deductions, etc. The IRS does attempt to prepare returns for non-filers, they have very low accuracy. Countries that prepare income tax returns for the taxpayer have tax laws designed to be compatible with that mode of filing.

      • >"Current US tax law requires much information the IRS doesn't have"

        I wasn't suggesting the IRS prepare our taxes for us. I was suggesting they make it possible to directly enter our tax information to them instead of through a third party, in "software", or on paper. And I said "They already have access to most of your data, already, anyway", which is true. I estimate 90% of what is needed from me, they already know. So that information could be pre-filled and just verified/approved, instead of havi

        • That's exactly what the new Direct File is. Had W-2 prefilled except for some missing special fields, and was missing the 1099-INT from my bank entirely, but the whole process start to finish (including state taxes, which was able to import the federal form directly) took 45 minutes.
        • On the surface what you say sounds true, but I think you'd be pretty surprised by what is in fact available to the IRS. Take your W-2 as the simplest example. That W-2 shows up at the IRS in june or july I think. The data actually goes to the SSA, not the IRS. SSA sends it over to the IRS later. That is the biggest hole at the moment for the IRS in handling the average taxpayer. And it is a whopper of a hole.

          • That does sound pretty ridiculous, since almost all employers send all this, electronically, in Jan. The IRS should have access to it essentially immediately, even if submitted through SSA.

            • Re:Yep (Score:4, Informative)

              by stabiesoft ( 733417 ) on Sunday April 13, 2025 @02:14PM (#65302933) Homepage
              I think you overestimate the funding IRS has gotten over the years. They run on a shoestring. Only government would underfund accounts receivables. Imagine Trump Enterprises being owed 696 BILLION dollars and not bothering to increase its accounts receivables dept. Cause that is the amount estimated for just 2022 to the IRS. No the wealthy want it that way, and they get what they want. What was nearly the first thing the new administration did. Yeppers, cut IRS funding. https://www.ifcreview.com/news... [ifcreview.com] Imagine cutting 20 billion to lose out on 696 billion. Now that is math that adds up eh?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      Just echoing Archie Bunker below, since it seems to be getting lost:

            Guess they don't read the news. https://www.reuters.com/world/ [reuters.com]... [reuters.com]

      Elmo and that potted plant running the IRS just fired the team developing their on-line tax return app.

      • There might be some very good reasons for it. I don't claim to know. And it doesn't mean the program won't remain and further improved with a different team. Guess we will see. If the program does die, that would be a shame.

    • It is insane that there isn't the ability to simply perform your tax data entry directly into IRS's website.

      For those living in some states (and simple cases) the IRS does offer a Direct File solution which is operated directly by the IRS. Some states also provide a free file service. The IRS has not really promoted Direct File (and, of course, the commercial products flood the zone of advertising results so that their solution shows up first).

  • The worst arguers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RazorSharp ( 1418697 ) on Saturday April 12, 2025 @11:46PM (#65301991)

    Everytime I read something published by the FSF, it feels like they're actively trying to repel people from agreeing with their point. FREE FREEDOM FREE FREE.

    All government software should be based on open source solutions (not necessary the FSF definition of Free Software), when possible. It's simply a case of avoiding vendor lock-in. If the government contracts a vendor to write a tax-filing web app using an open framework like Laravel or Django, and part of the contract is developer documentation, then they don't have to worry about the vendor going out of business, getting bought by a foreign interest, attempting to drag out the process and just bill infinite billable hours (see Oracle and the VA), and it allows you to create new bids for work down the road.

    The fact that government computers still run Windows is a travesty. Having a standard government *nix would allow them to more tightly control the software, it would massively reduce costs, and no single vendor would be able to negotiate from a position of power.

    • The fact that government computers still run Windows is a travesty. Having a standard government *nix would allow them to more tightly control the software, it would massively reduce costs, and no single vendor would be able to negotiate from a position of power.

      This is one area where I think it is better to have a software solution that is maintained by a private company. Yes, the government could create a Federal *nix, but then they would have to have an entire department focused on maintaining it, patc

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by RazorSharp ( 1418697 )

        I couldn't disagree more.

        First of all, they would want to leverage an existing open source solution and expand on it. Probably FreeBSD or OpenBSD to avoid any GPL legal entanglements. I'm not suggesting they build their OS from the ground up. But even if they did, when you look at the size of the U.S. government budget, maintaining an operating system is a minor expense. Furthermore, much of the work will be done by contractors as-needed. For example, if HP wants to supply the government with an order of 5,

        • What you're describing is isomorphic to the relationship the federal government has with Microsoft, IBM/Redhat, and way back at the beginning, Burroughs and later Unisys.

          The issue is that government is beholden to far more constiuencies than a private software vendor is. As such, government business processes are not conducive to developing a mass consumer product (which a server or workstation OS is). A prime contractor isn't the best either. Buying COTS is probably the only way it gets done. Should the CO

          • It would not really be a mass consumer product. Not in any traditional sense. The federal government would only worry about it suiting their needs. It would be freely available in the sense of documents that are freely available via FOIA, not in the sense that they are delivering a product. If it became popular in the consumer space, it would probably be various distros maintained by companies and communities.

            But government contractors would feel compelled to use it, contribute to it, and write software for

            • Yes it would be. If it's installed across millions of machines across dozens of departments and hundreds of offices it's either a consumer product or an incompatible-with-anything-else silo.

              Because not only does it need to run on commercial hardware, it needs to also be able to run commercial and/or OSS software that generally targets platforms with a large enough market share to justify the effort of the port.

              Right now, COMSOL, Matlab, Ansys, Cadence and some more big boys in engineering computing run on x

      • Crowdstrike demonstrated vendor lockin is a bad thing. I don't use windows, but I hear all the time about updates (forced) that cause all sorts of issues. Security and microsoft just should not be used in the same sentence.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kmoser ( 1469707 )
          The Crowdstrike problem wasn't caused by vendor lock-in. It was caused by a Crowdstrike bug. Replace Crowdstrike with any other security measure on any other OS and you still have the same potential problem, even if they updates were *not* auto-applied, because bugs can and do slip through.

          This is not to excuse Crowdstrike; they screwed up. Just pointing out that the problem is not exclusive to them, or to proprietary software, or to auto-updates.
  • But even still, the government receives all my tax information from 3rd parties. Everything that I file individually, has already been seen as a 1099, k-1, or w2. There is the foreign account form you have to file, but that info may or may not have been provided to them depending on the country. Still, even in this degenerate case, they could provide a summary to you that you could work from. Instead, you get nothing. Certainly for the modal case where you have *a* job and get a w2 you could just get a
    • Your taxes then are just not that complicated. Simple example, you bought a treasury the year prior near the end of the year and had to prepay interest on the purchase. Interest is returned in the current year. When you file your current year taxes, you should take a deduction for the pre-paid interest. You cannot take the deduction in the year you paid the pre-paid interest because it has not been paid back yet. Bond premiums, bond discounts, are other examples of issues that can come up. And that is just

      • Your taxes then are just not that complicated.

        I agree. I use a paid service that covers my ass - if there are mistakes, it's a them problem. Otherwise if this is too complicated, it's a problem of not being good at simple math. I even check their math.

        • I hope a CPA. Those h&r block guys are idiots. And they will not cover you like a CPA in tax court. As an example, a friend maybe 10 years ago now used them. He moved. They thought because he moved more than 50 miles they thought he would get moving expenses. Well, even I knew the rule is the job has to move 50 miles, not your abode. His job did not move but 20 miles, and so the IRS was not happy. Penalties & interest paid by my friend. H&R sent thoughts and prayers.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by kmoser ( 1469707 )
          Once you sign the return, you are ultimately responsible for what's on it. Attempting to pawn off problems on your preparer, even a CPA, will not absolve you of ultimate responsibility for what you filed (or the filed on your behalf).

          • Once you sign the return, you are ultimately responsible for what's on it. Attempting to pawn off problems on your preparer, even a CPA, will not absolve you of ultimate responsibility for what you filed (or the filed on your behalf).

            I palm off nothing. Assuming I'm not cheating by witholding income or doing things like claiming my pet hamster is a dependent - both are criminal acts where I'd be the active perp, I have it right in contract form that my preparers are responsible for any penalties.

            So they have skin in the game. And since I don't cheat on the taxes, and since I provide every document needed as asked for, yeah, it would be a mistake on their part, and like I noted my contract states they pay any penalties or interest.

            L

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by kmoser ( 1469707 )
              Sure, they may pay your penalties, but will they do hard time for you?

              • Sure, they may pay your penalties, but will they do hard time for you?

                Anything that would descend to an actual crime would be a criminal act on my part. Claiming a Hamster as a dependent for the deduction would be me giving false information to the preparer and committing a crime. And that is on me whether I prepare my own taxes or say TurboTax prepares them. They ask the questions, I give them the documentation, this isn't rocket surgery.

  • Good on the FSF, but asking this goverment? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by arglebargle_xiv ( 2212710 ) on Sunday April 13, 2025 @06:54AM (#65302343)
    If anything, it's going to result in all tax filing software being assigned to some company owned by President Musk. Better to wait three more years and try again then.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bn-7bc ( 909819 )
      Woe has trump allready been ousted? that was quick, or kis this a scenario you are hoping for /dreading

    • Their request won't move the needle on that at all, you can be sure that Leon is already trying to figure out how to force everyone to file their taxes at X.com, the same place they now have to go for information about changes in Social Security.

  • If you have to pay taxes (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    you're not free

  • Too late (Score:5, Informative)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Sunday April 13, 2025 @09:37AM (#65302515)

    Guess they don't read the news. https://www.reuters.com/world/... [reuters.com]

    • Yea, no chance now. They are firing all sorts of people at the IRS.
    • That's still online [irs.gov]. I dare you to try it and compare it to your normal tax filing solution; it most likely won't be applicable to your case. It also would cost tens of millions [gao.gov] of taxpayer dollars each year, for a less effective, less available, less useable alternative.

      • The status quo already "costs taxpayers millions" it just a matter of who gets that money and that's not what the GAO is saying if you actually read it, they are saying the startup costs should be calculated more accurately to guage those costs savings, they don't actually say the program would be a money loser, that's not how the government operates. The GAO isn't there to judge whether programs should exist or not, it's there to make sure they operate efficiently and accurately.

        If the IRS direct-file prog

        • Is anyone saying this will increase tax receipts? The estimates, from the IRS, is costs of $64-$249 million, annually, ignoring the fixed costs. And that's an estimate; from a Gemini summary (feel free to find your own numbers):

          Government software projects often exceed their initial budgets. A report by the Standish Group found that only 13% of government software projects with budgets over $6 million succeed. McKinsey & Company found that large IT projects run 45% over budget. Another study by the Standish Group found an average cost overrun of 43% for IT projects, with 71% exceeding time estimates and having narrow scopes.

          All that's for delivering a solution that is already freely available from at least 8 different companies [irs.gov] (and I'm sure they all spend much less, with better solutions).

          • I wasn't claiming it did, only the hypothetical to show the point, it's not as simple as dollars in dollars out. It's similar to every $1 you spend on enforcement at the IRS brings in like $4-6. No changes to the law just higher compliance numbers.

            The number to compare to is the amount Americans spend on tax filing services and of this could be less over the next decade. Also has to be taken into account if Americans are not satisfied with those systems.

            • I'm pretty sure this online IRS service only applies to people who have taxes simple enough for the free filing services.

              • So how are those businesses in business if every person who can get it for free is getting it for free? Why is every thread about this filled with stories about how much those businesses suck?

                • Partly it's fear of getting it wrong and having the IRS come down on you like the proverbial ton of bricks.
                  Partly it's greed that the software/preparer will find the magic deduction that will save you thousands.
                  Partly it's intimidation caused by the instructions themselves. The PDF for i1040gi is 4.4 MB and 113 pages, and that's not all the instructions you might need. Many of the other forms have their own instruction sheets.
                  And not least it's that racist construct of math. OK it's only four function arith

      • Government exists to provide services, not turn profits.

        • The federal government exists for the common defense and to regulate interstate trade. It was supposed to be a loose federation of states. With $37T in debt, the wars and services are destroying the country. Once foreign countries stop believing in the US's ability to pay its obligations, the game is up.

          • Sounds like somebodies got a case of the 'sposdas

            We tried loose federation of states and it was such a disaster we scrapped the whole thing and did a do-over.

            Once foreign countries stop believing in the US's ability to pay its obligations, the game is up.

            Why would they have a reason to believe that? Only if we choose to do it, which would be very stupid. You can't just say it's inevitable, it hasn't happened, that's not an argument, that's your own theory.

  • We should replace the Income Tax (plus AMT, death tax, and similar) with a National Retail Sales Tax.
    Less complex, less filings, less economic distortion, less Congress threatening to remove tax breaks [wikipedia.org] if you don't vote for the incumbents...oh wait.

    • It's hard to make a retail tax where rich people don't pay the lowest tax rate. You can try exceptions for food and essentials, but then the middle class ends up paying the highest rate.

      Regressive taxes are a bad idea.

      • Regressive taxes are a bad idea.

        Why? Why is the concept of "tax rate" so important in tax policy?
        If the state collects sufficient taxes to fund its activities, and no taxpayer is unable to meet his basic needs because of his tax burden, isn't that good enough?

        If I make $50,000 and pay $1,000 taxes, it's no skin off my nose if someone making $5 million has to pay "only" $50,000.
        And if the government gets enough funding, where's the problem?

        • The problem is that you're not paying 2% of your income, as you suggest. You're paying 22%. Which is a lot.

          When the numbers are trivial, as in your example, it doesn't matter very much. But when the numbers are large, as in real life, we need to consider things like affordability. Poor people can't afford to pay as much as rich people. Even when we look at that in percentages, they can't afford as much.

          Also, this entire comment thread should be modded off topic. Including my own comment, for taking th
        • Because you making 50 grand will be paying around 20% (10 grand) minimum in taxes to make your scenario work. Flat taxes have been estimated to require 20% to replace the current progressive tax system. And that is a flat tax. The regressive tax you suggest would be even worse. In your example the 50K earner paid 2% while the 5M earner paid 1%. I think you vastly underestimate how much it costs to run the federal government. The fed running I think a 1T deficit lately. So for 300M people, that is close to a

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by bsolar ( 1176767 )

          Why? Why is the concept of "tax rate" so important in tax policy? If the state collects sufficient taxes to fund its activities, and no taxpayer is unable to meet his basic needs because of his tax burden, isn't that good enough?

          If I make $50,000 and pay $1,000 taxes, it's no skin off my nose if someone making $5 million has to pay "only" $50,000. And if the government gets enough funding, where's the problem?

          Bring that example to the extreme with a theoretical 90% taxation rate: the 50K earner would be left with 5K, the 5M earner would be left with 500K. You cannot realistically survive with 5K, but you definitely can with 500K.

          Basically progressive taxation is usually promoted because higher earners are less affected from higher tax rates compared to low earners. A much higher percentage of a high income is effectively disposable compared to a low income, so the high income can support a larger tax percentage.

          • You can tax on the spending side, progressively, by setting different tax rates on goods depending on how "staple" they are. Many States/localities already do this with sales tax. Where I live, there are several different categories/rates.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by bsolar ( 1176767 )

              You can tax on the spending side, progressively, by setting different tax rates on goods depending on how "staple" they are. Many States/localities already do this with sales tax. Where I live, there are several different categories/rates.

              Yes, that's typically done in general. Either with sales tax or VAT there are typically always exemptions or significantly lower rates for essential goods and there can be much higher rates for "luxury" goods.

              The point is that progressive taxation is promoted for a reason and whether it's a consumption tax or an income tax, trying to make it progressive it's considered a good idea.

        • The problem is the government will never have enough funding. Every dollar they take in, they'll spend more. They'll support wars and genocide on the other side of the planet. They'll subsidize industries that help big corporations, public funding for private profits.

          Some examples:

          • Billions wasted on failed military equipment projects
          • Excessive administrative overhead and bureaucratic redundancies
          • Corporate bailouts for mismanaged companies
          • No-bid contracts to politically connected businesses
          • Wasteful su

          • You know we have DOGE to thank for putting those talking points to bed. First it was $2T in savings from all those bad things (without specifics I might add, just like your list), then it was $1T then last week it was $150B and today I just read that number isn't even real, in the end the savings will be under $100B.

            So we gave a brand new agency hundreds of millions, if not billions to find these things Republicans have told us about for decades despite the existence of several layers of accountability, In

    • >"We should replace the Income Tax (plus AMT, death tax, and similar) with a National Retail Sales Tax."

      I couldn't agree more. It could be done through a VAT or tariffs, or a combination of both. Oh well, I doubt it will ever happen.

      • Exactly, VAT is still a consumption tax.

        Income tax as a way to fund the government is not bad but not great either, there are better systems we can implement but National Retail Tax isn't one of them, it also has a lot of holes to plug, just different ones.

        Of course in my opinion they all pale in comparison to the one-true-tax, the Land Value Tax.

    • Sales tax is inherently regressive because the poor wind up spending a higher percentage of their income on taxes on necessities.

      The only way to fix this is by forcing them to keep records of such purchases (or forcing the submission of information on all purchases to the IRS or a related body, which is even worse) and then giving them a refund. But this only grossly increases the amount of paperwork which has to be done, which is why we use a graduated tax system instead.

      If your tax plan doesn't a) not mak

  • The irony of talking to that seasoned red-blooded American standing in a home they hold the title and deed on outright about “free” tax software they are forced to use in order to pay the taxes on the land underneath the home. Taxes they will never be “free” from. Ever.

    Not to mention the American Government is still an entity that can relieve “free”owners of their land at any time for their own use. Legally.

    (This ain’t a fuckin’ new problem either. Just ask

  • All those tax accountants who charge for filing tax returns need put out of business, I suppose.

    I mean, no one should ever have to pay ever. True Freedumb.

    The other thing s that if there is a mistake in my paid for tax service, they are responsible.

  • I agree that it's stupid that we pay an outside company to calculate how much we owe to the government, and then we submit it to the government (who has already calculated it) to see if we are right. That's .... asinine.

    But the fsf needs to update their bitching. The text is basically complaining that we can't file for free, but we can now. In fact, the fsf complains that "... unfortunately does require users to hand over their freedom when filing taxes."

    What the fuck does "handing over our freedom" mean

    • What the fuck does "handing over our freedom" mean, specifically? You're already giving the government your financial info and your credentials, what ELSE is there?

      The freedom to determine what software executes on your computer. FSF has campaigned against requiring proprietary script in the browser (see "The JavaScript Trap" [gnu.org]), something that these third-party identification services have tended to require.

      • Yeah, but you've chosen to use TurboTax instead of paper filing, or an accountant, or whatever other option. You can run your browser in a sandbox.

        Let's not pretend that browsing the web pretty much guarantees running proprietary scripts, and it doesn't matter.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tepples ( 727027 )

          Let's not pretend that browsing the web pretty much guarantees running proprietary scripts, and it doesn't matter.

          The GNU project publishes LibreJS [gnu.org], an extension for Firefox designed to perform exactly such pretending. It's like NoScript except it allows scripts that it can programmatically determine are distributed under a free software license. This includes, in the case of WebAssembly or minified JS, a link to original source code.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      "I agree that it's stupid that we pay an outside company to calculate how much we owe to the government, and then we submit it to the government (who has already calculated it) to see if we are right."

      It's important to remember that the government does not have all the information to calculate it and so it is usually wrong. Also anytime something is ambiguous or unknown the government defaults to the assumption which maximizes collection rather than minimizes tax burden, splitting the doubt, or looking at h

    • I'm just trying to figure out how the option of paying a company to help file your taxes (because paper is still an option) means handing over one's freedom. That's just a stupid thing to say. Am I entering into a period of indentured servitude with Intuit? No. Am I being incarcerated? No. Have I lost any freedom? Not that I can see.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      Income taxes anyway. Tariffs and sales taxes you agree to with the price.

  • The IRS has no business having access to anything but the final completed state of my taxes. Having access to earlier drafts and revision history seriously violates the financial and general privacy of citizens.

  • The average person, and certainly the average politician, has no idea what "free-as-in-freedom" means. I'm not sure how sure *I* am that I know what it means, or at least, why it has this label. If the FSF wants to get traction, they'll have to get better at marketing, using terms that regular people can understand.

  • The government already has it. How do you think they check your filings? So, why not just give We The People that software to use?

  • Ways to file for free [irs.gov] (as in "free from cost")

    Free File: For adjusted Gross Income $84,000 or less; yes, "You choose from IRS partner tax software companies", so they'll have your financial information. Just like every other company in the world.

    Direct File: "Taxpayers in 25 states can file their federal taxes directly with the IRS."

    IRS-certified volunteers – If you earn $67,000 or less, have a disability, are 60 years or older or need language support.

    Paper forms - You can file with paper forms and

Slashdot Top Deals

Nothing is faster than the speed of light ... To prove this to yourself, try opening the refrigerator door before the light comes on.

Close