Yes, it could be better. But an mvp-type launch that does some things well, without trying to achieve everything on day one, would definitely not be a "complete waste". If successful, it's laying the base for the next iterations of functionality.
For a lot of folks, they have one or two W2 forms to enter, and that's it. It's really not that hard. If even a million or so folks get benefit from it to start with, that's great, and we should then build on that.
Let's also remember the context of this project. It's not just an overly-cautious MVP rollout. This project is something that has tremendous resistance against it, for stupid reasons, but the resistance exists nonetheless. Much like ACA benefits, people will only realize it's actually a good idea after they've gotten used to it. Starting small, with a minimal project that is most likely to succeed, is the best way to ensure that the project can continue at larger scale in the future.
The IRS should play try to create an actual MVP. Create an API which allow for efile (which I assume already exists given turbotax) and create an API which allows the download whatever information the IRS has on the tax payer.
Then allow companies or open source software to create whatever value add they want on top of these APIs.
If it gives feature parity with the existing solution, it seems fine as a start. At least we'll presumably be able to file on a .gov now instead of freefilefillableforms.com, which seems like it was chosen to be intentionally sketchy looking.
Edit: actually looks like it doesn't reach parity with the existing free e-file system and only covers the simplest cases, and "the annual cost of a direct-file system could range from $64 million to $249 million" sounds absolutely absurd to me.
The high end estimate would be for 25 million households and would mostly go to customer service [0]. It may well be too high, but "absolutely absurd" doesn't seem fair.
I'm with you; if I still have to fill in the paperwork then quite literally what is the point? I'll continue paying an accountant to do this bullshit. This 'new' system is useless to me.
You're not me. The tax situation covered by this initiative fits my needs perfectly. Fine, there's nothing wrong with you paying. Not all of us have that kind of money.
jacobyoder|2 years ago
Yes, it could be better. But an mvp-type launch that does some things well, without trying to achieve everything on day one, would definitely not be a "complete waste". If successful, it's laying the base for the next iterations of functionality.
For a lot of folks, they have one or two W2 forms to enter, and that's it. It's really not that hard. If even a million or so folks get benefit from it to start with, that's great, and we should then build on that.
nerdponx|2 years ago
GreedClarifies|2 years ago
Then allow companies or open source software to create whatever value add they want on top of these APIs.
That sounds like a minimalist launch.
calamari4065|2 years ago
How does it feel to be the smartest person on the planet?
ndriscoll|2 years ago
Edit: actually looks like it doesn't reach parity with the existing free e-file system and only covers the simplest cases, and "the annual cost of a direct-file system could range from $64 million to $249 million" sounds absolutely absurd to me.
actuallyalys|2 years ago
[0]: https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5788.pdf#page=18
no_wizard|2 years ago
But when a government agency is working in software, suddenly all the best practices are a “waste of tax payer money”
Seems silly
ghaff|2 years ago
AlexandrB|2 years ago
Certainly no worse than the decades of fees taxpayers have been sending to Intuit and co.
lupusreal|2 years ago
themadturk|2 years ago
unethical_ban|2 years ago
You have an accountant, so you're already a minority of citizens. Open your mind.