The IRS Bleeds
Plus: Ceasefire talks, J.D. Vance as the future of the GOP, the government's war on treehouses, and more...

What will a gutted IRS look like? The Internal Revenue Service—my own personal most-hated government agency—appears to be in hot water this tax season, mostly due to cuts from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
You might recall that in 2021, the IRS was authorized to hire 87,000 new tax collectors and tax-related bureaucrats over the next decade, with an increase in funding sent their way by then-President Joe Biden. And in 2022, this became a political scandal (especially around these parts), because Biden and many of his Democratic bedfellows claimed that audit rates on households making $400,000 or less would not go up, just as some of them were cutting provisions in the actual legislation that tried to codify such assurances.
It's not clear they ever really did hire all those new agents and paper-filers; the IRS remains a little under 100,000 strong, hiring 19,482 total employees in fiscal year 2024. But the agency suffers from retention issues: About 10,000 employees left that same year.
Now there's a new sheriff in town, and some 7,000 IRS employees have been laid off from the agency under DOGE, hitting the "large business and international" division especially hard, per reporting from The New York Times. This means more complex audits might struggle to be completed—or might never start!—while the easiest-to-conduct audits on the poorest taxpayers might be prioritized.
Though all I want in this world is to never be audited by the men with guns, there's a clear issue presented for budget balancers: What will happen to federal revenue if the IRS ceases to do its job? And what will happen when customer service is made even worse? Will we toil to pay the right amount without any help from the government agents who are demanding we do so?
Another odd nugget: Normally, IRS commissioners stay in place even as administrations change. But President Donald Trump decided to dismiss the old commissioner, Daniel Werfel, whose term was not set to expire for another two years, replacing him with the former Missouri congressman Billy Long, an inexperienced figure who has yet to be confirmed by the Senate.
To be clear, I'm a big fan of the Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) proposal, eloquently framed as "blow up the tax code and start over," in which we replace the incomprehensibly complex system with a flat tax. Or the idea of making the tax code so simple that you can file your taxes on a postcard—a common Republican talking point circa 2017. (These types of changes would, to be clear, have to happen at the congressional level.) But what Trump is pursuing appears to be something different altogether: Slash the auditors who might crack down on larger businesses who might not be filing properly, deputize IRS agents to be more involved in immigration enforcement, and make sure the whole agency is helmed by someone with basically no experience. It's possible that DOGE will help the agency modernize its archaic tech, but overall it's not clear what the game plan is.
Israel-Hamas ceasefire talks: Negotiators will meet in Qatar this week in an attempt to end the war that started with the terrorist group Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. A deal cannot be made until the question of what to do about Hamas is resolved. Israel, for its part, says that Hamas must be eradicated within Gaza and can be in no future position of power. "Hamas has said it may be willing to give up civilian governance, but has firmly rejected dissolving its military wing," reports The New York Times. There are reportedly 59 hostages still in Gaza, with 24 believed by the Israeli government to be alive.
"In mid-January, after 15 months of devastating war, Israel and Hamas agreed to a complex, phased truce intended to free hostages taken from Israel and held in Gaza in exchange for Palestinian prisoners and detainees in Israel, and to build momentum toward a comprehensive cease-fire," continues the Times. But that agreement expired on March 1 and there's not a next step in place; Israel has offered to extend the ceasefire and more hostage-prisoner swaps, but it has also just cut off electricity to the Strip, which may complicate negotiations. (I wonder whether building out infrastructure capabilities, such that they don't have to rely on Israel, would be a better use of the Gazan leadership's time than building rockets and tunnels.)
Scenes from New York: I do not like these silly city policies and I intend to keep running my mouth about it.
Love when my husband and son get yelled at @ the Met for the heinous crime of husband carrying toddler son on shoulders. Which is apparently BANNED by not just the Met, but also Guggenheim, and Museum of Natural History. A city full of nonsense policies! @FreeRangeKids pic.twitter.com/i8z6Yeb5Oe
— Liz Wolfe (@LizWolfeReason) March 9, 2025
I also appreciate that the Guggenheim's museum policy involves permitting babies to be "chestfed." It's all paying lip service to being child-friendly, but not being truly child-friendly.
QUICK HITS
- Is J.D. Vance the GOP's future? Zach Weissmueller and I talked with James Pogue, a writer for Vanity Fair and prolific chronicler of the New Right, who has interviewed the vice president a bunch of times. Full Just Asking Questions episode here.
- Meanwhile, in Canada: "Mark Carney, a political rookie but experienced banker with a history of helming state financial institutions during crises, won the race to replace Justin Trudeau on Sunday," reports Politico.
- "My suspicion is that we are going through a shift now where the same technological forces that yielded hyper-individualism will increasingly create evolutionary pressures in *favor* of different kinds of communitarian/familial/religious tendencies, call them 'post-liberal' or not, because those tendencies will be required for cultures and families to survive under conditions where otherwise the combination of distraction and obsolescence will lead to literal extinction," writes Ross Douthat on X. "But that's on more of a 50-year timeline, and Trump is probably not a primary player in that story—except as a signifier of the turn from the age of liberal dominance to the next phase of the story."
- "Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal has kicked the Social Democratic Party from his coalition due to a dispute over economic policy, as his government's approval ratings hit rock bottom," reports Bloomberg.
- A South Carolina man—who murdered his ex-girlfriend's parents in 2001—became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad. A gruesome story all around.
- "An epic treehouse that has stood in Sherman Oaks for 24 years now teeters on the brink of destruction after the city of L.A. declared the whimsical creation a crime," reports the Los Angeles Times. "'The Simpsons' producer Rick Polizzi built the treehouse, dubbed Boney Island, in his front yard as a playhouse for his daughters. He says it's become a quirky local landmark loved by the neighborhood children and visited by celebrities such as Halle Berry, Christina Aguilera and Will Ferrell. But the city says it runs afoul of building permit requirements and has pursued criminal charges against him."
- Plenty of sports policy implications stem from this:
My observation is that very many women genuinely do not have an intuitive sense of how much stronger men are than women, because men have not used their strength against them &, when playing, hold back their strength.
1/ pic.twitter.com/I4hzkUQmTb— Helen Pluckrose (@HPluckrose) March 8, 2025
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The IRS Bleeds
"If it bleeds we can kill it."
-Some Governor
"never trust anything that bleeds for a week and doesn't die"
You know what else bleeds but doesn’t die?
Jesse Ventura?
He didn't have time.
would Alice Cooper know the answer to your enigmatic question?
A sex worker calling 911?
https://reason.com/2025/03/10/a-sex-worker-called-911-in-distress-cops-came-to-her-hotel-room-and-shot-her/
A crybaby liberal?
Pretty obvious they're setting this up for AI to pick the targets for audits. Aiming for most bang for the buck rather than auditing low probability folks.
...the agency suffers from retention issues: About 10,000 employees left that same year.
The good ones, anyway.
"Gov employees aren't so bad, they're just like you and me"
-TonyGodiva
Also remmy
They recognize the importance of the work they are doing. Worship them, dog!
The only good IRS employee is a fired IRS employee.
...we replace the incomprehensibly complex system with a flat tax.
With AI looming, the CPA job is on the chopping block anyway. Skynet is buying its green eyeshade as we speak.
Great. Now an AI is going to hallucinate that I owe taxes.
After watching Mr. Banks vs. the Post Office, this idea is particularly terrifying.
Or the idea of making the tax code so simple that you can file your taxes on a postcard...
How will I decide who to vote for if none of the candidates can promise me a child tax credit or whatever the fuck.
Just remember that the postcard will look like this"
Line one: Enter your total income.
Line two: Enter tax withheld.
Subtract line two from line one.
This amount is your remaining tax due. Remit immediately.
Wasn't that Steve Forbes' idea? Getting 1996 flashbacks with that one.
Child tax credits need to go away and be replaced with the child carbon tax. Why do people hate the environment?
"Why do people hate the environment?"
Because it wants to kill us.
You are not wrong.
Unless we kill it first.
Negotiators will meet in Qatar this week in an attempt to end the war that started with the terrorist group Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.
I think you mean the open air prison riot started by the Joos' genocidal impulses. If Trump wasn't so busy ending the Ukraine war he could bust through the door and negotiate the Hamas into the grave.
He's working on it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSGxNI1IRpA
Love when my husband and son get yelled at @ the Met for the heinous crime of husband carrying toddler son on shoulders.
Museums have been burned too many times by two kids in a trench coat.
Best one ever!
Can't children in New York get their porn from the school library?
Only gay porn.
Chemjeff saves the day once again.
So youve read snow white - Jeff.
I wonder why
Mark Carney, a political rookie but experienced banker with a history of helming state financial institutions during crises, won the race to replace Justin Trudeau on Sunday...
Canuckistan went and got their own Trump???
He is a Trudeau lackey. Wrll Trudeau was his lackey.
Forefront of trucker protests. Wef aligned. Big banker/big government.
Canadian soros eh.
"Canuckistan went and got their own Trump???"
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....
Carney is literally Davos Man. No, really, cape and everything. One of Klaus Schwab's best friends. Also one of Epstein's best friends and there are a million pics of him with him a Gisele. He visited the Island dozens of times.
He's also the one that wrote the horrific and oppressive Carbon Tax plan for Justin. That just went up 433.33% for every Canadian.
He hasn't lived in Canada for twenty years, calls himself a true international, a citizen of the world, and a European. He has Irish and British citizenship. He was actually living in the US when he announced his candidacy
Sounds like the 51st state plan isn't so bad for most of Canadia after all. Canada can keep the icky French part, and the US can liberate the rest.
Icky French was my stripper name.
IMHO, Western Canada should go independent.
Everything from Whiteshell, Manitoba westward should be easy enough. There’s only one road that would need a customs booth.
If you see a sign in the Yukon Territory that says Bump, take it seriously. While driving from Skagway to Anchorage (you have to cut up through BC and the Yukon Territory to catch the Alcan) I didn't slow down for a bump sign and I bet I had all four wheels of my Jeep off the road.
"a flat tax"
Any tax on income will be complicated, invasive, derided, cheated.
Tax avoiders and tax evaders are smart, and will exploit any loophole left in the law, requiring more words in the tax code to define away those loopholes. Any number of those loophole closures will require more paperwork to cover, more 1099's (or whatever the form is in this magical tax code future) to be issued.
A “flat tax” sounds nice. All your income taxed at one flat rate. What could be simpler? But a flat tax simply removes the progressive structure (different rates for different income levels and/or types of income). This has two problems. First, much of the tax code exists simply to define what constitutes "income". Second, if anything is deductible, such as charitable donations, then much of the tax code will continue to be required to define exactly how this should work. Mountains of paperwork and 10s of thousands of pages of tax code will be involved in defining what is deductible, etc. just as it does today. Armies of accountants and attorneys and IRS agents will remain in place.
If you want to say "All income is taxable income" that's fine. But it probably won't work. The current tax code recognizes that not every penny that lands in your pocket represents "income". For pretty good reasons, the tax code endeavors to distinguish between gross income, net income (adjusted gross income) and taxable income (AGI less deductions).
As an example, if every penny that lands in your hands is taxable, then when Grandma gives little Johnny a birthday card with $10 in it, Johnny must file a tax return and account for that $10, and Grandma may be required to file a correspond 1099MISC to document that she transferred monies to Johnny. Failure to do so on either party's part obviously is tax evasion and a clear failure to comply with the tax code. If this situation is undesirable, then exclusions must be written and further, the definition of “gift” must be codified so as to avoid certain abuses that would inevitably occur.
Now consider the nature of a gift exclusion that allows small amounts to be gifted without a need to report as income on the part of the recipient (or file a 1099MISC). First, how small is small? $10, $100, $1000, is that indexed to inflation? Can Grandma give $1000 *and* Grandpa give $1000 each? How often can a gift be given? Or is the limit a cumulative annual amount? If it's $10, then lots of people will have to file 1099 and cause way more work than it's worth. If it's $1000, a lot of people will start black-marketing "gifts": e.g. maybe I can convince my boss to "gift" me the maximum amount every year? Etc. Etc.
If I loaned $750 to someone, who paid me back $1000 (i.e. repay $750 and pay $250 in interest), the $1000 check is not all income to me right? Income in this case would be $250, the interest paid, the other $750 is simply returning my money. What if I loaned my brother $5000, with a contract, interest payment and everything, then 5 years later decide that he doesn't have to pay it back? Is that a gift? Have I violated the gifting rules? Is that loan income to him? Is it a loss for me? Can I use it to offset other income? Etc. Etc.
What about a lottery winner, say $1000 on scratch off. Surely that's all income? But current tax law says that if he spent $750 buying tickets, the net gambling income is only $250. It cost $750 to "earn" $250. What if he won $1000 but lost $10,000? Current tax law says too bad on $9000, but he owes no tax on the $1000 winnings. Current tax law looks at your gambling income as if you were playing a long poker game: win or lose hands during the game, doesn't matter, what matters is what you have at the end of the game (tax year).
If my house burns down and the insurance company writes me a check for $100,000 is that income? What if the insurance pays more than I paid for the house? But what if it pays less than the house is worth?
More rules will be needed to clarify these situations too. That’s just defining “income”…and those are the easy examples.
If anything is deductible, say charitable donations, then another mountain of pages are required to spell out exactly how the deduction works, valuations to be used, etc. It’s easy enough to track cash donations (but current tax code has a lot of rules on those too, e.g. my donation to my alma mater is 80% deductible if I buy season football tickets, but 100% if I don’t). What is my deduction for used stuff given to Goodwill? Fiar market value? How is that determined? What valuation should be used for the Monet painting someone inherited from their grandfather’s estate when they donate it to a museum?
Think of the pages and pages of rules needed to define these elements, and the record-keeping needed to comply.
Unless you really mean a flat tax applies to all income regardless of source and nothing is deductible, then defining the various things that constitute gross income, net income, and taxable income will consume a large portion of the tax code and will continue to chew us up in compliance overhead.
Further even if you do mean all income, including Grandma's $10 gift to little Johnny bear in mind the thousands of 1099MISC forms that will need to be filed. The benefit of a “flat tax” in this situation is negligible.
So what you are saying is no simplistic solution to a complicated problem? That details matter?
It’s well above your pay grade and intellect, Molly.
So is shoe-tying.
No, you lefty whore, the point is that the tax codes you support unnecessarily complicate what should be a relatively simple process of revenue collection.
Don't tax income. Tax consumption at the point of sale. Fair Tax.
YES!!! = Tax consumption at POS. System is already in place to collect the tax.
Systems are also already in place to collect all other taxes. Does that justify keeping them?
It has just as many complications as income taxes, since consumption by you is income to the stores.
The only tax which can come close to eliminating corruption and favoritism is a parcel tax.
* It can be paid anonymously since all the government cares about is getting paid, not who pays it, and they know where the parcel is if they want to confiscate it for non-payment.
* It doesn't need appraisers and can rely on self-assessment. If it is later sold for more than the last self-assessed value, collect back taxes. If the buyer lies about the purchase price, reward snitching with the full difference, along with charging the back taxes, which is enough incentive to catch most self-assessment lies.
Yeah, you can call it a wealth tax. So what? If the same amount of tax is collected as an income or consumption tax, what's the difference? Tax is theft all the way round. A consumption tax is just a tax on acquiring wealth. An income tax is just a tax on saving as wealth.
I have believed that is the way to tax for decades. You should not be taxed for saving your money, only spending it.
The political class would love this idea. 99.99% of the population have no idea how much they pay annually in sales taxes.
Your "fair tax" will make taxes invisible and the pols can raise taxes to their harts content with no one noticing. This is why the EU loves their VAT taxes which is a multi level sales tax scheme.
Prices in the EU are just listed/advertised with the tax included, So they don't even see on a receipt how much was the cost of the items and how much was tax for a single transaction.
That's expressly not part of the Fair Tax proposal. Fair Tax rate and tax paid is to be displayed on the receipt.
People who talk crap about the Fair Tax almost always make up something bad that is not part of the proposal, then complain about that strawman.
Not sure if serious.
Au contraire, you see the sales tax added to every purchase you make. Most people don't see their income tax except in the rare instances that they look closely at their pay stubs - so much so that people typically think the government is being generous when they get a refund at tax time.
You don't see VAT because that is baked into the price, but sales taxes are very visible.
The Flat Tax is a national sales tax. (As opposed to flat tax).
^this post is peak drunkcastic
Sit this one out dummy
This is why tariffs were the main funding source and income taxes were always considered the worst form of taxation from medieval days through the end of the 19th century.
Tariffs were the main funding source because they're easy to collect.
Don't need an entire bureaucracy, just people at ports and other points of entry.
Yet, you whine about tariffs all the fucking time.
Okay, what about a national sales tax? No income tax at all, so no complications as you describe.
Businesses will collect and pay, not much different than now.
The problem with this is that sales taxes are invisible to the vast majority of the population. How much total sales tax did you pay last year? Do you even have the information you would need to figure it out?
Europe loves their VAT taxes for exactly that reason. The VAT is a multi-level sales tax scheme.
Manufacturers pay VAT on raw materials and component parts and charge VAT on finished goods. Wholesalers have to do the same thing. Pay VAT on incoming goods, charge it on out going goods. Retailers also have to do this. Prices are listed/advertised with the tax built in (unlike the US where tax is calculated at point of sale and the amount is listed on receipts). No one has a clue how much tax they are paying.
"How much total income tax did you pay last year?"
NONE! I GOT A REFUND!
Yep. It’s pretty damn funny to watch Europeans who have no clue how much tax they’re paying whine about how we add sales tax at the register in the US and don’t just include it in the price.
User fees and head tax.
VERY obvious, and thus might motivate more people to question federal spending.
To be fair, head tax can be paid with cash or labor.
Which is why we need consumption taxes
Don't collect any tax at all from individuals. The original system would have been just fine if the federal bureaucrats hadn't gotten greedy. High taxes are a direct consequence of massive overreach by socialists. The original system was that the States funded the Federal government proportional to their populations. Congress would pass a budget periodically and send the bills out to the fifty states, who would send their shares to the Treasury. There is no such thing as a fair tax or a flat tax or an "income tax" so a simple tax is the only acceptable tax.
The Federal government in the early days was funded mostly by tariffs.
Most fledgling governments are funded by tariffs because they're easy to collect. That's the only reason. Not because they're magic, or fair, or good economics. They're easy to collect. The government just needs a few people at ports and other points of entry to collect them.
People who say tariffs are great because they were the original source of funding for the government are just making a fallacious appeal to history. Hey, the federal government allowed slavery in the early days, so by the same logic slavery was great too! But obviously it wasn't. So why does that logic make tariffs great? It doesn't.
And here we go with the false equivalency, that relying on tariffs and not income taxes is like having slavery.
Sarc, let us know when you’re done building your strawmen army.
A South Carolina man—who murdered his ex-girlfriend's parents in 2001—became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad.
South Carolina is desperate to put a cigarette in anyone's mouth these days.
They only had 3 volunteers. I think if the condemned gets to choose a method, they should be able to demand more than 3 shooters.
Where are the details? Estimated time until death? Did they get a clean shot to the heart? Did they miss and get a lung shot and have to watch him gasp for breath? Put a few more into him?
There was a very long press conference (https://youtu.be/feXsnKCwVrs) after the execution that featured 3 journalists that witnessed the execution. All reported the shots were fired simultaneously, all 3 seemed to hit exactly in the heart (which had a little target on it), and death was called in far less time than an electrocution.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/violent-sudden-firing-squad-execution-032438738.html
The firing squad is certainly faster — and more violent — than lethal injection. It's a lot more tense, too. My heart started pounding a little after Sigmon's lawyer read his final statement. The hood was put over Sigmon's head, and an employee opened the black pull shade that shielded where the three prison system volunteer shooters were.
About two minutes later, they fired. There was no warning or countdown. The abrupt crack of the rifles startled me. And the white target with the red bullseye that had been on his chest, standing out against his black prison jumpsuit, disappeared instantly as Sigmon's whole body flinched.
A jagged red spot about the size of a small fist appeared where Sigmon was shot. His chest moved two or three times. Outside of the rifle crack, there was no sound.
A doctor came out in less than a minute, and his examination took about a minute more. Sigmon was declared dead at 6:08 p.m.
3 trained shooters firing .308WIN (Hornady TAP Urban polymer tipped frangible) from 15 feet obliterated the heart. By witness reports: "And the white target with the red bullseye that had been on his chest, standing out against his black prison jumpsuit, disappeared instantly as Sigmon's whole body flinched. A jagged red spot about the size of a small fist appeared where Sigmon was shot. His chest moved two or three times. A doctor came out in less than a minute, and his examination took about a minute more. Sigmon was declared dead at 6:08 p.m.
Thanks for the gruesome details. If nothing else the method seems effective.
Why don't they just borrow the bolt gun from the butcher? No way that doesn't work.
"Where are the details? Estimated time until death? Did they get a clean shot to the heart? Did they miss and get a lung shot and have to watch him gasp for breath? Put a few more into him?"
You ASKED for the gruesome details.
"They only had 3 volunteers."
I believe the condition is that 3 shooters were used, and they were volunteers. I'm not sure that they "only had 3 volunteers" in the sense that only 3 people volunteered.
"Fifteen feet away will be three state Corrections Department volunteers with rifles. All three will have live ammunition. They will fire from an opening in a wall the witnesses can't see.
An epic treehouse that has stood in Sherman Oaks for 24 years now teeters on the brink of destruction after the city of L.A. declared the whimsical creation a crime...
California just doesn't like any housing.
Perhaps he can move it to Shelbyville
He does have an attractive cousin there.
Then on to Ogdenville!
Don’t they have a monorail there?
To the lemon tree?
That lemon tree was cursed, now drink your turnip juice.
My observation is that very many women genuinely do not have an intuitive sense of how much stronger men are than women, because men have not used their strength against them &, when playing, hold back their strength.
NONSENSE. Movies have taught me that all a woman has to do is spin around on a guy's shoulders and throw him down.
Also, whatever happened to the movement that had women on campuses being raped every two seconds. It's either girlboss or victim with these people. They just can't find a middle ground.
Robby Soave happened.
He asked about chicks on campus, not overspending on hair care
Every penny Robby spends on his coif is a necessary one.
NONSENSE. Movies have taught me that all a woman has to do is spin around on a guy's shoulders and throw him down.
To be fair, getting a hurricanrana from a hot chick that requires putting your face in her crotch tends to be kryptonite for most men.
The thing that struck me about the statement is how it comes ->||<- this close to recognizing that, for men, it's much more a matter of will and that, historically, women were much better at wielding the... uh... figure 4 of soft power.
I don't think I've had the opportunity to ask in conversation (and therefore change said conversation to a scream-a-thon), but I've wondered: If women are so equal to men, how the hell did we wind up in charge? Why is there a patriarchy? Why didn't a Matriarchy form to oppose it?
(scare quotes on "patriarchy.")
Why is there a patriarchy? Why didn't a Matriarchy form to oppose it?
Funny thing is, you can loosely map population numbers and demographics in the human genome back into pre-recorded history. Despite modern feminist idiocy about "Women were hunters too!", there is abundant evidence at many points in history of the diversity of the Y-Chromosome winnowing down and then exploding again as population numbers waxed and waned. This is independent of the X, autosomal, and mitochondrial DNA, indicating that men often went to war or ventured out in large numbers only to meet their demise while women enjoyed relatively stable lives. The opposite disparity is virtually never seen. If women died off, it was because of disease or famine or similar that affected people relatively indiscriminately.
So, despite the fact that populations were generally equal and frequently lopsided in women's favor, sometimes in massive ratios > 2:1, a feminist-style "Pure Matriarchy" never formed and/or stabilized.
The 100 lb heroine beating up on several 250 lb martial art villains is my latest peeve about Hollywood action flicks. There is fiction, and there is delusional fantasy.
As for the actual physical imbalance in hand to hand combat, THIS IS WHY WE INVENTED GUNS!
well... it may not be WHY... but it sure is a great equalizer. This is one of the virtues that are never acknowledged by the gun grabbers.
[note - I understood your comment to be referring to the woman\man power imbalance but now notice you were probably talking about the general power imbalance between strong ruling over weak]
Unless it's Buffy. She was the chosen one.
How to negotiate with hamas, and all muslims
"here is a beeper we will page you when we're ready"
President Donald Trump decided to dismiss the old commissioner
Will these hitler-mussolini tactics ever end?
Literally destroying democracy by firing unelected bureaucrats.
.
"My observation is that very many women genuinely do not have an intuitive sense of how much stronger men are than women, because men have not used their strength against them &, when playing, hold back their strength."
I'm reminded of the "Spiderman holds back" meme.
"Doctor Octopus has taken over Spider-man’s body, and unaware of the strength Peter had, he punches the Scorpion’s jaw off cleanly without effort. Doc Ock then realized that all this time Peter Parker was holding back in their encounters, and he could have easily killed all of his foes had he wanted to. From – Amazing Spider-man Vol. 1 #700
A woman in my office was bragging about how her daughter is taking self defense classes and is now much safer in public. The daughter is 12. Delusional.
That's my purse, you don't know me! (kick them in the crotch).
Good job, Bobby!
Damn it Bobby!
Well, I mean, that's probably not wrong though. A properly trained person in self-defense is better able to defend themselves, especially against the untrained.
That said, she's probably mostly 'safer' from people in her own age category. Obviously she wouldn't stand a chance against John Cena, but then neither would I and I'm a full grown adult man.
As I recall, the only villain that's come close to legitimately killing Spider-Man has been Tombstone.
I kill spiders with a paper towel.
Well, the latest Amazing Spider-man run involves him getting killed multiple times against the children of a demon, but he gets to come back each time so I guess that doesn't count.
To be fair, anything put out by DC or Marvel post-Y2K can pretty much be dismissed as non-canon.
"A South Carolina man—who murdered his ex-girlfriend's parents in 2001—became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad."
But the news stories left out the important part...what kind of rifles and ammunition were used?
Was visiting Charleston this past weekend, and local news coverage said .308 WIN, but I don't think I ever heard the make of the rifles.
If they were not M1 Garands they missed an opportunity!
the important part
"A South Carolina man—who murdered his ex-girlfriend's parents in 2001—became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad, while simultaneously, by an astounding coincidence, making him the first American to be shot to death by something scary and black in [looks at watch] seven minutes."
former Missouri congressman Billy Long, an inexperienced figure
A guy whose job was to write tax law is inexperienced in tax law. Seems right.
The irs doesn't write tax law.
No, congress critters do. If a former congressman is inexperienced to the point they can't work for the agency that enforces the laws he was responsible for writing, what does that say about the whole system?
I thought staff and lobbyists wrote the laws.
One thing it says is that many laws are so large and complicated that there is no fucking way the people who supposedly are the ones writing them have any idea what they actually say.
The politician's job is to get reelected. The lawmaking is left for recent law-school graduates who can't get a real job.
Whatever you do, don't fire any of them.
Like the movie, Cube.
I'd say its an improvement. Get the "experts" out of there.
"But what Trump is pursuing appears to be something different altogether: Slash the auditors who might crack down on larger businesses who might not be filing properly"
Terrible. Just terrible.
Cutting the ranks of "auditors who MIGHT crack down on larger businesses (and smaller ones) who MIGHT not be filing properly", will mean disaster. Imagine less Civil Servants. What are they going to do? Leave it to AI to ferret out the cheats like DOGE is doing?
HA, good luck with that.
"deputize IRS agents to be more involved in immigration enforcement"
Borders aren't meant to be enforced! They're gentle suggestions.
and make sure the whole agency is helmed by someone with basically no experience."
NO EXPERIENCE!!!
At what? Who knows. But experience at running the IRS is what gave America treasures like Lois Lerner overseeing the Exempt Organizations Unit division.
The greatest threat to democracy and the sign of a true fascist is cutting government.
The derivative of the size of government is not a factor in determining if a country is fascist or not.
You sure about that? Nazi Germany had a rather large government, as did Stalin’s Russia and Mussolini’s Italy. FDR, collectivist supreme, grew government by a then unprecedented amount.
You faking a degree isn't derivative of you being intelligent.
MG faking intelligence is a crime.
It's a VERY thin veneer.
and yet cutting even 1% of the current government scope is totally fascist.
Say you know nothing about history without saying you know nothing about history. For your information every single fascist country greatly grew their bureaucracies and relied heavily on them. Every dictatorship does you fucking moron.
"the size of government is not a factor in determining if a country is fascist or not."
Name the small-government fascist country, TonyGodiva.
I'll wait.
Annnnnnnd he fled.
But Jesse, cutting government IS a threat to (D)democracy, which is defined as big government.
Britain to make it illegal to take pictures of Muslim women without a hijab.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14461483/Possessing-photos-Muslim-woman-without-hijab-criminal-offence-MPs-say.html
Only one way out I'm afraid.
Meanwhile, to Jeff and Buttplug's delight, thanks to their CIA installed government radical Islamic extremists are rounding up and murdering Christians in Syria.
Don't for a second think that the Davos crew don't know what they're doing by importing millions of Islamic radicals in to Britain.
Christians are one of the most killed religious groups in the world. India, middle east, Asia. The media doesn't want to say this though.
Reposted from another thread; they did the thing, all the things:
Overtly Christian organization attacked, again, cause unknown but, suddenly, white supremacists aren't lurking behind every corner and, maybe, gender-social-construct-obliterating nihilists, social reformers who shoot people in the back, and some black people might be a problem. Next thing you know, Antifa won't have just been an idea and people like ENB can ask for amnesty... again.
Other online movements, such as No Lives Matter, promote nihilism as justification for violence.
Why bother...?
You're assuming passive, 'true believer' nihilists. These are garden variety, low-IQ psycho- and sociopaths that never figured out that they can use nihilism to "justify" just about anything but not that everyone else can.
I mean, yeah, I'd say that's pretty self evident. If you're a nihilist then nothing you do matters, but I suppose if you're an actual sociopath nihilist than you're going to do what gives you pleasure: violence.
When it comes right down to it, I assume every nihilist is at heart a hedonist.
And that is how fake news is created.
They may think they know what they’re doing, but they’re playing with fire here, and it’s going to burn them.
Don't for a second think that the Davos crew don't know what they're doing by importing millions of Islamic radicals in to Britain.
This is why "closed" societies represent such a threat to them, because such nations won't willingly sponsor their own subversion.
This is why people like Viktor Orbán are right wing fascist dictators for some unknown reason. They won't play ball with the global homogenization efforts.
Seems to not be homogenization but deferring to 3rd world cultures.
Only seems.
A big ball of nothing with no history, no culture, no past that they can mold and control is the end game for the Davos crew.
Britain has fallen. They might as well just call it the London Caliphate.
That scene where Cobra obliterates London with that space-dropped kinetic rod in GIJoe: Retaliation looks less awful and more like a necessary antidote as the years pass.
Somebody watched that movie?
Meanwhile, in Canada: "Mark Carney, a political rookie but experienced banker with a history of helming state financial institutions during crises, won the race to replace Justin Trudeau on Sunday," reports Politico.
Carney is a WEF warmongering Liberal flunky. If it were possible to be worse than Trudeau, he (and Freeland) are it.
The question is whether he can 'Defuse The Donald', and get a tariff deal before Canada's economy is severely hurt. I don't think so.
1. Carney likes the tariffs more than Trump does, as they give his party cover for the huge 433 % Carbon Tax hit on Canadians, at least until the next election.
2. Carney wants Canada's economy to be severely hurt. You can't do Agenda 2030 and UBI without beggared Canadians.
100%
If somebody asked you to think of a worse leader for Canada than Trudeau you may think that's impossible until you meet Mark Carney.
And then you get that complete retard Doug Ford in Ontario threatening to shut down power to the US. The moron has no clue to electrical interconnections work.
Step 1. Cancel elections.
Step 2. Arrest leading vote getter, tie them to Russia.
Step 3. Disqualify vote getter from the election.
Democracy.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/democracy-dies-romania-after-winning-december-georgescu-now-banned-may-presidential
What was the legal rationale for cancelling the elections?
Election interference on tiktok by Russians.
Scary that it is a NATO country.
VP Vance was right, in Munich.
What was the nature of this election interference?
Literally Russians on tiktok is the claim.
Though if you ask about this on Bluesky, you'll find lefties who will swear to you that millions in Russian currency were seized when police searched his apartment.
Lol. Really?
https://bsky.app/profile/youranoncentral.bsky.social/post/3lj3demqb3s2g
Definitely.
American voters are too stupid to ignore "manipulation" by misinformation but not stupid enough to justify our putting the whole "our democracy" narrative to bed permanently. American voters are too stupid to avoid electing a literal Hitler but not stupid enough to allow us to justify the elimination of "our democracy" permanently. Americans are too stupid to take care of themselves properly, so they need a massive bureaucracy to tell them what to do.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin discusses how he discovered $2 billion put away by the Biden administration to support a climate group linked to Stacey Abrams on ‘The Ingraham Angle.’
Failed Democratic Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams is facing condemnation from conservatives after she appeared on MSNBC to defend a $2 billion initiative under the Biden administration's EPA to purchase green energy appliances for Americans.
"Stacey Abrams linked Power Forward Communities received $2 billion in tax dollars in 2024 after reporting just $100 in revenue the year before. They were so unqualified that the grant agreement required the NGO to complete ‘How to Develop a Budget’ training within 90 days," EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in comment provided to Fox Digital on Sunday.
"$2 billion in hard earned tax dollars should not have been doled out to this organization for many reasons, especially if they don’t even know how to put together a budget. The Biden EPA ‘gold bars’ scheme is riddled with self-dealing and conflicts of interest, unnecessary middlemen, unqualified recipients, and massively reduced government oversight. The funds are currently frozen, and the DOJ and FBI are investigating."
Abrams also defends this by saying citizens ended up paying less when government gave them free shit.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stacey-abrams-slammed-after-defending-2-billion-biden-era-epa-funds-buy-green-energy-appliances
Black female activists are notorious for putting together these shell companies that are deliberately designed to grift government grants and contracts. Abrams and Patrisse Cullors are the most notable examples, but there was also Sheryl Williams Stapleton, a New Mexico legislator that set up fraudulent contracts via her job at Albuquerque Public Schools for a fake robotics company that her friend had set up, which they then used to simply stuff their own pockets with the cash.
The entire BLM leadership.
That's why I mentioned Cullors.
Yeah.
Does BLM even believe that all Black lives matter?
As marketing tools for the grift, yes.
"Breed has dodged scandals before. This one might actually stick"
https://sfstandard.com/2024/09/16/london-breed-dream-keeper-scandal/
312M given to kids under 11 years old in covid grants. Also thousands over 115 recieved loans.
Sarc will be here soon to tell us how fixing databases is wrong and there is no fraud.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/doge-says-312m-loans-given-children-covid-pandemic
It's COBOL's fault.
Fair.
A South Carolina man—who murdered his ex-girlfriend's parents in 2001—became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad. A gruesome story all around.
I'm generally not in favor of state executions^1, but firing squad should be preferred method. Lethal injection is a logistical nightmare, similar for gas chamber or the chair. Just fuckn' shoot 'em.
1: You still kill the real bad ones, John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, etc. Maybe death penalty requires a guilty plea as well, and the accused has to consent to execution or something.
but it has also just cut off electricity to the Strip, which may complicate negotiations.
And Lord knows those generators have only a few hours of fuel left.
Mr. House knows how to run the Strip securely even when surrounded by hostile forces.
I think Benny proved House has some serious blind spots.
But not with respect to the importance of the Hoover Dam and consistent electricity!
Caesar was just as stupid.
Oh, that rumbling sound? That was me, um, just destroying the huge robot army beneath your base. No need to verify. We're all good. I'll be taking the next raft to Cottonwood if you need me.
An epic treehouse that has stood in Sherman Oaks...
Good luck rebuilding after the fires.
I also appreciate that the Guggenheim's museum policy involves permitting babies to be "chestfed." It's all paying lip service to being child-friendly, but not being truly child-friendly.
"Chestfeeding" aside, adult women are so much hotter than 304s and childless cat ladies/librarians/art gallery managers.
The IRS "the most hated government agency" because the same people that don't understand that a tariff is a tax on the American people also don't understand that Congress writes the tax code not the IRS.
That's not why the IRS is the most hated government agency, you disingenuous lefty vermin.
Cite?
No. It is they are incompetent and abusive.
My fun story.
Pay taxes correctly.
Next year pay taxes correctly again.
Receive letter from IRS saying I owe 1400 for taxes from 2 years prior. Just pay it as it isn't worth my time.
Month later get a check from IRS for 1200 saying I paid the taxes correctly 2 years prior, but they kept the 200 in interest from taxes owed I didn't owe.
Fuck off statist.
At least you weren't fined for overpayment.
My fun story.
My wife calls me up to tell me the IRS says we own them 12K. That is 10K for late payment and a 2K penalty. I speak with the IRS agent, because they had enough staff to take a call, and we located my error ,and I corrected the form. I asked the agent to wave the 2k penalty as it was a unintended error and the agent said no problem.
Yeah. Nobody believes you pay any taxes on welfare.
I'll take shit that never happened for $1000 Alex.
Buzz, your down thousand.
*you’re.
Congress writes tax law. The IRS writes and
interprets the tax code.
Congress writes the laws that directly go into the tax code. If the tax code needs interpreting that is done by a court.
The IRS interprets the tax code through a myriad of regulations, and until recently the courts have punted on interpreting the code differently from the IRS by applying the rational basis test; said test is a joke and may even be a violation of Article III of the Constitution by the courts unlawfully delegating the judicial power to the executive branch.
No, it is not.
Courts interpret *law*, not agency regulations. JFC.
What are you talking about? Courts look at regulations all the time to determine if the regulation was correctly developed and that the regulation is in compliance with the law the regulation supports and that the regulation is applied correctly. Where do you get this stuff from?
That is not why but good try defending leviathan once again
I think it has more to do with the IRS being America's largest intelligence agency.
First America's largest intelligence agencies are Google and any credit card you may hold and use. Second Congress wrote the laws to give the IRS your finacial information.
More IRS employees means less tax cheats get away with it and thus more revenue. Musk's cutting of the IRS is nothing more than enabling tax fraud and is the opposite of saving money.
More IRS employees means less tax cheats get away with it and thus more revenue.
Assertion not in evidence.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57444
"Let me post this blind link that won't actually support my assertion."
Also, someone who claimed that PII was "highly classified information" isn't in a position to be arguing anything on tax policy.
Are you delusional? Oh, wait, don’t answer that. I know the answer already.
Yet you are against any and all audits of government agencies or NGOs. Weird.
Long TDS.
You really are retarded enough to believe this, aren't you?
Yes, it would appear that Molly is retarded enough to believe this.
the Met for the heinous crime of husband carrying toddler son on shoulders.
Well if he wanted to flaunt the rules he should have had your son wear a Free Hamas or Global Warming Now shirt.
Throw paint or soup on the art.
Democrat commenters defending the IRS.
Look at what you have become, you are pathetic, have some gotdam self respect.
If you are talking about the useful idiot-grade Democrats, you have a point. If you are talking about Marxist and "don't call it socialism" socialist Democrats, then realize they have always supported confiscation of wealth by the state.
What will happen to federal revenue if the IRS ceases to do its job?
Don't worry. Trump will balance the budget with tariffs that don't raise prices because it's the foreigners who pay them.
I wish I was being sarcastic, but I'm not. The idiot in chief has actually said he's going to "charge Mexico and Canada a 25% Tariff" meaning he actually believes (as do some of his idiot defenders in these comments, TJ I'm looking at you) that tariffs are paid by foreigners, not us.
Your strawmen are boring.
Just like their father.
A South Carolina man...became the first American in years to be legally executed by firing squad
There sure were a lot of people praying for the killer; I'm trying to figure out why the liberals weren't clamoring for arrests. It's kind of sad that only happens when the target of prayer is an unborn child rather than a murderer.
So it would be less sad if people clamored for arresting people praying in more situations?
I am going to say that the sad part is that anyone gets arrested for silently praying about anything.
So it would be less sad if people clamored for arresting people praying in more situations?
Sarcasm. I have zero expectations for principled consistency from progressive. Praying outside an abortion clinic is a constitutional right and a felony, praying outside a prison is as American as the pecan pie Ricky Ray Rector saved for later with his last meal.
There are two conditions when a cease fire is appropriate:
1. All the enemy are dead. (preferred option)
2. You are out of ammunition, and your knife blade broke.
I think unconditional surrender works too.
"...And what will happen when customer service is made even worse?..."
Uh, let's stay with the real world, shall we?
It isn't customer service. "Oh no, there aren't enough criminals on the street available to stop me at gun point and steal my money."
If there are no taxes, just tariffs and sales taxes, what about taxes on political contributions? Right now, government favors are eminently purchasable. The purchase of government favors (whether purchaser is U.S. or foreign) from individual government players will have no limits soon. A DOJ which is bought by the executive branch will never prosecute someone in that branch for bribery. Corporations have already got concessions on bribery regulations. More are coming.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-fcpa-anti-bribery-law-executive-order/
Fuck off and die, steaming pile of TDS-addled lying lefty shit.
This means more complex audits might struggle to be completed—or might never start!
yay!
PS: Stop auditing big business. Corporate Tax should be 0% anyway.
Or the idea of making the tax code so simple that you can file your taxes on a postcard—a common Republican talking point circa 2017. (These types of changes would, to be clear, have to happen at the congressional level.)
eliminate income tax entirely and close down the IRS.
If we do have to keep income tax. We need to abolish payroll deductions and force everyone to write their own check. Preferably quarterly after most people have forgotten and can't afford it.
I couldn't imagine how many people would have liens and warrants five years into that program.
The goal is to nurture tax revolt.
Get a load of the insurrectionist here.
Nurture the feeling of being stolen from. Nurture a connection with reality. Payroll deduction is a psyop.
Preventing a tax revolt was in fact the reason for creating 'withholding'
That and financing WWII.
What will happen to federal revenue if the IRS ceases to do its job? And what will happen when customer service is made even worse? Will we toil to pay the right amount without any help from the government agents who are demanding we do so?
The IRS doesn't help you do your taxes. For most people that is either oneself, a tax service, or a CPA. That we have to pay for help. On top of the taxes we already pay. We have to know what we owe.
The only thing the IRS does is come after you, after the fact, to nickel and dime you costing even more time and money.
IRS: Pay your taxes
ME: how much do i owe?
IRS: Guess?
ME: ok, $x?
IRS: Wrong, go to jail
this is the actual process
For $850 an hour I will make sure the go to jail part doesn't happen.
At least I can take joy in ensuring only the least amount of tax legally owed gets assessed.
+1
Made me laugh out loud. Absurdly true.
ludicrous speed.
This is for your records.
All those people shocked that a lot people don't like federal workers magically forgot about the IRS.
And have never had to deal with the EPA, USDA FSA, DoD civilians, FDA, DEA, Medicare, Social Security etc.
The IRS does provide help with your taxes if requested. IRS employees just very often give incorrect advice.
IT'S A TRAP!
And woe is the person who depends on IRS agent's advice! When they're wrong, using their advice is not a defense.
If someone is charged with tax fraud after following an IRS employee's instructions on tax procedures or laws, then I would think that would be an absolute defense. Fraud is a crime that requires mens rea (guilty mind), as far as I know. Now, if you mean that following an IRS employee's incorrect instructions would mean that you'd still owe the real amount, then that sounds totally reasonable. Although, I would think that it should be a defense against having to pay a penalty on top of that.
If they can modernize the IRS systems and use less employees, we all win.
0 is a good target number
>>This means more complex audits might struggle to be completed—or might never start!
if you say libertarians for bloated government every day it may become true
>>What will happen to federal revenue if the IRS ceases to do its job?
let's repeal the 16th and find out.
>Slash the auditors who might crack down on larger businesses who might not be filing properly
Wolfe, the large companies are all filing correctly. That is half the reason the tax code is so messed up - to give these companies special breaks only they can take advantage of because they can afford compliance staff.
>>I do not like these silly city policies and I intend to keep running my mouth about it.
idk ... is the floor of the Met marble?
Another impending victim of junk-science, shaken-baby-syndrome prosecution.
>>A deal cannot be made until the question of what to do about Hamas is resolved.
they lose.
You know who else had a final solution?
the makers of 409?
The income tax needs to be repealed.
We all know confusing and onerous it is and should be replaced with something less complicated and oppressive like a national sales tax.
This way, you only pay taxes on what you buy (except for food, medication and clothing).
Plus, it would eliminate almost all the IRS employees.
But that makes sense, so I do not see either party proposing this commonsense idea.
You really think a national sales tax would be less complicated? It would be a lot less complicated for the vast majority of Americans that only buy things and don't own a business, that's for sure. We wouldn't even really pay that much attention to it, since what matters to us is how much we pay total, not how much of what we pay is sales tax.
But sales tax is complicated, because the tax code has to decide which items are subject to it and which aren't. Lumber is a raw material for a construction company, so maybe they don't pay sales tax? but do you pay sales tax on lumber at Home Depot? I don't know the answer to that, and it might vary by state.
Think about who really benefits from "simplifying" the tax code in whatever way they are proposing it.
I followed Liz Wolfe's link to the article where Rand Paul talked about blowing up the tax code and starting over with a flat tax. When it got the arguments that it would take away the progressive nature of our current income tax and likely raise taxes on those with low incomes to balance the lower taxes on those with higher incomes, the article had Sen. Paul's response,
Paul tried to preempt those lines of criticism in his op-ed. "The left will argue that the plan is a tax cut for the wealthy," he wrote. "But most of the loopholes in the tax code were designed by the rich and politically connected. Though the rich will pay a lower rate along with everyone else, they won't have special provisions to avoid paying lower than 14.5" percent.
Uh, I don't know if Paul understood that people with a gross income of ~60k pay less than 14.5% income tax, even if you don't factor in the payroll tax.
The tax brackets for 2024 were:
10% on taxable income up to $11,600
12% on the income over $11,600 and up to $47,150
22% on the income over $47,150 and up to $100,525.
24% on the income over $100,525 and up to $191,950.
32% on the income over $191,950 and up to $243,725.
35% on the income over $243,725 and up to $609,350.
37% on the income over $609,350.
With the standard deduction at $14,600 for 2024, that means that someone with an AGI of $61,750 would pay $5,423 in federal income tax for an effective tax rate of 8.8%.
Let's say that Paul's flat tax would also have a standard deduction of $14,600. So, with the same income of $61,750, they would pay $6,836.75 in federal income tax (14.5% of $47,150) for an effective tax rate of 11.1%.
Let's not even get to the truly 'wealthy' and just go with a single individual making $200k a year. What would the difference be? Assuming just the standard deduction for the current system and the flat tax.
2024 tax on $200k gross income, single, standard deduction:
$37,539 for an effective rate of 18.8%
Flat tax of 14.5%, single, standard deduction:
$26,883 for an effective rate of 13.4%
I am not going to try and figure out the numbers, but I'm fairly certain that to generate the same revenue as the current income tax, that this flat tax would need to be higher than Paul's 14.5%.
For those of you that make into the six figures, I can totally see why a flat tax sounds appealing. For everyone else, why the fuck would we want that?
" reducing the number of tax brackets,"
This is almost always floated, and does almost exactly zero to simplify the tax code or simplify the preparation of taxes.
Ultimately, tax brackets, whether there are 1, 2, 5, or 50 brackets, boil down to a table that works like:
"If your AGI is more than $A, but less than $B, then your tax owed is $X plus Y% of the AGI amount greater $A."
Where $A, $B and %Y are defined by the bracket, and $X is precomputed for the table by summing up all the previous bracket tax loads.
No matter which bracket your income lands in, the process boils down to finding the row in the table that encompasses your AGI, subtract the bracket's lower end ($A) from your AGI, multiply the result by the bracket percentage (Y%), and add the result to the bracket's base tax ($Z).
Obviously, TurboTax et al., do this lookup and computation for you.
Just always get ranty when someone complains about the number of brackets, as if *that* is the big problem with the tax code.
Your last sentence is exactly the way I feel, as well. The math isn't the complex part of the tax code. And individual tax returns don't actually get complex unless someone has a lot of different sources of income, different types of income, types of income that are treated differently, or a lot of uncommon deductions or credits.
And who do those situations apply to the vast majority of the time? People with a lot of income. I've never spent more than an hour doing my taxes, even before Turbotax.
Though the rich will pay a lower rate along with everyone else, they won't have special provisions to avoid paying lower than 14.5" percent.
And this is where the quote from Rand Paul gets the most clueless. Only the very wealthiest people end up taking advantage of enough "special provisions" to lower their taxes that much. You know, like Trump, when he lost so much from his businesses that he was able to pay nothing for like a decade.
The Simpson-Bowles plan from around 2010 didn't please everyone, which was actually a decent sign that it might have been a good plan, but it aimed to not change the total amount of taxes collected by too much. It proposed more spending cuts than what tax increases it did have, to the tune of $4T in deficit cuts over 10 years, I think. It's modeling had it balancing the budget completely by 2035. No one has proposed anything that would balance the budget ever since then. Also, I saw in one article about it that Rand Paul had said it had some "good ideas".
This tax season, the IRS is, not will be, even more bloated and inefficient as it was last tax season. Even if the DOGE recommended cuts happened last month, it would have ZERO noticeable effect on this tax season.