107 comments

[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 183 ms ] thread
Intuit is guilty of using a whole range of dark UI patterns to trick people into paying for products they don't need. Last year I almost paid $80 (surprise at the END of the entire TurboTax flow) and clicked back 10 steps to realize that they showed a deceptive screen that implied that you had to select that option.

Their marketing emails are particularly deceptive, and if you try to opt out of them and unsubscribe, they force you to enter personal information you don't readily have access to to "confirm your identity."

I lost a lot of respect for Intuit from the lack of respect they show consumers.

Other sites are no better. This yeah I went through the whole flow on H&R Block, and only at the end did they say they couldn't file my taxes because of one 1099-NEC. However I still had to pay full price to print out my forms. Which I had to print and send myself.
I’m not going to shill too hard for a tax prep company, but I’ve used FreeTaxUSA for years and am satisfied. Cheap, simple, no hidden fees I’ve noticed.
I've used them for five or six years. They keep getting better. The name sounds super sketchy, but they're legit.

They do charge for oddball forms, but they're super up front about that. Like when you select the forms they tell you the price. I have multiple income streams and multiple weirdo tax situations (farming, day job, three consulting firms, my own consulting) and it still only takes me 30 minutes to do my taxes with them.

Relative of a FreeTaxUSA employee here.

> The name sounds super sketchy, but they're legit.

I've told them to change their name, and my relative has told them to change their name.

Their marketing department is...dumb, IMO. (My relative told me about a semi-recent marketing campaign, and it was laughable.) But quite frankly, I prefer a company where the marketing department is the only incompetent one.

Tell your relative they're doing really good work, but a little change to their website might do wonders. Nothing crazy, maybe just something to make them not look like identity thieves.

>I prefer a company where the marketing department is the only incompetent one.

I have never thought about that, but it is exactly spot on. They're really good at what they do and really bad at selling it. Word of mouth seems to be the only way they get customers. I read about them on reddit and started using them. Now I tell everyone about that service.

> Tell your relative they're doing really good work, but a little change to their website might do wonders.

You're absolutely correct. Fortunately, my relative is aware. Unfortunately, she's tried to tell them, and they don't believe her.

It annoys her so much.

Tell her to show them this thread and how they're effectively turning into a laughing stock in spite of a great product (well, at least hoping my comment sends the message so she doesn't have to be so upfront about it :P).
The name is sketchy and the website is just as bad. Every instinct I have says they're a shady scam site just waiting to steal my info.

But no, they're actually good and just have terrible marketing and design.

Sure makes doing my taxes interesting. I've been using them for three years

>But no, they're actually good and just have terrible marketing and design.

Maybe we should realize WE are in the wrong for conflating "Shiny, animation filled website" with "not scam".

I think we've all learned to conflate these things from lived experience, not some mis-placed prejudice against ugly UIs.
I dunno, it's a little hard to trust a website is up to date on present day tax law when the entire site design came from a 1990s reject bin.
What forms do they charge for? I've only seen them charge for state taxes.
I would love to keep using them, but looking at my current tax year, I want to file a specific state form that they do not support. For estimated taxes calculated by annualized income installment method because my income is tilted towards the end of the year. I haven't paid any estimated taxes for the first two quarters, and without this I'd have underpayment fees.

I did ask them about this two years ago, so if they don't add it for 2023, I'll have to look into other options.

i've been seeing this pattern on so many posts on hn that criticize basically anything. i'm not trying to have a stab at you specifically btw, this is more meta

> x is bad because of this obvious reason that it is bad

> "but y and z are also bad!"

what is that supposed to be a rebuttal to? is the implication that we should.. do nothing because everything else is also shit? i don't see why turbotax in this instance shouldn't be punished. that would set a nice precedent at least

> i don't see why turbotax in this instance shouldn't be punished.

I don't see why they should only be punished 141 million dollars - they undoubtedly made a lot more money than that out of these shady practices. Therefore, this is just a "cost of doing business" and won't curtail such behavior in the future.

Not until the penalty is severe enough to put the fear into them.

I feel like these penalties for corporate misbehavior are exactly as you describe: heads I-win; tails I-win-now-then-pay-it-back-later.

If we don't make the fines something like 3x the gains by default, but leave it at 1x disgorgement, we should expect rational players to keep playing the game the same way.

You see this in any internet discussion, such as about gun violence - “well knives can kill people too and we’re not outlawing those.”
And indeed in England most knives require that you have a specific lawful purpose to carry them. "Self defence" isn't a lawful purpose. The small folding knives on some utility tools are exempt but that's all.

All weapons are illegal. Purpose made, improvised, even just I picked up a glass and threatened people with it, that's a weapon and it's illegal to have weapons.

I don't think it's a rebuttal. I don't think it's a "but"; it appears to be an "and". The implication is a warning for people who may look to an alternative to inuit based on this - stay away from H&R Block as well. No one said anything about inuit not being punished.
I’ve used Free Tax USA for the past 6-7 years, and there are no dark patterns. Free federal filing will be the default option if you qualify (based on AGI), offers for extra services are clear about not being necessary for filing, and filing state taxes costs maybe $12.

I don’t usually recommend products but Free Tax USA is one of the most honest companies I’ve dealt with online, they’ve never thrown a curveball at me. It’s refreshing to deal with a company who is satisfied with just making money and not squeezing every possible dollar out of you.

It is interesting to note how ideology ends up being used as just another marketing tool in situations like this.

Resisting simplifying tax filing, to keep the tax system annoying, is seen as a way to build anti-tax political support. Among other things, that creates opportunities for barnacles like Intuit to scam people out of money like this. And once Intuit funds those pols' re-election bids, the cycle of life is complete.

Coalitions are funny things. Sometimes it is hard to tell who is suckering whom.

> Their marketing emails are particularly deceptive, and if you try to opt out of them and unsubscribe, they force you to enter personal information you don't readily have access to to "confirm your identity."

That shouldn't be legal, and I'm surprised that doesn't get their emails redirected to /dev/null by everyone. Stuff like that doesn't even deserve the modicum of respect that getting sent to Spam denotes, mail providers should just reject it at the MTA until Intuit stops.

Even having to enter my email address is too much. You sent it to me, you need a two click unsubscribe at worst. Otherwise it’s spam.
Totally agree. I would be behind email providers requiring bulk emails to implement whatever Gmail uses to provide that Unsubscribe button at the top of emails so you don't even have to go to their website. Any degree of difficulty is a bad pattern, and email providers should help discourage that with a heavy hand.

Edit: And also severe penalties for failing to actually unsubscribe someone within 24 hours of clicking that button. I don't want to hear any "it could take up to a week" bullshit. If people can transfer millions of dollars in a matter of days, they should be able to take me off a mailing list instantly.

So long as "whatever Gmail uses" really means "whatever the IETF [or other standards body] RFC defines" and gmail just happens to implement that RFC, sure.

Otherwise, I'm not inclined to give an advertising company control over the worldwide opt-out process for advertising emails...

The 24 hours vs 7 days thing doesn't bother me at all, frankly. I care about not getting your bullshit for the next decade. If you squeak 4 more in and then stop because you have (or claim to have) a bunch of nightly processes that all need to complete, fine.

I mean... They pay off literally every single lawmaker, to make sure that you will pay them for doing your taxes.

If you had any respect for them at any time, you probably shouldn't have. The level of corruption that they support is stunningly humongous. And even if you're using your "local tax person" - you're likely to be still making them money... as many CPAs use Intuit's software.

My tax guy uses Intuit Software as well. And I pay him 10x the cost of Turbo Tax. But I pay him for expertise / peace of mind.

Intuit can fleece me all they want. Give me non-BS advanced features and I will gladly pay way more. Just don't trick my mom & dad. But I guess they need to make their money from the masses.

Let's be real - us paying them $4000 per year isn't going to make them money.

Tricking your parents into paying for things that they don't even need - that's where the money is.

Selling 20 $2mil cars per years isn't as valuable as selling 1mil "cheap" $700 iPhones per year.

Holy smokes do you ever have complicated taxes!
I do, and when I do I get a tax person. But 7 out of 8 years in a row my taxes were standard deduction...

Question is - how does it excuse Intuit at all?

Democrats have the opportunity to change that. Every time Republicans are in charge, the Democrats scream loudly about letting the IRS offer their own free tax filing service and blame Republicans for it not happening. The IRS is trying again right now to offer free filing and the Democrats are in charge of Congress and the presidency. They can make this happen or they can let the IRS's work go to waste and reserve this issue for screaming at Republicans again next time they have control over the White House or part of Congress.
Are you assuming Democrats are inherently good and well-meaning and could not make this happen due to a missed opportunity?

Because corruption goes both ways. There's a reason one party blames the other for X when the other is in power, and then do nothing about X when they are in power.

I agree with you. The Democrats and Republicans in our government mostly agree on the topic we are discussing in this thread.

There is no radical movement discussed within our government to actually solve these problems. No politician is making serious attempts to improve our bureaucratic system.

The Inflation Reduction Act directed the IRS to create a feasibility study on direct file

"The report focuses on three areas: taxpayer opinions, cost and feasibility. The report also includes an analysis conducted by an independent third party, as required by the statute. The report also lays out the potential benefits and challenges associated with the IRS implementing a Direct File program."

https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-submits-direct-file-report-...

(comment deleted)
Democrats have not been in charge for a couple decades or more.

Manchin has long not toed the line with Democrats, and Sinema is officially not a Democrat, so they are not even at 50 senate votes. And they are the minority in the House, so they clearly do not have any control of Congress.

You also need 60 votes in the Senate for whatever reason, which they are nowhere close to. The last time sort of had it, which was again a heavily compromised 60 votes, was Jun to Dec 2009 during which time PPACA was passed.

For anyone curious, Wikipedia has a great article[1] showing party trifecta history in Congress (though keep in mind what lotsofpulp said about needing 60 votes in the Senate for true control, which is rare for both parties).

And when Democrats were stronger in Congress earlier in Biden's term they did pass legislation giving funding to the IRS to explore developing software for doing taxes (Sec. 10301 (1)(B) of the Inflation Reduction Act[2]).

Further, when Republicans forced the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 during the last debt ceiling increase "crisis" they specifically listed (1)(B) as part of their recension of funds[3], though I don't think it had any meaningful impact because the study had already been made and released. [4]

Because $15,000,000 was a really big deal to the federal deficit. /s

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat...

[2] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-117publ169/html/PLA...

[3] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-118publ5/html/PLAW-...

[4] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-submits-direct-file-report-...

It's really funny when a party is in power and they have to pretend to be "working hard" but the goal is obviously to maintain the status quo.

Almost had them with force the vote.

Democrats complained about healthcare

Obama pushed the ACA (Obamacare), had to compromise to get it passed, later it was gutted by Republicans, with key provisions remaining

1. Children can remain on parent's healthcare plan until 26

2. Insurance companies can't deny coverage for existing diseases

Republicans almost got rid of these provisions and it was saved by one vote from John McCain who did it out of spite and not because he agreed with the ACA [1]

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/health/obamacare/mccain-hated-obamac...

That has nothing to do with force the vote. Force the vote proved establishment democrats are never going to even try to give you healthcare. They are terrified of a medicare for all vote hitting the floor when they have a majority.
How did it prove that?
They fought kicking and screaming to not have to bring a medicare for all vote to the floor. If they wanted it, you'd expect the opposite, but that never happens.
> The IRS is trying again right now to offer free filing and the Democrats are in charge of Congress and the presidency.

No, Democrats are not in charge of Congress; Republicans have a majority in the House of Representatives and Democrats have a narrow majority, relying on two members that fairly consistently undermine Democratic policy priorities, in the Senate (and even without that problem don't have the 60 votes it takes to move normal legislation over a filibuster in the Senate.)

Honestly, I think there are just a lot of really naive people who visit this site… and I think there are a lot of bad actors here who are complicit too.

Anyone who’s been in the game for more than a few years knows how amoral companies are. Marketers and growth PMs are incentivized to convert, regardless of the methods used. Execs don’t give a shit unless there’s an impact on revenue.

Anecdata - I PM a product suite that serves growth/marketers. If you’re reading this, your company has probably used it, is actively using it, or has considered using it. I regularly ask customers and prospects about their KPIs during research calls - in the end, conversion is all that matters.

Why would you respect it in the first place? It's a faceless corporation that for decades has been lobbying congress for the privilege of ripping you off. Save your respect for real people, at least.
after getting owned by intuits bs 2 years in a row, I went to an accountant. $70/y, he does EVRYYHING, no gotyas or bs. I walk in or drop off all the papers he needs, he asks me a bunch of questions, files everything, I leave with all my federal, state, and local taxes filed. he guarantees a backup, I get a envelope with everything in it labels nicely, and if I ever get audited, he guarantees that he will handle all of the audit procedures as part of the cost, no extra cost.

that type of easy service and peace of mind is just toooo good for only $70. blows my mind that everyone doesn't do it.

> Last year I almost paid $80 (surprise at the END of the entire TurboTax flow) and clicked back 10 steps to realize that they showed a deceptive screen that implied that you had to select that option.

I hit this two years ago. When I finally undid it (took me a good 20-30 minutes), it removed all the work I did. I then had the option to restore it for $80 and it was still implying that I had to pay this no matter what. I spent another 20 minutes trying to fill things out again before I hit a loop that wouldn't let me through without paying. The issue seemed to be that I was working remote in a different state and it was trying to get me to file taxes with both states even though it said I didn't need to file anything! I sucked it up and paid. So I avowed to never use them again. Last year I used FreeTaxUSA and had no issues. I just paid $15 for state and that was it. My taxes are simple, able to use a 1040EZ, having to pay $80 is a fucking joke.

Fuck TurboTax, I'm never going back. Fuck this whole system too. We should at minimum have return free filing for 1040EZ users but really should for almost everyone. Seriously, Meta/Equifax/etc can collect all my financial info but the fucking IRS can't use all the information that is legally required to be sent to them to send me a fucking bill (really a rebate)? What a fucking joke. One party wants to kill the IRS, why not at least make it not a fucking joke and bureaucratic shit show first?

I always found it amazing that the amount of time it took to query their database was the exact amount needed to complete the animation.
Good thing i turned down an offer with them, in london, uk, over ten years ago. Money was sweet but i sensed the stink.
Glad to see they're facing consequences for this misleading nonsense. They got me one year where I went through the entire process only to find out at the end it cost money if I wanted to input my student loans. Due to that (and many other dark patterns noticed during the process) I will never voluntarily use an Intuit product again.

FreeTaxUSA doesn't pull any nonsense & I've been happy with it every year since.

I've used FreeTaxUSA for the past two years as well, and have been very happy with it. I'll put all my info into turboTax, and let it calculate my refund, then put the same data into FreeTax and verify it's the same. It's saved me a LOT of money.
My relative works for FreeTaxUSA. She's happy to hear you're happy!
At the time of writing this their stock is only down .41% or 2.41$.

I’m sure they’ll get a fine of 1% of their earnings.

A company centered around accounting and taxes? They'll figure out a way to claim its 2000% of their earnings and on appeal claim that its too burdensome.
After a surprise bill of over $100 from H&R block I've been using FreeTaxUSA and have been very happy to pay $15 for state filing.

The UI is just as good as TurboTax or H&R block.

The UI is better than taxAct which I'd been using for years. I got my taxes done in half the time without all the "wait while we calculate...".
What was the surprise bill of $100 for?

My god, at that rate you might as well just hire a private accountant.

(comment deleted)
I wrote a book and had a small amount of royalty income to declare, which meant I needed the 'premium' package on top of the state filing.

I think Intuit has made almost as much money from my book as I have!

The last time I had my taxes professionally done it was over $300, and that was 3 years ago now.
My relative works for FreeTaxUSA. I'm glad to hear you like them. She is too.

They're also great to their employees. My relative got a mostly paid vacation recently on top of great PTO.

Edit: Also, my relative is partially responsible for the UI, so she's happy to hear you like it.

The UI for 8949 is worse than TurboTax, for the edge case of having a lot of non-covered shares. (Technically you can mail a paper copy of all the 1099-B to the IRS to work around this problem)

And I think some 1099-R codes used to have buggy question flow, but it's better now.

So far that's the only two things I've found worse than TurboTax, and certainly not worth paying Intuit for.

> (Technically you can mail a paper copy of all the 1099-B to the IRS to work around this problem)

I do this every year. Got into the habit because some index fund thing I had a couple bucks of in my portfolio did some weird shit with stock dividends and ended up producing over a hundred transactions amounting to just over the "round to zero" amount of profit. It's really not that much of a headache as long as you have access to a printer. One form, check a box, scribble "TO THE IRS" on an envelope and jam it and your 1099 in and call it a day. Not a soul is going to bother checking the details anyway, since they already have the contents of your 1099.

> Not a soul is going to bother checking the details anyway, since they already have the contents of your 1099.

the issue is for non-covered shares, where they don't have the full contents of the 1099.

HR block got me once. They said I needed the premium package for some slightly unusual form that I ended up not actually needing. But once you click that button to enable premium features, there is no possible way of removing it. You're forced to pay the $80 no matter what.

I just copied my data to FreeTaxUSA and filed everything for free. Fuck them.

I've been very happy with Cash App Taxes for the past few years. They are actually 100% free no matter what. Federal, state, extra forms. All free.
One caveat to this is when CreditKarma Taxes was acquired by CashApp they forced users to sign up for CashApp and install it on a phone in order to continue doing taxes
It's not even the most annoying login system I have to deal with (2FA is truly out of hand at this point), but I certainly dont appreciate being strong-armed into installing an app that I want nothing to do with.
Intuit bought Credit Karma but had to divest from their free tax filing option, they're a good alternative.
Credit Karma's tax filing app was bought by Cash App and now has a login system that requires you to have Cash App on your phone to do taxes on your desktop. I use it regardless because the alternatives are somehow worse, but I think the writing is on the wall.
Administrative law "judges" are unconstitutional.
That hasn’t been determined, and while they’re sometimes controversial, I’m not sure they are unconstitutional as long as there’s a path to appeal to Article III courts.

Just as a point of reference, military tribunals and immigration courts also fall outside of Article III as well.

[flagged]
5 U.S.C. § 3105 pretty clearly creates a set of administrative law judges under each agency. The decisions reached by these agencies can be appealed in a federal court, making them ultimately inferior to the Supreme Court.

What about this setup violates the clause you quoted?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3105

I see a lot of handwaving and very little substance. Can you make a direct, explicit argument please?
[flagged]
For those who may not understand your comment, this is a summary of the issue at hand here [0] and some commentary here [1].

[0] - https://wp.nyu.edu/compliance_enforcement/2023/06/12/ftc-dim...

[1] - https://ogletree.com/insights/supreme-court-ruling-questions...

Conservatives hate the administrative state and want to destroy it. They would prefer the free market solve all problems instead of regulators like the SEC or FTC or EPA.

The Federalist Society has been workshopping this fringe theory that Congress isn't allowed to delegate enforcement decisions to federal agencies and that administrative judges are somehow unconstitutional. This was an unsuccessful (!) argument against the New Deal, but now thanks to a far-right Supreme Court it's a live issue again.

Can you imagine if Congress had to vote on whether to punish Intuit for misleading ads? It would obviously result in the effective end of entire categories of regulation.

Have you looked at the statistics on how ALJs rule, and how long they take to do it? The “administrative law” system is extremely Kafka-esque.
Have you looked at statistics on how criminal juries rule?

I don't find that a convincing argument.

A system working poorly doesn't make it unconstitutional. It also doesn't prevent it from being slightly modified to work well.
> system working poorly doesn't make it unconstitutional

Due process and equal protection.

Can we just switch to pre-filled tax forms already? The average American spends about $200/year and 12hrs preparing their taxes. This study from last year found that pre-filled tax forms would be accurate for 42-48% of people. That is already amazing, and I'm sure that number could be doubled over 10-20 years.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w30008

How do you know if you're one of the 42-48%, though? I'd love easier taxes, but not if I've got a 50/50 chance of getting hassled over it in a year.
I suspect that number would go way up by just providing a way to declare your dependents.

Right now, for the vast majority of the population, especially those who don't just pay an accountant, their taxes consist of a "Where's Waldo" copy-and-paste adventure combining information from their W-2s and 1099s onto a handful of other forms, then adding up like 3 numbers. If that describes your tax filing experience, a pre-filled form would be perfect. Any omitted details are more likely to be in the government's favor than your own.

But that’s the average American. Like everything in America, if you make enough money it’s not a problem. Just pay for an accountant.
Yeah... My accountant wants $2300 per year to make sure that we withhold the correct amount. (that sum is also no tax deductible)

The whole system is created to screw you... and yet many people defend it.

how would you handle the large number of deductions and credits everyone files for yearly? does the fed know of o bought a solar generator and plan on taking a credit? do they know if I had my windows replaced and plan on a deduction? do they know how many square feet my at home office is, or how much I spent in supplies? do they know if I plan on taking the general deduction or itemizing?
All of those purchases and deductions put you outside of the 42-48% that the parent is referencing.
File your own not using the pre-filled forms as you do today? While it won't for some doesn't mean it can't be the default option for many
Every single rational country provides a tax form to their residents, that is prefilled. You get the bill, with explanations. You file documentation with the tax authorities and then you get a response.

I have done that in multiple countries - getting tax refunds and other benefits at the end of the tax year. I even ran a business in the "tax heavy EU", where all of my tax related duties were at most 30 minutes per month(that's with payroll and other common business bookeping)

Meanwhile in US - IRS knows what you owe, IRS is legally banned to tell you and you're forced to pay a third party to send your documentation to IRS... oh... and they also make mistakes very often.

Yet for some reason, people like you are up in arms.. do you work at Intiut or something?

There's probably not a single lawmaker that they don't have on the hooks, along with a litany of CPA's who's sole existence depends on you requiring to have someone just input numbers into Intuit QuickBooks.

And most Americans just pretend that it's "fine".

Fun fact - to avoid under-withholding my CPA wants to charge me $2300 per year, that's not tax deductible. A simple thing of making sure that my withholdings are correct throughout the year and I don't have to pay IRS more in April...

So no. This is a corrupt system, that most Americans just pretend is "the norm".

One major issue is the number of jobs the current system props up. I wouldn't call it corruption when a lobbyist tells a Senator that pre-filled tax forms would cost their district 10k jobs. But I don't think the government should avoid providing preventative dental care because it might affect dentists' bottom line.
I'm not too convinced about the lobbying argument. I know they spend $2-3M per year on lobbying. but 1) our govt doesnt get anything done anyways, regardless of how much Intuit spends. I believe the null hypothesis is pretty likely here (they could not spend that money and still be the #1 tax company and no real laws get passed to take that away from them). 2) $3M just doesnt sound like a lot to a company as big as Intuit. If that's all it takes to get congress on your side, seems like not that big an obstacle in the first place for any company in any industry.

I am open to more direct evidence to the contrary though.

No kidding. Turbotax is THE case study of dark patterns.
I dont live in the us, but i am curious, what prevents open source developers from writing a decent open source alternative? Or other smaller companies from competing with intuit? Is there a law only allowing them to idk use government apis? To me it sounds like intuit is about to be disrupted one way or another.
The tax code is very complex, changes quite a bit every year, and a FOSS developer could not guarantee the accuracy of the generated tax forms. On top of that, each state has a different tax code, which further complicates any development effort.