Seriously, yet another example of the government meddling in the market causing problems, and most noteably, fraud.

Costly fraud and error reported in home buyers' tax program

Yeah, no one could have seen this one coming. The government writes a hand-out "stimulus" program (in spite of the fact that this program is not new, remember that the ARRA wiped out the repayment requirement, so it became a hand-out rather than an interest-free loan) and major fraud ensues, largely due to the fact that they ignored the recommendations of the Inspector General's Office prior to implementing the program.

Some highlights:

Quote:

Hundreds of millions of dollars may have been paid to people who fraudulently or mistakenly took advantage of a lucrative tax credit for first-time home buyers, including some who were employees of the Internal Revenue Service

Fraud by IRS employees. Who would have thought that? **cough**Geithner**cough**

Quote:

The report found that more than 19,300 people claimed a total of $139 million on their 2008 tax returns before purchasing a home even though the law requires the purchase to take place first

Quote:

580 taxpayers under age 18 -- including some 4-year-olds -- claimed $4 million, presumably so their parents could dodge the income limitations imposed by the program.

Quote:

George went on to criticize the IRS for not requiring buyers to attach documents that verify when they purchased their homes, something his office has been advocating. The IRS's deputy commissioner for services and enforcement, Linda E. Stiff, said the agency does not have the ability to accept such documents electronically, nor does it have the legal authority to disallow a claim if the documents are not attached, which would make such a requirement moot.

Now there is a push going on to extend this program, and this report by the Treasury Inspector General is seemingly an irritation to the people who want to continue the program. An interesting fact about this program is that 60% of the people who have taken advantage of it have an adjusted gross income of less than $50,000. I'm currently trying to dig up the statistics on the values of homes purchased using this program, but it reeks of the same problem with the other programs which got us to where we are now with the high rate of defaults: let's get people get into mortgages who would otherwise not qualify, and who have limited finances to afford actual ownership responsibilities.

Also, from the actual Audit by the Inspector General:

Quote:

Despite recommendations made in our November 25, 2008, memorandum as part of a prior audit, the IRS did not use information provided on the First-Time Homebuyer Credit (Form 5405) to verify eligibility requirements to claim the Credit and did not require taxpayers to provide documentation to substantiate the purchase of a home.

Quote:

In addition, taxpayers who appear not to be first-time homebuyers (based on their prior tax return information) were claiming the Credit.

Better than starting a war in Iraq though, and what about a out what Bush didwhen he___________?

When can we expect this IG to be fired or "resign".


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart

I don't think it's ALL bad, Pig...frankly, this is a great way to "red-flag" habitual tax evaders and abusers. The IRS will come down on them like a swarm of locusts, and find all their other mischiefs to also nail them on.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:I don't think it's ALL bad, Pig...frankly, this is a great way to "red-flag" habitual tax evaders and abusers. The IRS will come down on them like a swarm of locusts, and find all their other mischiefs to also nail them on.

Ya, unless they work in Washington.

people lie and cheat on their taxes every year. hopefully they can catch most of them and give them a nice big penelaty.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography

sndsgood wrote:people lie and cheat on their taxes every year. hopefully they can catch most of them and give them a nice big penelaty.

While this is true, I have two things to say about it:

1) Why keep creating things like this which just open the door to more cheating?

2) They are trying to extend this program, and are currently unwilling to force the IRS to verify eligibility, so it's just paving the way for continued abuse.

The only reason you've been exposed to this "news" is because it furthers your handlers' agenda. Another tempest in a teapot designed to make your obedient self froth at the mouth and wave a flaming stick with the mob. Reasonably now...how could you have any earthly IDEA how much actual tax fraud occurs, or if this is even unusual with a new program, or a thousand other questions neither of us even knows how to ask...'cause we just ain't tax experts. To be able to present this situation as alarming requires such an expert perspective, with actual comparative data: a whole helluva lot more than you'll find on rightie-sites. To avoid or overlook that needed perspective soils mightily your point, and your objectivity.

As for the alleged "preponderance of evidence" you've been describing in your posts...it's quickly becoming preposterous. Pre-Ponderous even.

I'd think you might consider choosing your battles more carefully, rather than shooting wildly at every "news item" you are urged on to (with the help of your doctrine doctors). It's just friendly advice

That sure sounds like a threat to me. Almost as if he's trying to say that 'beck told you to say that'


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart

Threat, oh man...please, I find it all comical, not serious, certainly not threatening.

That's my point, it goes clowny...when this kind of thing goes over the top like this, it loses relevance. It jumps the shark. No matter where it's coming from.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:The only reason you've been exposed to this "news" is because it furthers your handlers' agenda. Another tempest in a teapot designed to make your obedient self froth at the mouth and wave a flaming stick with the mob. Reasonably now...how could you have any earthly IDEA how much actual tax fraud occurs, or if this is even unusual with a new program, or a thousand other questions neither of us even knows how to ask...'cause we just ain't tax experts. To be able to present this situation as alarming requires such an expert perspective, with actual comparative data: a whole helluva lot more than you'll find on rightie-sites.

Aw, come on now, Bill. I'm starting to question my original assumptions about you as being a very reasonable and intelligent thinker. Did you look at the sources I posted? One of them was the actual report from the Treasury Inspector General, which was where the facts for the article I quoted were from. Are you going to tell me that the Treasury Inspector General is part of the "ring-wing extremist" group?

You don't have to be an expert to read the report from the people who are experts, and who are tasked with the very job of holding the departments accountable, and see that there are major problems. I will also point out again that there was a major loophole which was exposed almost a year ago by the IG, but the IRS refused to do anything about it, and now we have seen the loophole being abused, while Congress wants to extend the program without making the necessary changes to avoid further fraud.

Also, if you truly feel that the average American is not in any way capeable of being able to comprehend things as this, because we aren't experts, you have a mindset that is very dangerous. You are willing to trust without question the people who are charged with properly managing the affairs of our country. These people work for us. It is a founding principle of this country, that our government is not one of a ruling class, but one of the people, which is held accountable to the people. Somehow that entire premise is being diluted over and over again, to the point that most people are afraid of the government in one form or another.

Average American? Hang on there, Pig...I'm simply stating my credentials as to my knowledge about such matters. Don't you dare try to make me a snob! My "mindset" is that of a pragmatist and a compromise finder. If that's now "dangerous", well...the more you talk, the more you prove my point about extremism and how it turns people off.

No, my comments were those any professional would make, and I reiterate...with my knowledge, I am not qualified to take the incomplete evidence presented here and reach any sweeping conclusion as to its seriousness. There is no comparo of empirical data. Tax fraud, glitches in new programs and the like are nothing new. You simply have not presented sufficient evidence to prove how "exceptional" this instance is. I fear you were all too happy to jump on this inflammatorily presented info, without intellectually demanding sufficient evidence to effectively support the hypothesis under the harsh light of cross examination. Kind of like the Global Warming set, you apparently just don't NEED all the data...what you've been fed supports your premise, so that's just enough. Unfortunately, it's just not enough to swing anyone your way who has enough distance from the far right to consider all points of view.

This is what I am talking about. You keep getting hand-fed these tiny tidbits masquerading as alleged smoking guns. They polarize more than educate. I deem this current finding unsupportable by the minimal data presented.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, October 26, 2009 10:46 PM

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:Average American? Hang on there, Pig...I'm simply stating my credentials as to my knowledge about such matters. Don't you dare try to make me a snob! My "mindset" is that of a pragmatist and a compromise finder. If that's now "dangerous", well...the more you talk, the more you prove my point about extremism and how it turns people off.

You missed the point. I wasn't accusing you of being a snob. I was pointing out that it's dangerous to be on the side of trusting too much that you don't understand it, so you'll leave it to someone else.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:You simply have not presented sufficient evidence to prove how "exceptional" this instance is.

Why does this have to be exceptional to be a problem? It's a current event. They are currently trying to extend this program, and without fixing it's problems. How is there anything wrong with showing the problem with a program that they want to spend more money on? How is it extreme to point out the fact that the Inspector General has now twice audited this program and found problems, which they haven't addressed, and it has now cost hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud?

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:This is what I am talking about. You keep getting hand-fed these tiny tidbits masquerading as alleged smoking guns. They polarize more than educate. I deem this current finding unsupportable by the minimal data presented.

At the risk of repetition, are you seriously telling me that posting a government report that exposes fraud in a particular program, is a polarizing action? Are you seriously saying that this doesn't serve to educate people? And if you are going to lump this into my so-called Obama-bashing extremist posting, would you go back and read through this thread again and show me where I pointed out any particular person or group (other than the generic "government") as being responsible for this problem, and why they should be slammed for it? It's not there, save a small sarcastic reference to the person in charge of the IRS being a tax cheat. This was purely about the premise of creating these government programs to try and manipulate the economy, and especially the same part of the economy that has caused massive problems with previous manipulation.

This is what I mean when I say you have a preconception of what my posts will be about, so you read my words and in your mind they somehow fit into what you think the motive is.

I trust no one too much, my good man. I fear I cannot say the same for you. I am definitely implying you may be putting too much trust into snippets being provided by policy-dogmatists.

"Exceptional" would make the problem worthy of mentioning at all, much less debating. If it's not exceptional, if it can be explained as nothing out of the ordinary...then no harm, no foul, and especially...no debate. Nothing to see here. Business as usual. How much do you think you REALLY know about the subject?

I am telling you that this report was hand-picked and fed to your all-too-willing self. It did not come from objective, independent research. I'm sorry, but...I visualize a bunch of blind, flightless bird hatchlings with their mouths wide open, slurping down the regurgitated goo mom brings up after eating bugs. It's just the visual I get.

But indulge me. How was your attention called to this particular report? I mean, i am willing to dismiss the fact that it's in the Washington Post, which swings hard right. Just which of the rightie-sites called your attention to it?




Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Monday, October 26, 2009 10:42 PM

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:I trust no one too much, my good man. I fear I cannot say the same for you. I am definitely implying you may be putting too much trust into snippets being provided by policy-dogmatists.

Again, you're focusing too much on what I do, rather than simply the subject of the thread. I read and research a ton, and only post about 10-20% of the info I find, because a lot of it can be written off as biased commentary. However a large portion of what I read is the actual direct info from government websites, and the actual text of bills when available.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:"Exceptional" would make the problem worthy of mentioning at all, much less debating. If it's not exceptional, if it can be explained as nothing out of the ordinary...Business as usual.

See, this is aparently where you and I differ a lot. I have a very big problem with being able to dismiss hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud as simply "business as usual" and unworthly of discussion or outrage. Frankly, the fact that this is a common occurance is all the more reason to bring attention to it when it involves something being currently debated in Congress. People need to be telling their Senators and Representatives that they are sick of this being business as usual, and that the current item they are debating must be amended to require stricter reporting so as to close these gaps. Quite frankly, I don't see my life as too busy to know what the hell is going on in my government whenever possible, particularly when we are in a horrible recession and our government keeps writing bill after bill throwing money around that we don't have.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:It did not come from objective, independent research.

Just out of curiosity, who would you pick to be a better source than the Treasury Inspector General to research and report on something like this? This report wasn't done by a news agency. It wasn't done by an activist group. It was done by an office of the government designed to hold a department accountable. I'm sorry, but it seems you just keep missing this point.

Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:But indulge me. How was your attention called to this particular report?

It was an article in the Washington Post. I found it while clicking through their website as I do on a regular basis. Once I read the article, I found the actual report that had been filed by the Inspector General, which I included in my first post. I ask you again, did you actually click the links and see what they were, or did you make the assumption that I simply posted a couple of right-wing articles as my sources?

I hope you aren't offended by me replying without quotes. I find it easier to just run with the ball...constantly stopping to mark the field is tedious.

You still fail to prove why this is any more worthy of outrage than any of the other abuses that I suspect are just as widespread. My opinion on that is at least as good as yours, for both are pure conjecture until one of us can drill down through many years of records we aren't privy to anyway. I say that you choosing this one abuse to rage on is because it fits your needs. Not because it's an outrage presented in a non-partisan fashion.

It's not the Treasury Inspector General I question. Duh! It's how you were presented with the information. Please don't descend into accusations of incomplete attention on my part. I look, and I consider the source. You apparently do one of those two things. You can wave your one report around like some trophy, but I still say...it is but one report. No context. No comparos. It likely came to you from a biased source. Thus, no perspective. There may be dozens more like it. Hundreds. Thousands. Can you tell me how many there are? How this compares? If you can, you've not yet, and that's the position I am working from.

Perhaps you live in an impression that the Tax Code is this regal, unbroken law of the land. I can't comment as to your exposure to it, but I can comment on mine...extensive. This Post article illustrates but one instance. EVERYONE is cheating. To different degrees. You cheat too. I can assure it. No one comes 100% clean on their returns, and the system has additional revenue streams built into it to buttress these losses. It's a chess game between the IRS, the public, and the CPA's. Any other notion is ludicrous.

By the by...had a look at the TIGTA website you got that report from. So far, through three quarters of 2009, they've released to the public 87 such reports. That suggests an annualized rate of almost 120 reports. In a four-year term, that would be almost 500 reports. Of course, we don't know if there are even more reports filed that have not been cleared for public dissemination. But hundreds is a big enough number:

Treasury Reports 2009

You see, this is that arm of the government's sole reason for being...oversight of the tax system, and suggestion and implementation of corrective measures. The tax code is huge, and an ever-changing beast.

So, now with some proper perspective added, the one report you found, and the right-leaning news story in the right-heavy Post, seem lesser by comparison. See how that works?




Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, October 27, 2009 12:13 AM

After perusing this Washington Right...I mean Post, article again, I was entertained by two facts:

1. This Tax Credit Act enjoys bipartisan support on Capital Hill, so Republicans are partially responsible for its perpetuation. Kind of blows the steam out of disparaging the current Democratic-majority government for it.
2. The Act was initiated in April of 2008...yes, during the Bush administration. As such, it becomes an even less effective tool to cast derision at the current administration and Congress. In closing, the article even notes: The Obama administration has not taken a position on extending the tax credit.

Yep. I'm thoroughly convinced now. It is indeed business as usual, the gaps will be fixed, and we can wait for hundreds more to be found in the coming years. Nothing to see here, folks. Move along!

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

sndsgood wrote:people lie and cheat on their taxes every year. hopefully they can catch most of them and give them a nice big penelaty.

While this is true, I have two things to say about it:

1) Why keep creating things like this which just open the door to more cheating?

2) They are trying to extend this program, and are currently unwilling to force the IRS to verify eligibility, so it's just paving the way for continued abuse.

any rule, any law that is written, anything done to help someone will always result in someone finding a loophole or way around or just blatantly ingore the rules. cheaters are out there no matter what you do.

as to the second matter i dont know a specific answer to that one. you'd really have to dig into the whole numbers game and see what percentage is legitimate versus what is false and see if the risk is worth it. im sure theres some magic number that is acceptable. the goverment has millions or laws that arn't followed thru on. this one is no diffrent really. its just the same thing with a diffrent name on top. goverment doesnt real have a great track record of going back and fixing things that are wrong, or enforcing what is allready on the books, they just prefer to make up new laws to add on top of the old laws to make things more difficult, more time consuming, and more expensive.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography

Yes, and the senate health bill that came out of committee has "bipartisan support" because the solitery Olympia snowe said ok.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:And if you are going to lump this into my so-called Obama-bashing extremist posting, would you go back and read through this thread again and show me where I pointed out any particular person or group (other than the generic "government") as being responsible for this problem, and why they should be slammed for it?

Bill Hahn wrote:After perusing this Washington Right...I mean Post, article again, I was entertained by two facts:

1. This Tax Credit Act enjoys bipartisan support on Capital Hill, so Republicans are partially responsible for its perpetuation. Kind of blows the steam out of disparaging the current Democratic-majority government for it.
2. The Act was initiated in April of 2008...yes, during the Bush administration. As such, it becomes an even less effective tool to cast derision at the current administration and Congress. In closing, the article even notes: The Obama administration has not taken a position on extending the tax credit.

Sorry Bill, but you just showed that you haven't really been reading what I posted with any kind of open mind. You have made an assumption about my point, and your mind tried to fit my words into that preconception. I have not said anywhere in this thread anything about Obama or the Democrats. I spoke about the bill, and the facts.

However, if you want to go there, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 was entirely a Democrat bill. Bush and many of the Republicans in Congress who went along with it were long under the assumption by this time that by playing the "me too" game was going to gain them seats in the 2008 election, but that's a topic for another discussion entirely. It's also worth noting that the 2008 bill required the repayment of the credit, while the ARRA in January removed that requirement. The point of this thread was not who is supporting extending it, or who supported it to begin with, but that it's got problems they have refused to fix, and it shouldn't be extended without these fixes.

As for your point about this being just one of almost 90 reports, take a look at the reports list again, and see how many of them are regarding problems like this. If I remember correctly, there were only two or three, and the rest were basic reports. Some of them are even positives, showing things that are working. This is the only one since the beginning of the year which really shows any glaring problem.

Jason, with regard to there being a magic number of fraud that's acceptable, I can see when something is in the planning stage, that they assume a certain risk like that, but once a problem is uncovered, there is no reason to not fix it. Also, this problem was brought up in a report last November, but was ignored. While I have issues with the whole program in it's current form, my point here is that while they are debating on extending it, they are still not fixing the problem, in spite of the fact that they have a clear means to do so.

Any time you protest being unfairly characterized by accusations of "bias", my only reply can be...perhaps you are too blinded by bias to comprehend it. You seem insulated enough from moderate thought that you may actually perceive yourself as moderate. You're not, my man You've been characterized as a right-wing cheerleader and misinformation peddler due to material you post here. Again, I ask you...if that hurts to hear, consider why it hurts, I'm just the messenger who's being candid enough to point it out. Like it our not, it's the lens through which your posts and threads will be viewed. I just am adding some equality to the information presented. The proverbial "other side of the coin," if you will.

As to the 120 reports a year...I highly disagree with your insistence that "your" report (as spooned to you by the Post) is the only one that matters. By your own admission, now that you've been presented with a more complete picture, several others are at least as significant. I can find still more reports over the last several years, and even this year, that show troubling revenue loopholes that are being addressed and alleviated. Again...that's the sole purpose of this agency, it's what they exist for. That's also my sole point...that showing this is but one instance of many...is key to understanding its relative importance.

Bear in mind, this is not some Blue Ribbon Panel assembled to investigate one serious instance of fraud. I know you know that, but consider: if there were no problems, this agency would not even exist. Taken yet another way...the vary fact that this agency NEEDS to exist is BECAUSE there is a constant progression of issues and problems. Thus, your favorite report does indeed pale when shown in the harsh light of this counterpoint. It's a constant that these issues happen. Sure, these instances are serious, but the oversight is there, the problems get found and corrected. My point is, what's the use in even going off about something that has been, is currently, and will continue to be an ongoing constant?

So, the point I am making, and that you need to address to stay on target, is that this thread is yet another tempest in a teapot. You won't make a difference, or encourage good debate, if you keep bringing up inane (as in the case of the OBAMA HATE VID) or useless-without-context (as in this one) topics. You just need better material!

By the way, as I've noted recently (maybe YOU aren't fully reading MY posts, lol!) I do read everything you say, and the items you post. You may not get that impression, for I may dismiss portions of your posts as, well...dismissible, and not even address them. I do that to save space and enhance clarity. Please don't confuse my prioritization of your words with my comprehension of your words. I retain VERY well


Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Tuesday, October 27, 2009 1:57 PM

Obviously a reasonable discussion here with you is futile. I pointed out twice now that my original post had nothing to do with any particular group of people, but you keep acting as though I posted this as an attack on Obama and the current Democrats. I humored you for a minute, when I said "However, if you want to go there...", but it flew over your head. You are obviously unable to read my posts objectively, as you alluded to with your statement that I'm " characterized as a right-wing cheerleader and misinformation peddler". So in other words, you read anything I post and your mind makes it fit into that mold, just as I stated earlier in the thread. For this reason, it's obvious that you and I can not have an objective conversation. While I will post information, you keep going back to my bias, rather than make rational points on the subject of the thread. You're not playing the other side of the coin, you're attacking the messenger, rather than discussing the message. That is your failure, not mine.

That being said, I'll respond to a little part of your latest post, and be done here. Feel free to come back and get the last word, and take pride in it. LOL.

You said that you highly disagree that my report is the only one that matters. I didn't say it's the only one that matters, I said it's the only one that really points out a major problem like this. The other reports were mostly not of problems, and the one or two others that were about problem issues were not at the same severity level. Sorry, but either your reading comprehension is not what you claim, or you're purposely trying to twist my words, but you're getting a lot wrong here with regards to what I've said.

Whine if you must about how offended you are by such counterpoint. I suppose it is easier to just devolve to an attack on the messenger than actually address his message.

Your chosen report can now be viewed in the correct context I've provided...that it is just one of many, from an agency that exists for one sole purpose...to generate such reports and provide oversight and corrective measures. It is thus not an outrage, but business as usual.

Nothing else you say can alter this fact, for now all sides are presented. I need do nothing more.