I found some shocking details about the elimination of Virginia Tax iFile and I'm thinking of contacting the press about this - thoughts?

1- iFile was eliminated as a result of house bill 1349, passed in 2010. This replaced iFile with a "free file" option, which as we know is just a way for Intuit to make a profit:

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?101+sum+HB1349

2- The free file alliance's Executive Director is none other Tim Hugo, according to their very own contact-us page: http://www.freefilealliance.org/contact-us

3- That name sounded familiar to me, and sure enough, I realized that Tim Hugo is my Virginia delegate: http://www.timhugo.com/

4- I live in Clifton VA, and was totally shocked to see the address listed in the contact-us of the free-file alliance website:

7137 Main Street,
Suite B
Clifton, VA 20124

Clifton VA is a very small town on the outskirts of DC. I know this address very well, and it's nothing more than an old house in the old part of town. That house is currently setup as an antique shop, although I am not sure what "suite B" refers to - but it's probably no more than a mailbox.

5- Most shocking, notice the abstentions from the vote for HB1349. Of course Hugo did not vote to skirt the blatant conflict of interest

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?101+vot+HV0780+HB1349

This is definitely part of the untold story. How can we have such a corrupt government! Is this worth submitting to WaPo?

He's my delegate, too, sounds very fishy.

Suite B is the rear building behind the antique shop where Tim Hugo's office is currently located.

"The rear building" - sounds like the perfect kind of place where decisions to screw Virginians are being made...

um, this thread doesnt make any sense.

Why should we have ifile if you can do it for free anyway online?

http://www.tax.virginia.gov/site.cfm?alias=FreeFile

and a politician not voting due to conflict of intrest, per yr own words.

So, he's a bad guy for NOT BEING DISHONEST?!?!?

sounds like, based on what you posted, that the dude is just trying to save the state some cash by directing us taxpayers to sites that ALREADY DO what ifile did.

in other words, cut out the redundancy. And I'm just basing that on what YOU said is going on, and based on the links YOU provided.

Why should the state pay for a system that is already in place elsewhere, and is free to use already? Doesnt make sense to do.

Read here for why the "free-file" program is NOT one-for-one replacement of iFile and will end up costing the state more than iFile did.

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/335643.html

Several newspapers have also covered this story so it's pointless to recap all the reasons, but just one such story:

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2011/jan/21/tdmet01-michael-paul-williams-virginias-new-tax-fi-ar-788675/

The "free file alliance" is a group that only represents for-profit businesses (Intuit, TaxSlayer, etc). It was not about redundancy or doing things cheaper; it was about lobbying.

Gordo, it makes perfect sense.

iFile was free for everyone.

"Free File" is actually only free for people making relatively little money (especially by Fairfax County standards)—which you'd realize if you'd bothered to actually read the page to which you linked. If your AGI is over $58,000, you don't have a free option to e-file your Virginia state return. This is in contrast to the IRS, which offers the "Free Fillable Forms" e-filing option to everyone.

Filing a tax return is something that the government requires most of us to do. If people want to pay a tax preparer (or tax preparation software company) to prepare their taxes, that's their right. But the government shouldn't require us to purchase services from a third party in order to fulfill a legal requirement.

quote from that article: "Virginia replaced iFile with the misleadingly named Virginia Free File, whose website is a veritable billboard for commercial tax preparers. State residents earning more than $58,000 will have to pay to file."

so basically, ppl making money will have to pay to file their taxes instead of letting the state pay for it, is that what yr complaint is? That the state is trying to save itself $$$$ by cutting services?

iFile was set up back when the economy was good. Economy aint so good now - so the state is cutting back on stuff to slim it's budget and all I'm hearing is WAH WAH WAH from ppl who can AFFORD AN ACCOUNTANT or TurboTax. Gimmee a break.

And dont give me that "file by paper" argument. Even with the loss of iFile, most ppl and businesses are going to file online - only complete morons and hillbillies that dont know any better still file by paper.

It totally sucks that iFile is gone, but to make up some huge conspiracy theory on it seems kinda lame. State is cutting it's budget, plain and simple. When things get better, maybe iFile can come back. But for the time being, ppl and businesses making over 60-large a year can kick in the extra $50 for a program as far as I'm concerned.

@ut - Gov'ment aint requiring anybody to use a 3rd party. That's CONVENIENCE on YOUR part that's doing that.

as I said before, iFile came into play back when the economy was great, which it aint right now. If everything was happysmiles and roses, then yeah, you'd have an argument. But it isnt, and the state is tightening it's belt. School cuts, VDOT cuts, and now Tax Dept cuts. I doubt it's fun for anyone involved, and yeah, I hope iFile comes back sooner rather than later.

But to make up some conspiracy theory on itlike the OP is doing, that's just too much...........................

Hey Gordo, if you actually read that article (this is becoming a common refrain with you), you'd see that iFile cost the state less than $50,000 a year to operate. If even half of the 90,000 former iFile users file on paper instead, the state loses money.

This has everything to do with Intuit and the rest of the "Free File Alliance" (actually a tax prep software industry lobby) greasing palms in the GA to eliminate their "competition."

according to the website, it seems 20 other states are doing the EXACT SAME THING - so it's not only a VA thing.................

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Gordo, if you actually read that article (this
> is becoming a common refrain with you), you'd see
> that iFile cost the state less than $50,000 a year
> to operate. If even half of the 90,000 former
> iFile users file on paper instead, the state loses
> money.
>
> This has everything to do with Intuit and the rest
> of the "Free File Alliance" (actually a tax prep
> software industry lobby) greasing palms in the GA
> to eliminate their "competition."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
why would anybody file paper in this day and age?

that's ludicrous

p.s. I covered that part of it in my last post

Gordon - these other states are also doing it under pressure by the FFA "Free File Alliance" (of which Tim Hugo is the director). Are you really so obtuse so as not to realize how companies like Intuit, TaxAct, TaxSlayer make profits from the elimination of true free filing programs operated by the state?

Now they have the right to these profits of course. In my mind it becomes immoral once these companies form an "alliance" that is directed by the same person who legislates on behalf of taxpayers.

RICHMOND, Va. – Last year (2009), more than 2.3 million Virginia taxpayers, a record 61 percent, filed their tax refunds electronically

http://www.tax.virginia.gov/site.cfm?alias=NewsReleaseArchive#onlineisfaster

That means 1.47 million people, over 1/3 of the total filers, filed on paper.

Apparently you haven't succeeded in your quest to award everyone +1 internetz, gordo.

(fixed my html)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2011 10:00PM by Ut videam.

anon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon - these other states are also doing it
> under pressure by the FFA "Free File Alliance" (of
> which Tim Hugo is the director). Are you really
> so obtuse so as not to realize how companies like
> Intuit, TaxAct, TaxSlayer make profits from the
> elimination of true free filing programs operated
> by the state?
>
> Now they have the right to these profits of
> course. In my mind it becomes immoral once these
> companies form an "alliance" that is directed by
> the same person who legislates on behalf of
> taxpayers.

------------------------------------------------------------------

what I dont understand is how the same ppl who complain about too much Govt spending now get all butthurt when the cuts they yell for FINALLY effect them.

nobody in their right mind is going to file on paper due to the loss of iFile. Only vindictive dicks and morons would do that. IT IS NOT REALISTIC THAT NORMAL PEOPLE WILL FILE WITH PAPER IN THIS DAY AND AGE!!!

The state should not be paying for YOU to file yr taxes when they cant afford to. That's just nuts when we were just last year were facing a FOUR AND A HALF BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!

http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/virginia/2011/01/virginia-general-assembly-opens-no-budget-deficit

just like schools, roads, and other state services, this is the wave of the future with the whole belt-tightening vibe that brought the teabaggers into power.

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RICHMOND, Va. – Last year (2009), more than 2.3
> million Virginia taxpayers, a record 61 percent,
> filed their tax refunds electronically
>
> http://www.tax.virginia.gov/site.cfm?alias=NewsRel
> easeArchive#onlineisfaster
>
> That means 1.47 million people, over 1/3 of the
> total filers, filed on paper.
>
> Apparently you haven't succeeded in your quest to
> award everyone +1 internetz, gordo.
>
> (fixed my html)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
strawman argument fail, UT.

a) that was with iFile still in place - meaning those alleged 1.5 mil werent using the system in the first place, so why even have it?

b) those 1.5 mil prolly didnt have i'net access or know about iFile to begin with, so not really part of the argument

c) a record number did their filing online. Suggesting that more ppl are comfortable with filing online. Why would they go back to paper and INCONVENIENCE THEMSELVES MORE when there are other online options they can simply use?

5- Most shocking, notice the abstentions from the vote for HB1349. Of course Hugo did not vote to skirt the blatant conflict of interest
-------------------------------------------------------------

I'm a little confused here. Which is more shocking:

a) he abstains from voting on an issue where he may have a conflict of interest?
b) he votes on an issue where he may have a conflict of interest?

Please elaborate.

newgatedenizen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 5- Most shocking, notice the abstentions from the
> vote for HB1349. Of course Hugo did not vote to
> skirt the blatant conflict of interest
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----------
>
> I'm a little confused here. Which is more
> shocking:
>
> a) he abstains from voting on an issue where he
> may have a conflict of interest?
> b) he votes on an issue where he may have a
> conflict of interest?
>
> Please elaborate.

---------------------------------------------------

that's the whole part that got me going, y'know? - hows the guy a bastard for NOT voting on something that would be a conflict of interest?

Gordon,

My point from the very start was that our legislature is at the mercy of big business (so much so that the same people representing big business are our delegates!). We don't have the data yet so we should not speculate on whether the $50,000 will actually materialize as cost savings to the state. That's besides the point. Spend the 2 minutes reading the bill:

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?101+ful+HB1349

"Whereas, the Internal Revenue Service and the Free File Alliance LLC, a group of 19 private tax software companies, offer the Free File program providing free federal income tax preparation and electronic filing to taxpayers whose income does not exceed $57,000 annually; and

Whereas, the Commonwealth offers "iFile," a free, online tax filing service; now, therefore,"


Reminder: Free File Alliance LLC = 19 private tax companies under the direction of Tim Hugo

Are you saying there's NO CHANCE that Mr. Hugo is benefiting financially or otherwise from the passage of this bill???

Gordo, you obviously don't know what a straw man argument is.

Beyond that, the figure I cited demolishes your repeated contention that "IT IS NOT REALISTIC THAT NORMAL PEOPLE WILL FILE WITH PAPER IN THIS DAY AND AGE!!!" Unless it's your contention that over 1/3 of Virginia taxpayers are not normal.

anon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon,
>
> My point from the very start was that our
> legislature is at the mercy of big business (so
> much so that the same people representing big
> business are our delegates!). We don't have the
> data yet so we should not speculate on whether the
> $50,000 will actually materialize as cost savings
> to the state. That's besides the point. Spend
> the 2 minutes reading the bill:
>
> http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?101+fu
> l+HB1349
>
> "Whereas, the Internal Revenue Service and the
> Free File Alliance LLC, a group of 19 private tax
> software companies, offer the Free File program
> providing free federal income tax preparation and
> electronic filing to taxpayers whose income does
> not exceed $57,000 annually; and
>
> Whereas, the Commonwealth offers "iFile," a free,
> online tax filing service; now, therefore,"
>
>
> Reminder: Free File Alliance LLC = 19 private tax
> companies under the direction of Tim Hugo
>
> Are you saying there's NO CHANCE that Mr. Hugo is
> benefiting financially or otherwise from the
> passage of this bill???
-------------------------------------------------------------
about as much chance that he's just s dude who trying to save the state money - in other words I KNOW JUST ABOUT AS MUCH AS YOU DO - which is jack shit.

like I said before (sigh), if the state's budget was all sunshine and rainbows, then you'd have a point. But here in Planet Earth (3 Rock from the UNSMILING SUN), we have serious budget issues the state is trying to correct. iFile was a GREAT program, and I hope it does come back. But I'd rather lose it now and help the state balance it's budget.

Hugo, running that tax alliance, may have just simply clued the state tax ppl in on what those other tax companies can do, and how iFile doesnt need to even be in existence. May have been as simple as that. If you have some PROOF that he's crooked, PLEASE share it with us. If yr just sprouting unfounded hints and innuendo, then yeah, I've heard it all before.................



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/2011 10:45PM by Gordon Blvd.
Attachments:

Not that I'm in favor of eliminating Ifile, but isn't there a lot more fraudulent refunds associated with electronic filing because of the fast turnaround?

Les Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not that I'm in favor of eliminating Ifile, but
> isn't there a lot more fraudulent refunds
> associated with electronic filing because of the
> fast turnaround?

----------------------------------------------------------------
now THIS is true!

the whole "quick refund" scam is nothing more than check cashing at it's finest

in fact, I think they are regulated the same - i.e. the tax companies get the same $$$$ cut as check cashing places get.

nite nite all - discuss amongst yrselfs
Attachments:

Gordon:

You seem to have a grudge against anyone making more than $58K.

If the iFile decision were based only on the state's need to make budget cuts, I think it's likely legislators would have allowed an option for higher-income residents to pay to use iFile--rather than forcing us to use commercial tax prep companies if we wish to file online. I would have gladly paid a fee--to the state--to support any costs associated with my continuing to use iFile.

I am not a "moron," as you allege one must be to file on paper; I happen to have a very high IQ and pride myself on making rational decisions in most matters. I haven't filed on paper in something like 20 years, but I am going to the trouble of doing so this year--just to register my discontent at legislators over this issue.

Others on this thread have already tried to explain it to you, but you persist in misunderstanding the most salient points. So this will probably fall on your deaf ears as well.

Shocking, absolutely shocking, I say!

Saving even 50K of taxpayer money, what a fool...

It is apples vs. oranges.... Your facts are just wrong.

The Free File Alliance (which Hugo runs) is a national organization that partners with the IRS to provide millions of free "FEDERAL" tax returns to low and moderate income Americans. (http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=118986,00.html?portlet=6)

Across the country, many states pattern their individual states' online tax program after the Federal Free File Alliance. Most states even call it "Free File", but, they are not associated with the Hugo's federal Free File Alliance. When asked why he abstained on the vote if the programs are not linked, Hugo has publicly stated that the similarity of the names would confuse people and it would be better to avoid controversy altogether.

Obviously, the person who started this post was confused by the similarity of the names.

Signed....Interested Observer

P.S. I think the other facts by the person who started this post were also wrong about iFile costs and limits, but, someone else can work on that aspect.

P.S.S Sounds like the original poster just didn't like Hugo.

Just a little information, I ifiled last year as well as a bunch of my friends. We make over 58K a year, therefore instead of paying $30+ to "efile". I printed out the 760 form filled it out and spent 44cents to mail it. My friends did the same thing. From my understanding, it cost the state $1 extra per return to file vs electronically. Therefore, if over 50,000 people do the same thing, as I am sure they did. It will cost the state more money. That simple.

I'm not sure where they got the "only costs 50k a year to run" number but I can tell you that there is NO WAY IN HELL that is accurate.

Perhaps that's all they spent on hardware but to develop and maintain this kind of IT system along with all the bandwidth and hosting costs a lot more than 50k a year. Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know IT.

Sorry you guys can't have your "free" service. I got news for you, it wasn't free. Get over it. You sound like a bunch of babies. I'm glad my tax dollars aren't going to this anymore. Never used it, won't miss it.

Agree with anon and UT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon:
>
> You seem to have a grudge against anyone making
> more than $58K.
>
> If the iFile decision were based only on the
> state's need to make budget cuts, I think it's
> likely legislators would have allowed an option
> for higher-income residents to pay to use
> iFile--rather than forcing us to use commercial
> tax prep companies if we wish to file online. I
> would have gladly paid a fee--to the state--to
> support any costs associated with my continuing to
> use iFile.
>
> I am not a "moron," as you allege one must be to
> file on paper; I happen to have a very high IQ and
> pride myself on making rational decisions in most
> matters. I haven't filed on paper in something
> like 20 years, but I am going to the trouble of
> doing so this year--just to register my discontent
> at legislators over this issue.
>
> Others on this thread have already tried to
> explain it to you, but you persist in
> misunderstanding the most salient points. So this
> will probably fall on your deaf ears as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
if you are "going to the trouble of doing so this year" just to be vindictive against the state, then that's yr right. But to me, cutting of yr nose to spite yr face is indicative of being a moron 0_o

Doesnt have anything to do with having a grudge - it has to do with the fact WE HAD A FRIGGIN DEFICIT OF 4.2 BILLION "with a B" Dollars last year. Only ppl I have a grudge against are those who think that budget cuts should not affect them when times get tough

How can you tell us that "there is NO WAY IN HELL" the 50K/year number is accurate?

News flash: the Department of Taxation has plenty of online systems even after the elimination of iFile. Companies can—and in many cases must—submit many of their required filings online. I can log onto their website and check the status of my refund.

It's entirely conceivable that maintaining the iFile application as a small part of a large enterprise system for the Department of Taxation incurred a small incremental cost along the lines of 50k.

FairfaxMatt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just a little information, I ifiled last year as
> well as a bunch of my friends. We make over 58K a
> year, therefore instead of paying $30+ to "efile".
> I printed out the 760 form filled it out and
> spent 44cents to mail it. My friends did the same
> thing. From my understanding, it cost the state
> $1 extra per return to file vs electronically.
> Therefore, if over 50,000 people do the same
> thing, as I am sure they did. It will cost the
> state more money. That simple.
----------------------------------------------------------------
if you dont want yr money the quickly, then that's up to you. I really doubt there are 50,000 fools across the state......................but of course I could be wrong since I found a few here...........

http://www.wric.com/Global/story.asp?S=14373379

http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-nws-teacher-arrested,0,732566.story

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How can you tell us that "there is NO WAY IN HELL"
> the 50K/year number is accurate?
>
> News flash: the Department of Taxation has plenty
> of online systems even after the elimination of
> iFile. Companies can—and in many cases
> must—submit many of their required filings
> online. I can log onto their website and check the
> status of my refund.
>
> It's entirely conceivable that maintaining the
> iFile application as a small part of a large
> enterprise system for the Department of Taxation
> incurred a small incremental cost along the lines
> of 50k.
---------------------------------------------------------------
wouldnt it simply have been easier to raise the rates on the Dept of Taxation rather than do a huge conspiracy and get the laws changed?

That's if you go along with yr "evil corporations are taking control of the gub'mint" thesis.

Meanwhile, I still notice you have no proof that any of this is anything more than hypothetical b.s.


All I know is that this thread got my attention cause the OP was calling the dude out just for not voting on something he had a possible conflict of interest in. ANd I'm all about defending a politician if he/she's actually DOING SOMETHING RIGHT LoLz

Anywho, it's still silly to paperfile taxes (state or federal) in this day and age unless you simply dont have access to a computer - and it's a shame some ppl want to be vindictive enough to purposely inconvenience themselves and file by paper just to cost the State more $$$$$ WHEN THEY KNOW THEIR IS A DEFICIT ISSUE GOING ON! That's a very definition of ASSHOLE there..............

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How can you tell us that "there is NO WAY IN HELL"
> the 50K/year number is accurate?

I just did. See how easy that was? Where does this 50k number come from? Does anyone know? Yet you chose to take it as gospel. I say wishful thinking. As person familiar with these types of systems, I can tell you with certainty that there is no possible way to run a system with 90k plus users for 50k. Not even close. It’s not your fault you believe it, you obviously don’t know any better.

> News flash: the Department of Taxation has plenty
> of online systems even after the elimination of
> iFile. Companies can—and in many cases
> must—submit many of their required filings
> online. I can log onto their website and check the
> status of my refund.

That’s great.

> It's entirely conceivable that maintaining the
> iFile application as a small part of a large
> enterprise system for the Department of Taxation
> incurred a small incremental cost along the lines
> of 50k.

No, it’s not. Think what you want. The 50k number is laughable and whoever threw it out there knows it.

Gordon,

Again I see your words and non-words splattered across the screen like scattering ants, again I must chastise you. I must advise you against trying to discover how many pencils you can fit up your nose; you might have bothered your grey matter.

To the best of my knowledge, filing a paper return is less expensive than using a service, therefore it is just an issue of judging whether the savings are worth the trouble. If the state is willing to pay extra to process an otherwise-electronic form, I say stick it to them and have a laugh. I have other ways of doing so, like not filing altogether; suck it Richmond.

Also, you seem to have conveniently overlooked the fact that the poster to whom you replied was willing to pay a fee. That is hardly thinking that 'budget cuts should not affect [one's self]' (annotation mine). I am in favour of abolishing the whole thing so that there will be no budget to cut.

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beyond that, the figure I cited demolishes your
> repeated contention that "IT IS NOT REALISTIC THAT
> NORMAL PEOPLE WILL FILE WITH PAPER IN THIS DAY AND
> AGE!!!" Unless it's your contention that over 1/3
> of Virginia taxpayers are not normal.


Technically, being a minority, they aren't normal.

OED - normal (adj.) - conforming to a standard ; usual, typical, or expected

If 1/3 of the people file via paper, that is normal, as it conforms to the state's standard and is usual on account of the large number of filers. Given past data, the number of paper filings would be around 1/3 too, therefore it would be expected. Thus, paper filing is normal. What would be abnormal would be having the return chiselled into stone and sent that way, or hiring a horseman to hand-deliver a paper form after riding from NoVA to Richmond.

I was going with the "perpendicular" definition, thank you.

I do not know of a definition that makes a 90 degree angle unless it is physically written that way.

Well, let's see... on one hand, we have More Complete assuring us that the 50K number is "laughable" and anyone who believes it doesn't know any better. Doesn't cite any evidence, of course—we're just to take his word for it. And why not? He assures us that he knows about these things.

But wait... on the other hand, we have the Virginia Department of Taxation, which stated the following in the Fiscal Impact Statement regarding the bill as enacted:

Quote

It is impossible to determine the administrative impact of this bill. Provided those taxpayers who would be prohibited from filing for free by this bill do not instead file paper returns, this bill would result in an administrative cost savings for the Department of Taxation of $49,200 in Fiscal Year 2011 and each fiscal year thereafter. To the extent that taxpayers choose to file paper returns instead of paying a member of the Consortium of Virginia to file electronically, TAX’s cost to process paper returns would be approximately $1 each. Therefore, depending on taxpayer behavior, TAX, may either incur a savings or additional costs.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?101+oth+HB1349FER161+PDF

Whom to believe?

Ut videam Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is impossible to determine the administrative
> impact of this bill. Provided those taxpayers who
> would be prohibited from filing for free by this
> bill do not instead file paper returns, this bill
> would result in an administrative cost savings for
> the Department of Taxation of $49,200 in Fiscal
> Year 2011 and each fiscal year thereafter. To the
> extent that taxpayers choose to file paper returns
> instead of paying a member of the Consortium of
> Virginia to file electronically, TAX’s cost to
> process paper returns would be approximately $1
> each. Therefore, depending on taxpayer behavior,
> TAX, may either incur a savings or additional
> costs.

Again, it’s not your fault you don’t understand so I’ll try to help you see where I’m coming from. Look at your quote. Look at the word "impossible". Also notice the word "administrative". This is also the (impossible to estimate) “administrative” "savings". This is NOT the same as the cost to run, maintain, upgrade, the “system” (servers, storage, bandwidth, hosting, administrators, developers, DBAs, web designers, etc). Understand? 50k wouldn't even run the power and cooling for such a system. It’s obvious such costs were not factored in to their “administrative impact”.


In addition, do you think the DOT might have an interest in keeping their little system alive in order to keep the money coming in? No, the government never does that.

You can believe what you want. The only thing I found “shocking” about this thread is that 50k estimate. It is my opinion that this number is in no way representative of the cost to run and maintain such a system. Just my opinion, you’re entitled to yours as well.

You don't know me or my professional experience, so it's not surprising you'd call BS, feel free. However, I'm sure there are others with similar IT/Gov/Financial system experiance that would agree. Though it may seem this way to you, I'm not just pulling my opinion from thin air.

That said, I don't care how much it costs. It certainly isn't "free" and I never used it so I couldn't care less that it got cut. Other than that, I don't really have a dog in the fight.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2011 06:12PM by More Complete.

...duplicate post, sorry.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/2011 06:11PM by More Complete.

,., Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gordon,
>
> Again I see your words and non-words splattered
> across the screen like scattering ants, again I
> must chastise you. I must advise you against
> trying to discover how many pencils you can fit up
> your nose; you might have bothered your grey
> matter.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, filing a paper return
> is less expensive than using a service, therefore
> it is just an issue of judging whether the savings
> are worth the trouble. If the state is willing to
> pay extra to process an otherwise-electronic form,
> I say stick it to them and have a laugh. I have
> other ways of doing so, like not filing
> altogether; suck it Richmond.
>
> Also, you seem to have conveniently overlooked the
> fact that the poster to whom you replied was
> willing to pay a fee. That is hardly thinking
> that 'budget cuts should not affect ' (annotation
> mine). I am in favour of abolishing the whole
> thing so that there will be no budget to cut.
--------------------------------------------------------------------


I love it when I actually stick to the rules of legit debate and get the other person to just dissolve into name-calling and whatnot instead of proving what they are talking about :)

but let me point out something that More Complete pointed out in the last post, but doesnt seem to have made any sense to some of y'all.

What the tax office is saying in this phase here:

"Provided those taxpayers who would be prohibited from filing for free by this bill do not instead file paper returns, this bill would result in an administrative cost savings for the Department of Taxation of $49,200 in Fiscal Year 2011"

is that if the ppl who are making over $58 large a year actually ALL decide to file with paper, that it will cost the state $50k. It DOES NOT MEAN that the whole iFile system costs $50k to run.

It's really kinda simple if you actually read the sentence.............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY

iFile still runs is its near-entirety - I can file my business taxes; check my refund; file estimated payments - all using iFile.

So the 50k is NOT laughable - since all that was taken away is the ability to file the income tax form.

Servers/DBA's/other costs must have stayed the same. I'm surprised there's even any saving at all...

50k Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> iFile still runs is its near-entirety - I can file
> my business taxes; check my refund; file estimated
> payments - all using iFile.
>
> So the 50k is NOT laughable - since all that was
> taken away is the ability to file the income tax
> form.
>
> Servers/DBA's/other costs must have stayed the
> same. I'm surprised there's even any saving at
> all...

-----------------------------------------

all those resources can now be directed to other uses, my friend.

"ALL THOSE RESOURCES" - what are you talking about???

Take an application that took 500k to develop. It contains features A,B,C,D. Now go to production with this application and assume is costs you 100k per year to maintain it.

NOW - take away feature D.

How much is your cost saving?

50k Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "ALL THOSE RESOURCES" - what are you talking
> about???
>
> Take an application that took 500k to develop. It
> contains features A,B,C,D. Now go to production
> with this application and assume is costs you 100k
> per year to maintain it.
>
> NOW - take away feature D.
>
> How much is your cost saving?

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(SIGH)...........i cant believe ppl are the fact the goverment is tightening it's budget. How DARE they count their pennies.

Anywho, instead of hypotheticals, (since you are just grabbing numbers like $500k out yr butt) does anybody have any FACT on what iFile actually costs? Since according to the website:
"It is impossible to determine the administrative impact of this bill."

The only fact we have is that it would only cost the state $50 large if everyone who wants to be an a-hole who cant get a free on-line service purposely decides to file by paper.

for yr answer, it's 100large a year. $$$$ that could be allocated to other resource like state school funding, roads, etc.

WE HAD A 4-PLUS BILLION "with a B" DEFICIT THEY ARE TRYING TO FIX! C'mon now!

Dude chill... I was not fighting you on whether or not it addresses the deficit.

I was debating the previous "assertions"

"NO WAY IN HELL that is accurate."

and

"Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know IT"


I know IT - and I know that sunk costs don't go down just because a feature of a system is removed.

50k Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dude chill... I was not fighting you on whether
> or not it addresses the deficit.
>
> I was debating the previous "assertions"
>
> "NO WAY IN HELL that is accurate."
>
> and
>
> "Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know IT"
>
>
> I know IT - and I know that sunk costs don't go
> down just because a feature of a system is
> removed.

------------------------------------------------------------

I gotcha

nah, I'm on a completely different level on this thread. The politico Hugo was called out, basically called a scam-man by the op when there's no proof he did anything or is crooked in anyway - that's what got me going.

"It is impossible to determine the administrative impact of this bill."


It seems like government at all levels is working with this much ability to determine anything.

know nothings Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "It is impossible to determine the administrative
> impact of this bill."
>
>
> It seems like government at all levels is working
> with this much ability to determine anything.
---------------------------------------

so you what? Want them to waste MORE money trying to determine how much money they'd save?

gimme a break

Even though I had a free state tax return with my TT, I sent a paper VA tax return this year after using i-file for years. (I did notice whatever TT and ifile computed as my VA tax refund or owed were always a couple of dollars different..always went with the ifile #.

I encourage everyone to file paper and bring the system to it's knees. Hopefully help expose the 2 digit IQ's of our our illustrious lawmakers (those who voted for this one) as well as their high horsepopwer money sucking wallets. The lobbying money came from a a bunch of places, not just Intuit (TT).

(Certainly if you are owed alot of money I can understand why you would go electronic).

50k Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I was debating the previous "assertions"
>
> "NO WAY IN HELL that is accurate."
>
> and
>
> "Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know IT"
>
>
> I know IT - and I know that sunk costs don't go
> down just because a feature of a system is
> removed.

I'm sure you do. I'm sure you have a fantastic career in the industry. I'm sure you make a nice salary. Say, much more than 50k a year.

smartass Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Even though I had a free state tax return with my
> TT, I sent a paper VA tax return this year after
> using i-file for years. (I did notice whatever TT
> and ifile computed as my VA tax refund or owed
> were always a couple of dollars different..always
> went with the ifile #.
>
> I encourage everyone to file paper and bring the
> system to it's knees. Hopefully help expose the 2
> digit IQ's of our our illustrious lawmakers (those
> who voted for this one) as well as their high
> horsepopwer money sucking wallets. The lobbying
> money came from a a bunch of places, not just
> Intuit (TT).
>
> (Certainly if you are owed alot of money I can
> understand why you would go electronic).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

geez.............................what an asshole.

More Complete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 50k Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I was debating the previous "assertions"
> >
> > "NO WAY IN HELL that is accurate."
> >
> > and
> >
> > "Anyone who thinks differently doesn't know IT"
> >
> >
> > I know IT - and I know that sunk costs don't go
> > down just because a feature of a system is
> > removed.
>
> I'm sure you do. I'm sure you have a fantastic
> career in the industry. I'm sure you make a nice
> salary. Say, much more than 50k a year.

-----------------------------------------------------
Attachments:

Face it Virginia, Intuit paid your elected officials, Hugo being the top delegate recipient, to get iFile eliminated.

• Evidence #1: Intuit's donations in 2009/2010. Notice how the contributions peak in 2009. Hugo has done fairly well by Intuit as well as by the Dominion Leadership Trust which InTuit also donates to heavily. Intuit appears to have given $32K to that Trust over the years and Hugo has gotten $50K from it.
  
• Evidence #2: The "pre-paid code" (read 'ad') for a 'free' one-time efile for this year from TurboxTax, and no other tax preparation company, sent out on State letterhead on Jan 7, 2011. And Intuit wins even with the free one time efile because they get those users opting in to their mailing list, rather than H&R Block's, ready to shill them for 2011.
  

Can the connection be any more obvious?

Arguments about how much iFile cost the state to maintain ignore the fact that the Dept of Taxation still has to run their IT operations to process returns regardless of where the data comes from. iFile, if anything, likely reduced overall costs by guaranteeing that iFilers data went right into VA's systems cleanly. The $50K that eliminating iFile was supposed to save probably came from eliminating one person's job who used to update the tax tables in iFile yearly. (Yes, I do work in IT; and yes I do understand what O&M costs are like. You do not believe that VA turned off even one system when iFile was eliminated do you? I don't think that the staff and infrastructure to maintain iFile was separate from the Department of Taxation's other IT resources, do you?)

The Virginia House of Delegates has a bill to return iFile:
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?111+sum+HB2321

The bill is stuck in "Committee on Finance", only VA Delegates in the committee can bring the bill before the entire house. Please contact your local representative on the committee:

Harry R. "Bob" Purkey (Chair) - 82nd district in Virginia Beach
Tim Hugo (Vice Chair) - 40th district in Fairfax County
Rich Anderson - 51st district in Prince William County
Vivian Watts - 39th district in Fairfax County
Robin Abbott - 93rd district in Newport News & James City County
Bobby Orrock - 4th District in Caroline & Spotsylvania Counties
Ben Cline - 24th District in Amherst, Augusta, & Rockbridge Counties
Scott Garrett - 23rd District in Amherst County & Lynchburg
Lynwood Lewis - 100th District in Accomack County, Northampton County, Hampton & Norfolk
Mark L. Keam - 35th District in Fairfax County
Lee Ware - 65th District in Chesterfield & Powhatan Counties
Bob Marshall - 13th District in Loudoun & Prince William Counties
Ronald Villanueva - 21st District in Virginia Beach
Ward Armstrong - 10th District in Carroll, Henry, & Patrick Counties; Martinsville
Kathy Byron - 22nd District in Bedford & Campbell Counties
Chris Peace - 97th District in Caroline, Hanover, Henrico, King and Queen, King William, New Kent, & Spotsylvania Counties
Will Morefield - 3rd District in Buchanan, Russell, & Tazewell Counties
Albert Pollard - 99th District in Caroline County, King George, Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond, & Westmoreland
Mark Cole - 88th District in Fauquier, Spotsylvania, & Stafford Counties
Tag Greason - 32nd District in Loudoun County
Joe Johnson - 4th District in Smyth & Washington Counties; Bristol
David Englin - 45th District in Arlington & Fairfax Counties; Alexandria

This group of Delegates need to be forced to bring HB2321 to floor or we should campaign against them during their next primary with this issue.

Please tell your local representative (http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openform) how you feel about this issue.

BringItBack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Virginia House of Delegates has a bill to
> return iFile:
> http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?111+su
> m+HB2321
>
> The bill is stuck in "Committee on Finance", only
> VA Delegates in the committee can bring the bill
> before the entire house. Please contact your
> local representative on the committee:
>
> Harry R. "Bob" Purkey (Chair) - 82nd district in
> Virginia Beach
> Tim Hugo (Vice Chair) - 40th district in Fairfax
> County
> Rich Anderson - 51st district in Prince William
> County
> Vivian Watts - 39th district in Fairfax County
> Robin Abbott - 93rd district in Newport News &
> James City County
> Bobby Orrock - 4th District in Caroline &
> Spotsylvania Counties
> Ben Cline - 24th District in Amherst, Augusta, &
> Rockbridge Counties
> Scott Garrett - 23rd District in Amherst County &
> Lynchburg
> Lynwood Lewis - 100th District in Accomack County,
> Northampton County, Hampton & Norfolk
> Mark L. Keam - 35th District in Fairfax County
> Lee Ware - 65th District in Chesterfield &
> Powhatan Counties
> Bob Marshall - 13th District in Loudoun & Prince
> William Counties
> Ronald Villanueva - 21st District in Virginia
> Beach
> Ward Armstrong - 10th District in Carroll, Henry,
> & Patrick Counties; Martinsville
> Kathy Byron - 22nd District in Bedford & Campbell
> Counties
> Chris Peace - 97th District in Caroline, Hanover,
> Henrico, King and Queen, King William, New Kent, &
> Spotsylvania Counties
> Will Morefield - 3rd District in Buchanan,
> Russell, & Tazewell Counties
> Albert Pollard - 99th District in Caroline County,
> King George, Lancaster, Northumberland, Richmond,
> & Westmoreland
> Mark Cole - 88th District in Fauquier,
> Spotsylvania, & Stafford Counties
> Tag Greason - 32nd District in Loudoun County
> Joe Johnson - 4th District in Smyth & Washington
> Counties; Bristol
> David Englin - 45th District in Arlington &
> Fairfax Counties; Alexandria
>
> This group of Delegates need to be forced to bring
> HB2321 to floor or we should campaign against them
> during their next primary with this issue.
>
> Please tell your local representative
> (http://conview.state.va.us/whosmy.nsf/main?openfo
> rm) how you feel about this issue.

The session ended 5 months ago. HB2321 died in committee. A new bill will have to be introduced in January.

but all is not lost. There's an election this Fall. Ask your delegate about the bill before you send them campaign contributions or vote for them.

While I am glad to see some other people have realized how Intuit and H&R Block bought the General Assembly, I think its hopeless. They really just don't care about us, or else they never would have voted for this POS bill in the first place. I believe one of the few guys to vote against it was former gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds who saw it for what it was. I remember a quote from around that time saying as much.

I used iFile when it was available. It was great. This year I paper filed because I am not spending another $20 to reward their lobbying effort. I am sure it cost Virginia much more to process my tax return as well.

Seeing I live in Loudoun and have arguably the most out of touch, worthless delegate in Virginia with Bob Marshall, I doubt writing to him would do much of anything. Maybe he'd send me some anti-abortion literature.

On principle, in opposition to the anti-consumer change, I too filed on paper this year after having used iFile for many years.

While I recognize that big businesses have a lobbying advantage over me, I'm not yet willing to believe it's hopeless that all Virginia residents will regain the user-friendly, easy iFile system.

I'm going to make it a key requirement for my votes this year, and I'm going to let all the candidates know.

Let's keep this thread high-profile on this site as the election season approaches...

Hey look, Virginia annouces a $544.8 million budget surplus. Surely a nominal portion of that could be used to bring back iFile?

I'm still not sure how wanting to file my state taxes directly to the state of Virginia instead of through a third-party service makes me an "a-hole" as some have called it. I too filed on paper this year.

For those who were dismayed about the loss of the user-friendly online Virginia tax-paying site/service "i-file" in what appears to have been an anti-consumer give-away to big tax software companies, now is the time to raise it with Virginia legislative candidates when they are out on the campaign trail...

Bring back i-File for every Virginia state taxpayer!

BTW, does anyone know how much the scaling back of i-file actually ended up costing the state (particularly as many of us filed on paper in protest rather than in effect pay a new fee to a company that successfully lobbied against taxpayers' interests)?

Bring iFile back!

Is Turbo Tax offering free 2011 VA state income tax software like they did last year after they bought the votes to kill iFile?

These things never come back after they are killed by the lobbyists. The GOP majority in Richmond can't even bother with something like Castle Law, let alone something that they probably wanted killed anyway for "efficiency".

As usual, GOP "efficiency" means a handout to private business at the expense of tax payers.

The VA Department of Taxation completely redesigned their website. I wonder how much they paid for that? Yet, we can't have our iFile back.

Apples and oranges really... there is active legislation BARRING bringing iFile back - legislation heavily influenced and funded by the tax preparation industry under the guise of the "free file alliance". Thankfully there's no legislation barring website updates.

It was never about how much these systems cost the state - it was always about how much these systems circumvent the paid-tax-preparation systems...

Demonoid. Up yours, Intuit!

I've used ifile for years (efficient, quick, easy, an immediate email giving receipt, an email the next day saying acceptence, the refund deposited within a few days--- a highly effective system --- so we get rid of it? Duh VA - This year I will file on paper which will cost the state more to process, take longer, and overall make the whole process work less efficiently. Hmmm - Good thing we are moving "forward" in VA these days.... A paper return? Really? Welcome to 1980 VA (oh wait a lot of VA is still in 1850 so that's not too bad is it?)

reality Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've used ifile for years (efficient, quick, easy,
> an immediate email giving receipt, an email the
> next day saying acceptence, the refund deposited
> within a few days--- a highly effective system ---
> so we get rid of it? Duh VA - This year I will
> file on paper which will cost the state more to
> process, take longer, and overall make the whole
> process work less efficiently. Hmmm - Good thing
> we are moving "forward" in VA these days.... A
> paper return? Really? Welcome to 1980 VA (oh
> wait a lot of VA is still in 1850 so that's not
> too bad is it?)

You act as if a paper return is your only other option. There are plenty of other programs that do the exact same thing you described. They don't cost much at all. More importantly, they don't cost tax dollars.

More Complete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reality Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I've used ifile for years (efficient, quick,
> easy,
> > an immediate email giving receipt, an email the
> > next day saying acceptence, the refund
> deposited
> > within a few days--- a highly effective system
> ---
> > so we get rid of it? Duh VA - This year I
> will
> > file on paper which will cost the state more to
> > process, take longer, and overall make the
> whole
> > process work less efficiently. Hmmm - Good
> thing
> > we are moving "forward" in VA these days.... A
> > paper return? Really? Welcome to 1980 VA (oh
> > wait a lot of VA is still in 1850 so that's not
> > too bad is it?)
>
> You act as if a paper return is your only other
> option. There are plenty of other programs that do
> the exact same thing you described. They don't
> cost much at all. More importantly, they don't
> cost tax dollars.

Sigh (again). You just don't get it--or you do and maybe you're hiding your interest in the matter (see more on that point below). The point is that some of us plan to file on paper rather than enrich and reward some tax prep software company that managed to prevent thousands of VA taxpayers (anyone making above approx. $50K) from filing state taxes for free online. Let me add that it's not just the fact that I can't file online for free anymore that bothers me--it's the fact that I can't file online even if I am willing to pay a fee to the state of Virginia to do so--instead, I must pay a private co. to do so.

I've noticed there are 2 posters to this thread ("Gordon Blvd" and "More Complete") who appear to either be really, really slow to understand the justifiable anger from those of us who wish we could still file using iFile (even if we had to pay the state to do so--but not a private tax software co!) or are not disclosing that you have a dog in this race, so to speak (i.e., do one or both of you possibly work for or are you related somehow to those companies or their paid lobbyists or are you a legislator who voted against consumers on this cause?).

What happened was wrong from a consumer standpoint. There has been no data to back up a claim that any tax dollars were saved by cutting off many citizens' free use of IFile, especially given that the system is still available to low-income citizens so there are still system costs to the state. And to repeat a point consistently overlooked by 2 posters above: some of us would be willing to pay fees--to the state, rather than to a company profitting from citizens' responsibility to pay taxes--to cover any IFile cost that the state might incur just to have the convenience of filing online again via the Ifile system.

iFile fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sigh (again). You just don't get it--or you do and
> maybe you're hiding your interest in the matter
> (see more on that point below).

No, I get it. You're pissed off about this. I just don't share those feelings. Honestly, it doesn't bother me. There is a lot of whining and complaining going on about something, that to me, doesn't seem like a big deal.

> The point is that
> some of us plan to file on paper rather than
> enrich and reward some tax prep software company
> that managed to prevent thousands of VA taxpayers
> (anyone making above approx. $50K) from filing
> state taxes for free online.

More power to you guys. Have fun with that.

> Let me add that it's
> not just the fact that I can't file online for
> free anymore that bothers me--it's the fact that I
> can't file online even if I am willing to pay a
> fee to the state of Virginia to do so--instead, I
> must pay a private co. to do so.

Boo hoo. :(

> I've noticed there are 2 posters to this thread
> ("Gordon Blvd" and "More Complete")

And you are?

> who appear to
> either be really, really slow to understand the
> justifiable anger from those of us who wish we
> could still file using iFile (even if we had to
> pay the state to do so--but not a private tax
> software co!) or are not disclosing that you have
> a dog in this race, so to speak (i.e., do one or
> both of you possibly work for or are you related
> somehow to those companies or their paid lobbyists
> or are you a legislator who voted against
> consumers on this cause?).

I can't speak for the other guy but for me, I just don't think it's something to get all up in arms about. Obviously, you feel differently.

> What happened was wrong from a consumer
> standpoint.

I'm a consumer and I don't think it was wrong at all.

> There has been no data to back up a
> claim that any tax dollars were saved by cutting
> off many citizens' free use of IFile, especially
> given that the system is still available to
> low-income citizens so there are still system
> costs to the state. And to repeat a point
> consistently overlooked by 2 posters above: some
> of us would be willing to pay fees--to the state,
> rather than to a company profitting from citizens'
> responsibility to pay taxes
> --to cover any IFile
> cost that the state might incur just to have the
> convenience of filing online again via the Ifile
> system.


Why? Don't you pay enough in taxes already? Why would you want to pay the state more money? What is your problem with paying a private company? They're evil and wrong and it's just not fair? Never mind, don't answer that. I just remembered how little I care.

I'm sorry you're upset about this but I just don't share your frustration.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/06/2012 01:51PM by More Complete.

Here is another example of Hugo working for his constituents who pay for his reelection:

Hugo got the former Mayor of Clifton--Peterson exemptions for his Ice Cream shop, something having to do with meeting health standards..........apparently the shop did not meet health regulations.

Hugo appears to skirt issues with regulations and laws when it suits him and his cronies.

Has anyone noticed that the freefile fillable forms available this year does not include Page 1 of Schedule ADJ as of Feb 3? This is one of the most important forms supporting 760 and the freefile alliance doesn't have it available! Their livechat reps only say that they are working on it. This should have been completed before the site went online.

The 760ADJ page 1 is there dude - it's at the bottom of the 760 form; just scroll down and you'll see it.

Not sure what Intuit is "looking into" for you - they're looking into how one scrolls down a web page ;)

Is the fillable forms option easy to use? What are the pros and cons?

Based on my experience with the federal fillable forms option, it sucks! There's very little help provided and you're bound to make some mistakes or miss a form or schedule. There are also very few calculations done for you so the amount of work is the same (maybe more!) than just doing paper.

I hate paying $50 for the privilege of getting my taxes filed electronically the right way, but I just end up biting the bullet and using turbotax every year. Never had an issue with my return that way.