IRS Wants Your Bank Statements

 

How do you fund a $3.5 trillion budget? The honest answer is, you don’t. Joe Biden knows this, but he thinks he can find some additional revenue by snooping through your bank statements.

As part of Biden’s The American Families Plan (A plan for families? How nice) there would be a requirement for banks to provide more information about your account to the IRS:

The President’s proposal leverages the information that financial institutions already know about the accounts that they house. Financial institutions would add information about total account outflows and inflows to existing reporting on bank accounts. Importantly, there are no added requirements for taxpayers. The IRS will be able to deploy this new information to better target enforcement activities, increasing scrutiny of wealthy evaders and decreasing the likelihood that fully compliant taxpayers will be subject to costly audits.

Sure, this might be what our Founding Fathers would have called an unreasonable search but it will happen with “no added requirements” to you, the taxpayer. What they would be asking from the banks is information about any transaction, incoming or outgoing, of $600 or more. As we have been told over and over again, the rich do not pay their fair share (whatever that means). Now we know that anyone who is dealing with sums in the $600 range is obviously some rich fat cat looking to ripoff the IRS.

There are more than a few issues here. The first is, what right does the government have to gather all of that information without a warrant? And what else might that data get used for? So, constitutionality could be a potential issue. Then there is pure logistics: This is a huge reporting burden on banks and, no doubt, smaller ones couldn’t afford to do it.

While this is touted as a way to get better voluntary compliance, the data would also be used for audits. The Left loves to play up class warfare, but they also know that truly rich individuals can afford better accountants and lawyers than the government can. Going after them involves cost and potential risk. However, with a $600 threshold, plenty of not-so-rich people could get called in for audits. Without the means to fight, many smaller taxpayers will pay what they’re told regardless of the merit because they can’t afford to put up a defense and don’t want to risk any further penalties. In other words, the IRS will pressure them into surrendering . . . but it is all about American Families.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 34 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    The government wants to be have full visibility of everyone, all the time, so they can then control us. 

    • #1
  2. Blondie Thatcher
    Blondie
    @Blondie

    I need to buy some more Mason jars and a new shovel. 

    • #2
  3. Dave of Barsham Member
    Dave of Barsham
    @LesserSonofBarsham

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The government wants to be have full visibility of everyone, all the time, so they can then control us.

    That’s the whole thing isn’t it? Power. It’ll start with just the numbers and soon after what those numbers were used for (where, when what).  They’ve been toying with the idea for a while in the “cashless” society thing. Nothing hidden, everything spread out for the government to see…and tax.

    • #3
  4. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    I don’t trust them at all with any initiative. 

    Ive been audited and it was an enriching experience for me because I learned all the legal tax deductions I wasn’t making. 
    The individuals working for the IRS I’ve encountered are fine people. I liked our auditor. 
    We were ultimately charged 3,000 extra over some technicality but it was clearly ( to me) a face-saving move. And after that I’ve never been audited again in 12 years.

     

    This is a shortcut. They can have the information in real time, without a formal demand. 

    So, when they say ‘costly unnecessary’ audits, maybe that’s because they are incompetent to detect fraud and are catching too many fish (like me) to throw back.

     

    • #4
  5. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    That’s step one.  

    Next will be digitization of the currency.   Just think of the savings from not having to print currency and mint coins! And “there won’t be any added requirements to the taxpayer.”

     

    • #5
  6. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    That’s step one.

    Next will be digitization of the currency. Just think of the savings from not having to print currency and mint coins! And “there won’t be any added requirements to the taxpayer.”

     

    It’s Brave New World, 1984, Idiocracy, Alice in Wonderland and Roshoman all at once!

    I’m just trying to stay(?) sane.

    • #6
  7. Seawriter Contributor
    Seawriter
    @Seawriter

    This is beginning to sound like a Mack Reynolds novel written in the 1950s set in the 2020s.

    • #7
  8. RushBabe49 Thatcher
    RushBabe49
    @RushBabe49

    Unreasonable Search and Seizure, sue immediately if enacted.  Class-action lawsuit, made up of a class including each American citizen with a bank account.

    • #8
  9. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    The Biden / Harris / Whomever administration sure isn’t doing anything to disprove the “conspiracy theorists ” claiming we are facing a totalitarian dictatorship. 

    • #9
  10. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The government wants to be have full visibility of everyone, all the time, so they can then control us.

    Yup, they may as well put up the telescreen and be done with it.  Facebook is just the first step.

    • #10
  11. James Salerno Coolidge
    James Salerno
    @JamesSalerno

    Time to get out of the banking system. The federal government never had the authority to create corporations anyway. Thanks a lot, Washington and Hamilton.

    • #11
  12. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    James Salerno (View Comment):
    Time to get out of the banking system.

    and that includes “Venmo, PayPal, crypto exchanges” as well. Can’t imagine this gets past Congress but . . .

    • #12
  13. La Tapada Member
    La Tapada
    @LaTapada

    We are going to end up owned by the government, like slaves.

    • #13
  14. DonG (2+2=5. Say it!) Coolidge
    DonG (2+2=5. Say it!)
    @DonG

    Franco (View Comment):
    I don’t trust them at all with any initiative. 

    You don’t trust the people that have had trespassers locked up for 8 months, because the Dems don’t like their politics?  

    I will say that Congress *loves* to raise marginal rates, since it makes tax deductions and loopholes more valuable to sell.

    • #14
  15. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Vance Richards:

    As part of Biden’s The American Families Plan (A plan for families? How nice) there would be a requirement for banks to provide more information about your account to the IRS:

    The President’s proposal leverages the information that financial institutions already know about the accounts that they house. Financial institutions would add information about total account outflows and inflows to existing reporting on bank accounts. Importantly, there are no added requirements for taxpayers. The IRS will be able to deploy this new information to better target enforcement activities, increasing scrutiny of wealthy evaders and decreasing the likelihood that fully compliant taxpayers will be subject to costly audits.

    Sure, this might be what our founding fathers would have called an unreasonable search but it will happen with “no added requirements” to you, the taxpayer. What they would be asking from the banks is information about any transaction, incoming or outgoing, of $600 or more. As we have been told over and over again, the rich do not pay their fair share (whatever that means). Now we know that anyone who is dealing with sums in $600 range is obviously some rich fat cat looking to ripoff the IRS.

    As best I recall, the rationale for the first regulations of this kind were that they were necessary to catch drug lords and other organized crime figures.

    It seems inevitable that sooner or later the justification will be to catch people who fail to report on their tax returns that they earned $10 selling an old dresser in a garage sale…or merely that they cannot prove where some cash deposit came from.

    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    • #15
  16. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    Now that is an investigation I would like to see

    • #16
  17. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    The government wants to be have full visibility of everyone, all the time, so they can then control us.

    I would like to have full visibility of the FBI interactions with the Obama administration regarding their spying and harassment of the Trump administration.

    I would like to have full visibility of the politically-motivated leaks of information from the IRS.

    I would like to have a Roe vs Wade decision to deal with an actual issue of privacy.

    I would like to have full visibility of the relationship between government and GoogleFace.

     

    • #17
  18. Addiction Is A Choice Member
    Addiction Is A Choice
    @AddictionIsAChoice

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    “A poor politician is a poor politician”

     

    • #18
  19. Paul Stinchfield Member
    Paul Stinchfield
    @PaulStinchfield

    Addiction Is A Choice (View Comment):

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    “A poor politician is a poor politician”

    An excellent illustration of the adage that politics attracts the worst people.

    • #19
  20. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Hopefully Congress will not pass this, but if it does, I wouldn’t be shocked if this turns out to be one of those deals where the government spends more money trying to catch tax cheats than they actually recover from them.  Like Minnesota’s estate tax which likely costs the state more than it brings in.

    • #20
  21. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Hopefully Congress will not pass this, but if it does, I wouldn’t be shocked if this turns out to be one of those deals where the government spends more money trying to catch tax cheats than they actually recover from them. Like Minnesota’s estate tax which likely costs the state more than it brings in.

    It’s not very much about the money.  If it was about the money, there are a lot of things they would do differently.   (See Laffer’s Curve for more information.) 

    • #21
  22. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Vance Richards (View Comment):
    Can’t imagine this gets past Congress but . . .

    It’ll sail through with no trouble at all.

    • #22
  23. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Good grief. Who doesn’t make such transfers in and out of accounts rather regularly.

    • #23
  24. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):

    Addiction Is A Choice (View Comment):

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    “A poor politician is a poor politician”

    An excellent illustration of the adage that politics attracts the worst people.

    Every time I see that Silver Star in his lapel I go crazy…

    • #24
  25. J Ro Member
    J Ro
    @JRo

    This is the broke government that withholds $0.01 from my credit union account when I earn $0.03 in interest. 

    • #25
  26. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    If it were a $3.5T budget we could fund it, heck with $3.8T in revenue we could even have a surplus to pay down the debt.

    The problem is that the US spending right now is running at just over $7T right now.  Heck our budget is at $6.9T right now…and the Dems want to add another $1.5T (Infrastructure), $3.5T (General Pork), and likely even more for the Green New Deal.  That jacks up the budget from $6.9T to $7.4T…seems like a drop in the budget so why not spend it?

    Those numbers are all from U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time (usdebtclock.org)

    • #26
  27. Vance Richards Member
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    If it were a $3.5T budget we could fund it, heck with $3.8T in revenue we could even have a surplus to pay down the debt.

    The problem is that the US spending right now is running at just over $7T right now. Heck our budget is at $6.9T right now…and the Dems want to add another $1.5T (Infrastructure), $3.5T (General Pork), and likely even more for the Green New Deal. That jacks up the budget from $6.9T to $7.4T…seems like a drop in the budget so why not spend it?

    Those numbers are all from U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time (usdebtclock.org)

    Yes, this for an extra $3.5 triilion

    • #27
  28. Rightfromthestart Coolidge
    Rightfromthestart
    @Rightfromthestart

    Vance Richards (View Comment):

    Paul Stinchfield (View Comment):
    Meanwhile, the IRS will continue to have zero interest in the “mystery” of how congressmen and senators can become multi-multi-multi-millionaires on their relatively modest salaries.

    Now that is an investigation I would like to see

    Years ago Bill Buckley came up with a questionnaire of 3 questions.

    1 Networth upon entering political office

    2 Salary in political office

    3 Current net worth.

    I guess you could add a fourth ‘Splain , Lucy’

    • #28
  29. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    James Salerno (View Comment):

    Time to get out of the banking system. The federal government never had the authority to create corporations anyway. Thanks a lot, Washington and Hamilton.

    I think when you buy silver and gold now, they have to report it to the government. 

    Anybody that stocked up on silver rounds etc. a few years ago could be way ahead.

    • #29
  30. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    There is no value added by central planning with the tax code. There is no value added by the IRS. Total drag on everything. 

     

    • #30