
1099 will end the world in 2012 - ajaimk
http://academicvc.com/2010/07/23/2012/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+AcademicVC-Main+%28Academic+VC+%C2%BB+Main%29
======
DanielBMarkham
[warning. rant head]

This has to be the most mind-numbingly stupid thing I have seen the government
do in the last couple of decades -- and that includes bad wars, if that's your
thing.

Why can it be so bad? Because it screws with every single economic entity in
the nation, in a way that pervasive, subtle, and micro-managing.

If you want to know where "1984" is, with Big Brother watching all of your
moves, it's not bullshit programs like TIA. It's making you rat out the guy
who is on disability but mows lawns on the side, or the guy who paints houses
at nights without reporting the income so he can send his kid to school. Or
the mom that babysits kids so that she can stay home.

Yes. These people are law-breakers. In a web of such complexity that 80% of
IRS's own employees can't answer sample tax questions, we are all law-
breakers. But this takes tax collection to a new low -- now I am going to be
responsible for "double-checking" on my neighbor who sold me those used lawn
mowers last year. I need to do my part to make sure he's reporting everything.

It is so outrageously stupid and infuriating that I still can't believe it is
true. I'm beside myself. So if I eat at Burger King during the week when I
travel, about the 120th time I buy a burger, I need to chalk them up for a
1099.

It's the worst thing for small businesses and the underground economy that
I've ever heard of the government doing. It just can't be true.

</rant>

ADD: And don't get me started with some bullshit about how the agency hasn't
decided yet how to enforce it. This is like saying the Congress voted to
install cameras in everybody's homes, but that might not be so bad because the
administrative work hasn't been done to decide who _exactly_ gets a camera and
when. As if this somehow mitigates things.

Also, for all of you folks down-voting me. Tell me I am wrong. I'm not a tax
professional and I don't read the political spin sites. The only reason I've
commented now is that this is the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this posted on HN.
So please. I would love to be wrong about this.

~~~
_delirium
Man, talk about hyperbole. This is probably a terrible idea economically, but
it's hardly a _Nineteen Eighty-Four_ scenario. It's not becoming illegal to
say "the IRS sucks", the IRS will not have cameras in your house looking for
the slightest sign of dissent, and it'll actually be nearly impossible to get
imprisoned for anything at all (tax penalties are generally merely more taxes,
unless you deliberately lie).

Also, you, as an individual, won't have to send 1099s to anyone, whether your
baby-sitter or lawn-mower or Office Depot. Only businesses will, though this
does include small businessmen and sole proprietorships (the way to
distinguish a sole proprietor from "just a person" is by whether you're
deducting those expenses as business expenses on a Schedule C or not).

~~~
Confusion
This _is_ a 1984 scenario, because virtually everyone becomes a criminal, as
everyone will fail to fill out all the proper 1099's. Consequently, at any
time you do something the government doesn't like, they can come and get you
for those incorrectly or unfiled 1099's.

(Reiterating what madair already replied to sprout, but I felt his point was
not as clear as it could be)

~~~
_delirium
That would require that "virtually everyone" is a business, which is not the
case. Somewhere less than 5% of the U.S. population run businesses. Again,
contrary to the misinformation rampant in this discussion, individual
expenditures that are not business expenses won't require 1099s. (Did anyone
even read the linked article?)

Even if that were not the case, it would hardly be a _1984_ scenario,
especially given that there are no criminal penalties for failing to file the
1099s. That's pretty absurdly embarrassing hyperbole that makes you sound like
you came from DailyKos or something. The war on drugs is more of a _1984_
scenario than requiring 1099s is, especially since it comes with widespread
criminal penalties.

~~~
sprout
>it would hardly be a 1984 scenario, especially given that there are no
criminal penalties for failing to file the 1099s.

I think that's the key of it right there. The worst the IRS could do if you
failed to file the 1099s is... force you to file the 1099s. The horror.

~~~
jmtulloss
They could also fine you or use it as an excuse to audit. Both of those things
are pretty unattractive for a small business.

------
subwindow
What the hell is up with this thread? This has to be the worst thread I've
ever seen at HN. You'd think this were a comment thread on Fox News or
something.

People: Chill the fuck out. The IRS is accepting comments on the issue. The
rule doesn't go into effect until, realistically, April of 2013. By then, it
is almost guaranteed that the rule will be significantly weakened to the point
where it is not much different than what we have in place now.

This isn't a world-ending or economy-destroying fuckup organized by big-
governement Democrats. It was a short-sighted clause put in by a politician
trying to close a loophole. This is why we have checks and balances- the
executive branch, which is actually in charge of implementing these rules,
will implement them in a sane way.

So put your conspiracy theories to bed and get on with life. File a comment
with the IRS and wait a couple of years. Then maybe you'll see that this was
just one big stink over nothing.

~~~
jimbokun
"By then, it is almost guaranteed that the rule will be significantly weakened
to the point where it is not much different than what we have in place now."

This is probably only true if people flip out over it now.

~~~
alnayyir
Intelligent and measured comment is more likely to be listened to, especially
if it comes from people educated in tax law and accounting.

I don't think the IRS is reading angry internet forums.

This law is just noodling. They're just fishing around for new income ideas,
throwing spaghetti at the wall, and seeing what sticks.

Don't freak out.

~~~
megablast
I am not so sure that is true. It is like saying, be polite to people in
stores and restaurants and you are more likely to get what you want, but the
fact is that you see pissed of people making a stink, and getting treated
better for fear of pissing them off.

We wish it was true, but it ain't.

~~~
chronomex
I work in a small store, where I'm the only person running the place. I eject
people who cause trouble.

------
Anechoic
The good news is that purchases made with a credit or debit card will be
exempt from this requirement. However this requirement is still likely to be a
huge pain for me at least because I use PayPal for a lot of vendors for totral
purchases over $600 in a year.

The IRS is accepting comments on this requirement at
<http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=225029,00.html>

~~~
btucker
Exactly. I'd assume most businesses do nearly all their purchasing through
credit/debit card. I know we certainly do. So I don't see how this is such a
big deal.

~~~
jcnnghm
The massive processing fees charged by the colluding credit card duopoly? Why
aren't checks, electronic funds transfers, and electronic checks included?

~~~
ccamrobertson
Thank's for bringing this out - it really gets to the heart of who is getting
paid off and the results of lobbying in creating artificial barriers through
regulation.

Ostensible justification is likely along the lines that the IRS can already
track credit & debit card purchases far more easily than purchase orders,
checks and cash. Regardless, this would be a major boon for the credit card
industry if it in fact goes forward as planned.

------
jcnnghm
This will be an unmitigated disaster. Office Depot will get 50 million or so
1099's. How do you deal with that many accounting discrepancies? How do you
match that many transactions to all those forms. What about under and over-
reporting? This is a Democrat clusterfuck if there ever was one.

~~~
InclinedPlane
More likely: most businesses will completely ignore this rule. It will either
go away before it comes into force or it will be so impractical to police that
it will be useless.

~~~
phr
The trouble with rules that remain on the books despite not usually being
enforced is that they create opportunities for selective enforcement when they
decide to crack down on you for other reasons, such as your political views.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Yup, they create potential for abuse of power. They also erode trust in
legislating bodies and the law in general.

See also: [http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-
Innocent/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-
Innocent/dp/1594032556)

------
roboneal
This can't generate remotely enough revenue to offset the compliance cost to
the business sector.

This is nothing more than a Federal jobs program at the expense of the private
sector.

~~~
mattmcknight
Part of what they are doing is getting the system ready to put a sales tax on
services. That will generate some serious revenue (or provide another
effective mechanism to steal money from some people to give to other people,
depending on your perspective.)

~~~
_delirium
Aren't services already covered by most states' sales taxes? I paid sales tax
when I got my oil changed recently, and my VPS provider charges sales tax if
I'm in the same state.

~~~
sprout
>if I'm in the same state.

And that happens what, 8% of the time? Most online services are evading sales
tax.

~~~
koenigdavidmj
Hell, if you're in Washington, Amazon will ship from an out-of-state warehouse
so that you still don't have to pay.

~~~
blahedo
It doesn't matter where the shipment is from; if the business has a point-of-
presence in the shipped-to state, they charge you sales tax for that state.
For instance, I bought some stuff at the Pendleton store in Portland, Oregon,
and had it shipped home to Illinois, and the clerk (very apologetically) told
me that he'd have to charge me sales tax since Pendleton owned stores in
Illinois. This despite the fact that I was physically in Oregon, the sale was
taking place in Oregon, the blankets were still in Oregon, and Oregon has no
sales tax at all.

------
mmaunder
There is an incredible amount of rhetoric from both sides of the isle on
supporting small businesses, supporting the entrepreneur, that entrepreneurs
are the job creators, that innovation will lead us out of this recession. But
it's all just politically correct talk.

This forum is filled with entrepreneurs and innovators. It has one of the
highest density of job creators of any forum on the web. Has anyone here seen
any help from the government in creating jobs? Either on the supply side
(grants) or on the demand side (tax breaks)? Or by reducing our administrative
workload? From either side of the isle, conservative or liberal?

Instead we have bureaucratic nightmares like this 1099 legislation that create
work that has a not insignificant opportunity cost for innovation and job
creation in this country. You could be coding, but instead you're issuing
1099's to walmart.

The reality is that even if this passes, we'll all do just fine and keep
innovating. But the next time some politician tells you he supports job
creation in this country be sure to call bullshit on him. They only say it
because it sounds good and they have done nothing to help us create jobs.

------
count
Check out: [http://www.taxgirl.com/new-rules-about-forms-1099-are-
causin...](http://www.taxgirl.com/new-rules-about-forms-1099-are-causing-a-
stir/)

for a less dramatic look at things.

~~~
mcritz
Thanks that link was the most helpful thing I read on the matter.

------
ck2
[http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_ca...](http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/)

    
    
      In any case, the final impact of the law won't be known 
      until the IRS issues its regulations on the new law, 
      which aren't expected to arrive until sometime next year. 
      The IRS has not yet commented on when it will release   
      regulations or schedule public hearings, and an agency  
      spokesman was unsure when it will do so.

~~~
cedsav
another quote: "Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., introduced legislation last week
that would repeal the new 1099 requirements."

Bottom line, a misguided attempt to improve income reporting and tax
collection is going to be either watered down by the IRS or killed in
congress. Maybe I'm a sad optimist, but to me it looks like democracy's still
working well :-)

~~~
jcnnghm
Democracy would be allowing the populace the time to read and digest multi-
thousand page bills before voting, and not allowing totally unrelated sweeping
changes hidden in bills. This has nothing to do with health care, whatsoever,
in any way shape or form.

~~~
knowtheory
Then you haven't been paying attention to either health care in general, or
the health care effort in specific.

The health care bill was effectively implemented as a tax bill. The entire
structure of the bill is a set of rules and initiatives set up to encourage
businesses and individuals to get or provide health insurance through a series
of tax raises and tax cuts.

The tax code is the mechanism through which this policy is implemented. I'd
love to hear what other mechanism you'd prefer for implementing a health care
plan. (And copping out by saying "it shouldn't have been implemented" isn't
gonna fly)

~~~
dantheman
Of course it shouldn't have been implemented.

If they were going to actually try to implement national health care it should
be done as constitutional amendment.

~~~
sp332
If the Air Force wasn't a big enough deal to require an amendment, neither is
health care.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Article 1, Section 8: _The Congress shall have Power To [...] raise and
support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a
longer Term than two Years;_

Are you seriously going to argue that "Armies" doesn't include the Air Force?

~~~
sp332
Specifically, I meant that the constitution explicitly gives each of the Army
and the Navy cabinet-level power and responsibility. The Air Force was given
the same power and responsibility, without amending the constitution.

~~~
yummyfajitas
Actually, I think I agree with you. They should change the org-chart and put
the AF back under the Army.

I still don't understand your comparison to Obamacare. Are you asserting that
the constitution would authorize Obamacare with some tweaks to heirerarchy?
Please explain.

~~~
sp332
Nope, I was just comparing the magnitude of the changes, not really the
structure.

~~~
yummyfajitas
How is the magnitude comparable? Obamacare is not authorized by the
constitution at all - to become constitutional, it would need to be
eliminated. To become constitutional, the Air Force would need one arrow in
the org chart to be changed.

I don't see the changes as being remotely comparable in magnitude.

------
rick888
It's things like this that will eventually force me to move my business (and
invariably, my employees) to another country. Why do they want to make it even
more difficult for small businesses?

------
nhebb
Last year a customer accidentally double entered my invoice in their system,
and paid me two checks instead of one. I contacted them to let them know of
the discrepancy, and never cashed the second check. Their system was never
corrected, and I got a 1099 showing I earned double the actual amount. I'm
still trying to iron this mess out, and it's just _one_ 1099.

~~~
Anechoic
The good news for you is that the uncashed second check will eventually show
up as a discrepancy on their books and they will have to deal with it. It make
take some time but it will happen.

~~~
jcnnghm
And if he gets audited before then for under-reporting his income?

~~~
anigbrowl
The original invoice and uncashed check would substantiate his explanation of
the error. I don't enjoy filling out forms etc., but somehow I manage to keep
my tax paperwork and business receipts chronically organized in case I ever
need to verify something.

------
javery
Already discussed here in-depth: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1306434>

(and about 10 more I don't feel like linking)

~~~
rortian
A bunch of uninformed whining is hardly in-depth. You'd think you couldn't
file these electronically or that people have to create, gasp, invoices for
the vast majority of such transactions.

~~~
jcnnghm
Cool so where do I send the 1099 for SAMs club, Office Depot, and the
restaurant down the street to? Will you come deal with the reporting
discrepancies for me. I'll be getting at least 1000 1099's a year, will you
deal with those for me? This is needless bueracratic bullshit to the maximum.

------
patrickgzill
The underground economy will explode. Working under the table will become much
more prevalent.

~~~
lsc
maybe? the problem is that if I pay you under the table, I'm paying you out of
/post tax/ money. this is to say, paying people under the table costs me about
50% more than reporting it. I don't think 1099s jack up the cost /that/ much.

------
phreeza
Sounds like a business opportunity to me? Build a specialized service that
handles those for mom'n'pops, small businesses, etc?

~~~
donw
And how; a service that just _catalogues_ tax IDs and handles sending out the
right paperwork would make mint... this might be perfect for somebody like
Indinero (a recent YC addition).

------
ojbyrne
New budgeting guideline - spend no more than $599 at any individual supplier.

~~~
sophacles
Wait -- wouldn't this help the economy by creating many competing entities in
any given space?

~~~
Yzupnick
Or hurt it by forcing people to use a less efficient supplier. Competition is
only good if it organic in nature, (ie: comes about because both have
efficient methods and high quality products, even though they differ to some
degree) not if it forced competition. Then you end up getting a worse product
when you could have gotten a better one.

------
akmiller
I don't like this at all but if you want to attempt to take a positive spin on
it you could see that this would be a lucrative area for many startups to
start offering services for handling these 1099's.

~~~
revicon
Cam here to make this comment. Wouldn't be too difficult to build a quick site
that aggregates all your transactions, auto-generates appropriate 1099s and
mails them to the company accounting addresses it has on file matching the
transaction records.

------
kaens
It's almost like the government is _trying_ to get its populace to silently
replace it.

~~~
shadowfox
With what?

~~~
kaens
I don't have a good "end goal" answer for that right now. I do think that the
technology that has popped up over the last few decades allows for means of
organization and collaboration for providing life necessities that were not
available for the vast majority of human history.

If I'm being idealistic, I think that a good bit of the historically useful
functions of government ( on a more abstract level, historically useful
functions of centralized authority )is made quite outdated by the availability
of global communications and exchange to the "common man". It's a can of worms
of a topic, and I don't really have the time to get into it right now, so I'll
leave it at that.

If I'm being extremely idealistic, I think we should be in a state of post-
scarcity in terms of shelter and food, and I think that the internet is a
large part of the way that humanity will get to that point if it ever does. In
the same vein, I lean towards thinking that getting to that state will become
rather _necessary_ for the continued growth and survival of our species, if
we're going to continue to grow and survive.

But yeah, can o' worms.

------
rwhitman
I know this is a really alarming issue, but there's no way this will ever
happen. Business lobbies are far too powerful to allow something like this to
slip by without a serious fight, and we've got 2 years.

Solution: write your congress person. Sign petitions etc and make a whole lot
of stinkin noise..

But I'm sure every Fortune 500 corp will be making even more noise about this
than small business owners. I can't imagine Walmart likes this anymore than
Joe's Hardware

------
terrellm
In addition to the 1099 nightmare, there's also the S-corp self employment tax
nightmare where all s-corp income has the 15.3% self-employment tax imposed,
not just the earned income. I predict a mass switch to C-corps.

From [http://www.businessbrief.com/feds-take-aim-at-small-biz-
loop...](http://www.businessbrief.com/feds-take-aim-at-small-biz-loopholes/)

 _Both House and Senate bills address what some lawmakers see as evasion of
employment tax by certain individuals. The Internal Revenue Service has stated
that many taxpayers receive nominal salaries and take their earnings through
distributions by S corps., limited partnerships, or other entities. The House
and Senate bills would change that situation by imposing self-employment
payroll taxes on 100% of S-corp. pass-through income when:

\- The S corp. is engaged in a professional service business, with the key
assets being the reputation and skill of no more than three employees, or

\- The S corp. is a partner in a professional service business._

------
borisk
A popular tactic of totalitarian governments is to pass laws which everyone
will have to break. So that if they don’t like someone, there is always a
lawful reason to take them down.

~~~
jorgem
We should do that to migrant labor.

------
bsnss-mn-cdr
If (Government && GetRidOfCash) $response = MakeCashUnusable($year=2012); //
Returns array with multiple options

echo $response[0];

"Success! New law implemented that will effectively make it so painful to use
cash, checks, ach and wire-transfers that everyone will use credit and debit
cards which we have full digital access to without direct user knowledge."

echo $response[1];

"Success! New law implemented that will effectively make it so painful to use
cash that everyone will start buying everything possible from overseas
companies who still accept PO's ( checks, ach and wire-transfers ) because the
shipping cost are more easy to predict than cost associated with absolute
compliance with this new law."

------
drawkbox
I see this as an immense opportunity to automate this via an software by your
identity at purchase. Why can't this be part of the software transaction and
automatically reported and available at the IRS real-time.

Our tax system is way too form and administrative based still. It is always
delayed and never real-time. Get this stuff out of the way and automate it
throughout the year. Hide income taxes and 1099s for contractors just like
they hide sales tax in transactions, or just rid of the income tax altogether
and go another direction.

------
hop
Anyone know why this was put into the bill? What good intentioned upside
someone is trying to accomplish?

Are cell phone companies going to issue 1099s to most of America, and all
users have to do the same?

~~~
Anechoic
_Anyone know why this was put into the bill? What good intentioned upside
someone is trying to accomplish?_

To make sure that retailers/sellers are accurately reporting their sales and
not lowballing their revenue numbers on their tax returns. It's basically to
reduce tax fraud with the hope that the extra tax income (which is assumed
that corps or fraudulently not paying) can be used to pay for health care
without having to add additional taxes.

------
RancheroTaco
While I disagree with the manner in which many of the "calm down, folks"-esque
comments take for granted that this issue will automagically sort itself out,
I do agree with them that there are more constructive ways to deal with it
than writing rants on HN.

Please, if you are, as I am, concerned about the potential consequences of
this provision, please calmly inform your representatives (especially ones on
the [very powerful] House Ways & Means Committee) that you would like them to
support HR 5141 ( <http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5141/show> ), which
selectively voids this provision.

Concisely and realistically emphasize the impact you believe this provision
will have on your present or future business(es). Also, IMHO, it would be
constructive to mention that (regardless of your stance of the ACA) you are
not expressing concern about the ACA as a whole, but rather about this
specific provision; Democrats may otherwise interpret your message as a
general attack on their hard-fought (perhaps Pyrrhic?) victory and Republicans
may take it as encouragement to frame the debate over HR 5141 as part of an
overall attack on the ACA, which would likely cause the the bill to fail. IOW,
know your audience.

------
friendlyhacker
[http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_ca...](http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/05/smallbusiness/1099_health_care_tax_change/)

------
lsc
seems like an opportunity for automation. I bet you could do something where
you slurp down a csv of your credit card transactions (most banks let you do
this) and then go through the merchant IDs to figure out who to send the 1099
to. Now, sure, going from the merchant ID to a tax id and address for a 1099
would be quite a lot of work, but that's where the central service comes in.
You could either sell the credit card id-> tax id database, or you could
'crowdsource' it- (though you would have to solve a major trust problem) when
one user of your service figured out the tax id mapping they would share it
with the others.

------
mark_l_watson
I am a little concerned about this. While I do some consulting work for large
companies and we do 1099s anyway, I also do a lot of very small projects
(mostly helping other developers get started or get up to speed on something I
know more about than they do). For these little jobs that are paid for via
PayPal, now small customers need to do a 1099 with me - a hassle for them
probably means not as many little 1 week jobs.

Also, as a consumer of goods and services, now I need to do a 1099 for Amazon,
people I hire for small bits of work, the local electronics store, etc.?

~~~
subwindow
As for getting paid for small jobs and paying people for small jobs, if you
paid the person more than $600 in a tax year, you should have already been
giving/receiving 1099s.

The only difference with the new rule is that you'd have to give 1099s to
vendors.

~~~
mark_l_watson
We are OK on paying vendors: for hiring a handyman one or twice a year, a
plumber about once a year, and a brush removal service we are under the $600
limit - we mostly do things ourselves. I am more concerned with small
customers who pay me a thousand or two a year via PayPal - now they have
hassles. It would be really good if PayPal had some service that automated
this!

~~~
chronomex
They very well may, by the time this rolls around.

------
mattchew
So, is this going to be mitigated somehow, or will everyone just ignore the
requirement, or will somebody launch Fresh1099s.com and make a pile of money
to reduce my headaches considerably? Stay tuned . . .

------
netmau5
I think that we feel a loss of control over our common politic and that is
making even the most rational of us feel like we have to yell and curse to
have our disagreements registered, even in a quiet room.

------
ubernostrum
I'd be curious to hear how many of the outraged people in this thread already
deal with at least, say, 4-5 1099s (other than the obligatory one your bank
sends you to report interest earned) in a year.

------
gruseom
It's easy to see that this is much ado about nothing: if it actually happens
as described, it will do significant harm to major politician-owning
interests. Therefore it won't happen.

------
danbmil99
what this means in practice I suspect is that audits will result in more
findings of non-compliance, therefore more penalty revenue for the IRS. While
I agree it's stupid paperwork, if your vendors pay their taxes, and you are
keeping your accounts correctly, it probably won't be the biggest deal on the
planet to generate a bunch of 1099's for your expenses.

------
SkyMarshal
The great injustice here as I see it is, Wall Street destroys the economy,
makes billions doing it, passes the cost on to US Government via skilled use
of FUD (especially the F part), capture, and paid-for access, and gets away
clean (with a few show trials like Madoff).

Now the government is so cash strapped that they're looking to squeeze the
rest of the country to make up for it. This appears to be the greatest reverse
wealth transfer I've ever witnessed or even read about.

------
rbranson
All they did was make corporations the same as people for 1099 reporting.
Don't you just LOVE the hypocritical irony?

------
rradu
1099s are for services only, not products. Buying paper doesn't count as a
service.

~~~
chronomex
This bill changes the requirement to apply to physical goods as well.

------
bsaunder
Sounds like job creation to me.

~~~
jpcx01
Agreed, but also wealth destruction for all of us except those employed in
these unproductive jobs.

~~~
Empact
Not "except." The jobs of the wealth destroyers don't count as wealth
creation.

------
korch
_Theoretically, an Age of Bureaucracy can last until a paper shortage
develops, but, in practice, it never lasts longer than 73 permutations. — Adam
Weishaupt_

    
    
      — Robert Anton Wilson, The Illuminatus! Trilogy
    

I say great, bring it on! The sooner we Immanentize the Eschaton, the better!

Fiction aside, I predict this law will get repealed pretty quickly and quietly
before it goes into effect. The amount of added annual tax revenue from this
is projected to only be $20 billion, and as soon as various interest and trade
groups realize how much more the extra paperwork is going to cost them, then
they'll be screaming at the Congress-critters. They already went through this
process with SOX.

It's the Government's duty to maximize tax revenues, so if the cost of doing
business in general causes a decrease in many company's profits, then there is
less overall income to tax. If that amount of lost tax revenue is more than
the projected increase of $20 billion, and I bet it is, then it makes sense to
repeal that particular law.

~~~
Calamitous
> I predict this law will get repealed pretty quickly and quietly before it
> goes into effect.

> They already went through this process with SOX

Has SOX been repealed, then? I know of at least two businesses it's prevented
from an IPO.

It only makes sense to repeal if the gov't _motive_ is to maximize revenue. As
we've seen repeatedly, "duty" is not a concept that impacts career politicians
in the slightest.

------
whyenot
Next time link to the original article, which is here:
[http://www.chcchoices.org/Article/28083/Consumer_Power_Repor...](http://www.chcchoices.org/Article/28083/Consumer_Power_Report_231.html)

In this case the report was produced by the Hearland Institute which Wikipedia
describes as "an American conservative public policy think tank based in
Chicago, Illinois that advocates free market policies."

Based on some of the bullshit they have published when it comes to global
warming, they seem to be more interested in pursuing a political agenda than
sticking to the facts.

"Most scientists do not believe human activities threaten to disrupt the
Earth's climate."

"The most reliable temperature data show no global warming trend."

"A modest amount of global warming, should it occur, would be beneficial to
the natural world and to human civilization."

"The best strategy to pursue is one of 'no regrets'."

~~~
hugh3
How is that relevant to anything?

~~~
whyenot
How do you know they are telling the truth? Maybe this is just scaremongering
from a group with a certain political agenda. Before getting excited it would
be nice to see the same information from a less biased source. How is that not
relevant?

