Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
^ Neither the IRS nor the pay day loans companies are under a duty to act as fiduciaries.
As ChessieMom stated, the IRS cannot know your tax liability until you file. My tax liability varies greatly each year, and only I can determine how much to send to the IRS. If I choose to give them an interest free loan, that is solely my responsibility.
The borrower with a pay day loan company makes a choice to take that loan and pay that interest. In this situation, the IRS is the borrower, and it does not get such a choice.
It is apples and apples in the sense that in both cases, Joe Sixpack is getting ripped off by unscrupulous borrowing terms. In the case of the IRS refunds, Joe Sixpack is giving an interest-free loan to the federal gov't. It still represents an interest free-loan whether the refund check is over 45 days late or not. The money is being withheld over time, but not actually due until April 15. It's an interest free loan. A rip-off by the government.
The distinction between the on-time refund and 45-day late refund is arbitrary. Both are loans from taxpayer to government. Interest should be paid in both cases.
In the case of the payday loan operations, they are also giving unscrupulous loan terms, and as with withholding, it's entirely on a voluntary basis.
In both cases, the offending parties are failing to act as 'fiduciaries' so to speak. The payday loan shops make no claim of being fiduciaries, but the federal gov't is inherently supposed to be a 'fiduciary' (so to speak). But they are not; if they were they'd be paying massive fines if not going to jail.
It is apples and apples in the sense that in both cases, Joe Sixpack is getting ripped off by unscrupulous borrowing terms. In the case of the IRS refunds, Joe Sixpack is giving an interest-free loan to the federal gov't. It still represents an interest free-loan whether the refund check is over 45 days late or not. The money is being withheld over time, but not actually due until April 15. It's an interest free loan. A rip-off by the government.
The distinction between the on-time refund and 45-day late refund is arbitrary. Both are loans from taxpayer to government. Interest should be paid in both cases.
In the case of the payday loan operations, they are also giving unscrupulous loan terms, and as with withholding, it's entirely on a voluntary basis.
In both cases, the offending parties are failing to act as 'fiduciaries' so to speak. The payday loan shops make no claim of being fiduciaries, but the federal gov't is inherently supposed to be a 'fiduciary' (so to speak). But they are not; if they were they'd be paying massive fines if not going to jail.
Nope. The IRS made no such loan agreement with Joe Sixpack. Apples and oranges.
Last edited by ChessieMom; 08-01-2019 at 08:43 AM..
It is apples and apples in the sense that in both cases, Joe Sixpack is getting ripped off by unscrupulous borrowing terms. In the case of the IRS refunds, Joe Sixpack is giving an interest-free loan to the federal gov't. It still represents an interest free-loan whether the refund check is over 45 days late or not. The money is being withheld over time, but not actually due until April 15. It's an interest free loan. A rip-off by the government.
Money is not due April 15, it is due throughout the year. Withholding accomplishes that and mitigates the issue of people spending their cash without adequately providing for what they will owe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t
In the case of the payday loan operations, they are also giving unscrupulous loan terms, and as with withholding, it's entirely on a voluntary basis.
Withholding is not voluntary, nor should it be (see above).
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis t
In both cases, the offending parties are failing to act as 'fiduciaries' so to speak. The payday loan shops make no claim of being fiduciaries, but the federal gov't is inherently supposed to be a 'fiduciary' (so to speak). But they are not; if they were they'd be paying massive fines if not going to jail.
In neither case is there, or should there be, a fiduciary duty.
The payday lender is in business to make money, within the bounds of the law, off of consumer who choose to use their service. The consumer has the choice whether or not to use their service.
The government has laws that require the payment of tax and has enacted laws that facilitate this payment through withholding. Remember the outcry back in January and February when people were finding out that their withholding wasn’t sufficient to cover their tax liability for the year and give them a refund? For whatever reason, people generally want the tax system structured that way.
If they don’t, they’re free to change their withholding to obviate the issue (except as noted above for those taxpayers who are subject to supplemental income withholding, they have a legitimate gripe).
^ Neither the IRS nor the pay day loans companies are under a duty to act as fiduciaries.
As ChessieMom stated, the IRS cannot know your tax liability until you file. My tax liability varies greatly each year, and only I can determine how much to send to the IRS. If I choose to give them an interest free loan, that is solely my responsibility.
The borrower with a pay day loan company makes a choice to take that loan and pay that interest. In this situation, the IRS is the borrower, and it does not get such a choice.
Technically, no. But the federal government is supposed to be looking out for the interests of citizens and taxpayers. As Lincoln said, 'for the people.'
I'm truly surprised that so many people think it's fine for the government to take advantage of taxpayers lack of financial savvy. Raise 'em up stupid in public education, then take advantage of their stupidity when they get into the working world--heck of a racket.
Technically, no. But the federal government is supposed to be looking out for the interests of citizens and taxpayers. As Lincoln said, 'for the people.'
I'm truly surprised that so many people think it's fine for the government to take advantage of taxpayers lack of financial savvy. Raise 'em up stupid in public education, then take advantage of their stupidity when they get into the working world--heck of a racket.
So you think the govt takes advantage of a tax payers financial savvy and should pay them for their stupidity?
I think the government should do less to protect the stupid from stupidity ..we need to thin the herd . My hair dryer says do not use in water ...nuff said
Money is not due April 15, it is due throughout the year. Withholding accomplishes that and mitigates the issue of people spending their cash without adequately providing for what they will owe.
Withholding is not voluntary, nor should it be (see above).
The level of withholding is indeed voluntary; that was the primary point of most of your allies in this thread. You can adjust your withholding such that you get little or no refund, and thus not give an interest free loan to the IRS, which translates to money out of your pocket.
No, that's not what I said. Read again, more carefully.
I can read just fine and that is what’s implied
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
