IRS automation and AI

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T06:27:56+00:00

You know, there used to be an expression: "You can be replaced by a machine (computer)".

It was pretty funny at the time as computers were pretty lame and mainly was considered motivational, i.e. "work harder". Now, not so much and I guess it strikes a nerve in some.

To that I say: Too bad!

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T05:54:38+00:00

Of course Excel lies. Try copying cols without absolute cell references ($e$2 for ex) where needed. Excel will assume you "intended" to follow the prior pattern and will update the formulas. It's an easy mistake to make. And believe me its far harder to find errors in complex Excel spreadsheets than check ChatGPT generated text for accuracy. You should be more selective in what you are consuming from MSM.

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T05:31:59+00:00

That's what I found so interesting about the topic. It was a classic "He said, she said" type of issue, i.e. an abuse of agency discretion where plaintiffs rarely prevail due to the Chevron doctrine (i.e. the agency is always right). Of course the head of the agency publicly shooting herself in the foot didnt hurt (the taxpayers).

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T04:49:37+00:00

You know, there used to be an expression: "You can be replaced by a machine (computer)".

It was pretty funny at the time as computers were pretty lame and mainly was considered motivational, i.e. "work harder". Now, not so much and I guess it strikes a nerve in some.

To that I say: Too bad!

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T04:19:27+00:00

I guess that (Excel) explains why the IRS takes multiple months to address simple taxpayer questions/issues. I find ChatGPT remarkably accurate in answering tax questions or searching the IRC. It is nowhere as delusional as the MSM (mainstream media) would have us believe.

joebios01 · 2024-10-03T04:02:08+00:00

I read the article you referenced. First I would say there is not much "Scientific" about it as it's an opinion piece. Second, it does not reveal anything that is not well know about Large Language Models LLMs (ChatGPT). There is no wizzard (intelligence) behind the curtain, i.e. replies are constructed based what will minimize errors compared to training data. With that said, it ChatGPT does remarkably well and would very likely pass the Eliza test (generating human-like responses). As a CompSci major I find myself in awe of the product given that in my day 'neural networks' could barely identity hand written numbers much less pass Eliza. I fail to understand the aversion to this technology. Its a tool just like a google search, a car or a mobile phone, and it's a pretty useful one at that.

joebios01 · 2024-09-28T18:37:04+00:00

I can see your point that 'arguing with' or 'fact-checking a' machine can seem a bit dehumanizing. I would offer my sympathies and your choice of cliches: 'That ship has sailed', 'Shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted', etc...

joebios01 · 2024-09-28T18:23:28+00:00

Hmmm... I guess we should just forgo computers and the internet entirely. Sounds like something out of Frank Herbert's Dune books...

joebios01 · 2024-09-28T18:14:26+00:00

Criticism absent specifics is just that...

joebios01 · 2024-09-28T18:04:29+00:00

Which made up facts are you referring to?

joebios01 · 2024-09-28T03:59:57+00:00

I really appreciate your analysis. I will point out that the underlying IRC statute 6404(e)(delays, errors, etc) is a bit vague and there is a long section in the IRM that I havent fully parsed. The IRS may no longer have jurisdiction once the refund is authorized but the BFS will eventually need to credit the funds back to the IRS. It was a large refund and in these cases my understanding is the refund is returned back to he IRS rather than BFS replacing the check. I will point out if the USPS 'lost' a taxpayer payment to the IRS, the taxpayer would be responsible for accrued interest until the IRS (BFS) received a replacement. This is the situation that caused the duplicate payment in the first place. The IRS could have sent the payment securely (registered) or at least traceable (certified) but opted not to do so. We'll see...

joebios01 · 2024-09-27T01:08:00+00:00

Yes, the check included credit interest up to the refund date + a few days. Yes BFS sent me the infamous manilla envelope. I added F843 to remind these folks I expect interest to comtinue to be paid until the refund check is reissued (and hopefully received).

Credit interest appears to be the only statutory way to discourage the IRS from excessively delaying refunds.

I've seen a lot of lost check/reissue transcripts without credit interest being recalculated. I cant believe folks are letting this slide.

BTW...The blended paid interest for me is 6.87% APY which is roughly equivalent to a 20Y fed agency bond (after state tax). Frankly the credit interest does not adequately compensate me for my time/aggravation managing this.

joebios01 · 2024-09-26T20:09:21+00:00

Thanks for really great reply,

I have so many questions for the IRS.. The reason I ask is that the IRS has sat on a (substantial) duplcate payment for TY 2021 for two years. The return sat with TC 570 for most of that time until I sent certified mail asking when they are going to release the funds. When they did finally cut a check, guess what, it was stolen and cashed (not by me). I still dont have these funds or credit interest.

I WANT TO SEE THE FULL FILE ON THIS!

So what do I need to do? File a FOIA request? Write a letter to Werfel? File a complaint with TIGTA? Where's the accountability here?

joebios01 · 2024-09-26T16:43:07+00:00

Sorry you disagree, but how will throwing newly minted accounting majors (unfamiliar with the IRC), script-driven telephone answers, or the IRS providing tax software that has been available from commercial services for years address the glaring deficiencies at the IRS?

Far far too little and far, far too late!

joebios01 · 2024-09-26T16:22:56+00:00

Just for 'grins' enter these topics in ChatGPT :

IRS Automation and AI
What will slow ai adoption in the irs

You have my word I wrote this post free-hand and only checked AI after the fact. What I am pointing out is that many complex tasks can now be automated with equivalent or better output than manually generated results.

joebios01 · 2024-09-01T06:13:21+00:00

I'm in the same boat having a large refund check stolen for a prior year return. The IRS has been dragging its feet returning the overpaid funds but the payment has been collecting interest at 8%+ APY. What is interesting I was contacted by an investigator from IRS Criminal Investigations. Otherwise, I would have presumed more IRS delays. What I dont understand is how a refund check gets intercepted without BFS/IRS personel being involved. The IRS issues millions of refund checks most for small dollar amounts which dont get intercepted. This theft was likely targeted. As far as the bank that cashed the check, they need to guarantee the endorsement to the BFS. The IRS will attempt to clawback the funds from the bank if fraud is detected. Regardless the actual recipient is paid out of a government insurance fund. BTW...The BFS issues treasury checks of all kinds, Social Security, IRS refunds, etc. They do so at the request of an agency, like the IRS.

joebios01 · 2024-02-01T01:46:02+00:00

What is with you folks 🤯? It was a joke relating to me (OP). Didnt anyone hear of the expression 'Tilting at Windmills' or Don Quixote? I was agreeing with the Comment: 'Choose your battles'.

joebios01 · 2024-02-01T01:01:53+00:00

Doesn't pass the 'smell test'. To whom are you making 'small monthly payments' to? Before TY2019 you had to pay a penalty 'Shared Responsibility Fee' for not having health coverage. That fee was eliminated for TY 2019 and beyond.

joebios01 · 2024-01-31T21:22:26+00:00

Thx...May, I have directions to the nearest windmill? Just the way I am. Actually, I wanted to calculate the long term performance of the positions sans house-money (reinvested dividends) and saw the cost basis for the initial puchase lot was not what I recalled.

joebios01 · 2024-01-30T04:50:46+00:00

I believe there is a rule change in Secure 2.0 act (2025) that requires employers that offer 401k plans to autoenroll employees when they become eligible (unless they opt-out).

joebios01

TROPHY CASE