IRS getting serious about rich tax cheats

[Number Six]

That's a start. But what about the IRS computers? Are they going to get the most powerful computers and software they need to identify all the ruses and tricks most of us are quite familiar with? If I want to cash a check at the payee's bank, will it be tied to a social security number and matched with tax records?

All those who have been public on their tax non-compliance easily have money coming to them intercepted or deducted from their bank accounts but there are 1001 ways around this. The IRS can go back indefinitely in a tax-payers records if there is indication of criminal tax fraud or evasion, but are they using the best programs to filter through billions of records to identify untaxed checks and other income?

This is the burning question: Why isn't the Internal Revenue Service being given the tools to do its job?

[LaVidaRoja]

There is also the small complication that as a system is being designed, Congress changes the law!

[Nikki]

There's also the trivial detail that, as the replacement systems are being developed and implemented, the existing systems have to keep running 24/7 to keep processing everything.

Then, when the new systems come up, there has to be a parallel operation period to validate all the data and operations. That means every single transaction must be completely processed through both the legacy and the replacement system. Thus, there's a need for 100% duplication of every data entry operation PLUS 100% validation of the applications after every processing cycle.

This wouldn't have been such a big deal, except that the replacement/upgrade is at least 20 years overdue and the existing systems take every cycle of available processing power just to keep up.

A reasonable comparison would be taking a trans-atlantic airline flight leaving New York in a Boeing 707 and upgrading it to a 747 before touching down in London.

[Number Six]

What, then would be the minimum amount of money required to make this change happen--i.e. have a second, modern, compatible system engineered moving forward so that the chance of a crash is minimal? What would be required in terms of leadership?

From the practical money-saving standpoint, would it help if Congress rescinded some of the reforms of 1997-1998? I would think that the current President and Congress would want to get this done ASAP. Next time I do a FOIA request, I'll see if they have updated. Last time I did one they were totally in the dark about my income.

[Judge Roy Bean]

From a systems design/development standpoint, the task is the equivalent of producing a perpetual motion machine.

"Getting serious about rich tax cheats?"

Hmmmmm.... Serious about those who aren't appropriately connected is more like it.

[Melted Rabbit]

What, then would be the minimum amount of money required to make this change happen--i.e. have a second, modern, compatible system engineered moving forward so that the chance of a crash is minimal? What would be required in terms of leadership?

I would imagine that much of the software used by the IRS uses obscure programming languages like COBOL, Prolog, or old dialects of Fortran. Finding enough programmers to migrate the systems to a modern language is difficult because current universities often times have graduates of their computer science programs have only studied Java or C# and that do not know how to program in even program in recent languages like C++ or standard C. The programmers that do understand those older languages are nearing and/or have reached retirement age.

On the other hand, it has not helped that in the last twenty years there have been numerous fads in programming that have appeared quickly and then died a short quick death. Finding a possible solution and then hiring an outside private contractor to do a project based on a new programming fad is a recipe for quite a bit of pain. Especially with the all of the earmarks that Congress has passed through the years.

Sadly, programs also require constant maintenance that a one-off contract would not supply. IMHO, the IRS should have its own competent staff and management to perform its programming needs in house. The department should also have the same level of oversight and independence as the rest of the IRS. Granted, this also means that such a department would need adequate funding and a staff receiving wages similar to private industry. Good luck on that. In the mean time IBM makes mainframes capable of running COBOL that have increased in power and speed in a manner similar to that of personal computers.

[Nikki]

COBOL

Try ALC.

At the time the systems were written, there just wasn't enough computer power available to do the processing while wasting overhead on higher-level languages.

Many of the applications were written in ALC to squeeze every possible cycle out of the mainframes. Unfortunately, they are STILL in ALC and the pool of qualified ALC programmers keeps shrinking every year.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Then it's a good thing I've kept up on my Fortran, LISP, ALC, Pascal, COBOL and a host of other "dead" languages.

LISP is by far my favorite. Garbage collectors rock!

[Number Six]

I saw the 60 Minutes interview with whistleblower Brad Birkenfield last night. I guess it's a story of "no good deed goes unpunished" or "kill the messenger"; except for the fact that he may hit the jackpot after going to jail.

Anyone have a prediction when the IRS will have adequate computer power to have a better basis for audits?

[webhick]

Anyone have a prediction when the IRS will have adequate computer power to have a better basis for audits?

Right around the time we balance the budget...so...3052?