Re: A little humor...

["Laura J. Walker" <LJW6626@worldnet.att.net>]

Bernie Mooney wrote:

> You don't have a problem with the IRS? I'm not saying they should be abolished
> but they need somebody to answer to. They can do wht they want, when they want
> it. I've read too many horror stories about how people's lives were destroyed
> by them.

I didn't say I DIDN'T have a problem with the IRS.  And yes, I know that they
can get (and have gotten) away with tactics that are totally outrageous --
believe me, I've had my own nightmare with them.  If you are advocating that
they have an 'oversight' group, I believe this already exists -- something that
was established early on in the Clinton administration, and is comprised of
public/private sector business andagencies, congressional reps, and "average"
citizens.

As to what this oversight group has done, I don't know...actually something to
be checking into -- especially given the tax abuses that were raised during
congressional hearings on IRS reform legislation.

> AND it's not the wealthy that usually get screwed, it's the average guy. The
> IRS knows the average guy doesn't have the money and/or clout to fight them. I
> had a friend some years ago who was audited. He made $13,000 that year.  In
> fact, I think the majority of audits are those making middle or below middle
> income.

Don't know if this is the case or not; I've heard and read that 'supposedly' the
IRS does audits according to a procedure: if, for example, your deductions are
over a certain percentage of your income; if your deductions are over a certain
percentage of number of dependants, for example.  How these formulas are or have
been arrived at, I'm not sure, although I have a friend who was an economist
with the Commerce Dept., and she said that any "formulas" used in computing
government benefits, payments, etc. is based on a standard economic calculation
(something similar, I presume, to how COLA is determined).

Laura