Tax Masters review: Horrible Negligent Service 84

This is a copy of the letter that I sent to Tax Masters. Of course, there has been no contact except through the Houston BBB whose hands are tied. I also contacted the Texas Attorney General's Office and the Consumer Fraud Office of the FTC. So far, nothing, and judging by the other complaints, I can expect nothing. Anyone for a class action lawsuit?

January 7, 2009

To: Quality Assurance, Tax Masters
From: Client #R7209
Re: Contract screwups

On December 30, 2009, I contacted Tax Masters through e-mail (at 9:07 am) regarding a rejected Offer in Compromise from the IRS. Antonio Ruiz called me on December 30, 2009 to discuss what Tax Masters could do to help. At that time, I agreed to work with Antonio, and he explained the billing to me. I was told that the cost would be $4750.00, that fees were deductible, and that I could make payments in installments. Antonio and I agreed on January 8, 2010 and February 8, 2010 as dates for two installments of $2375 to be withdrawn from my checking account.

I received an e-mail at 3:35 pm from Abigail Venegas with the Engagement Agreement and Power of Attorney to sign and fax back. The Engagement Agreement listed the dates of installments as December 30, 2009 and January 8, 2010. I immediately called Antonio to tell him that the dates were incorrect. He said he would notify Billing of the changes and send out new paperwork. I told him I would not sign the incorrect paperwork. I have yet to sign any paperwork.

On January 4, 2010 the first installment was taken from my checking account. I immediately called Tax Masters, albeit after hours and left a message for Antonio to call me. I again left a message for Antonio to get back to me regarding this matter on January 6, 2010 and did not receive a response. I called again this morning (1/7/2010) at 8:15 am and was put through to the Billing Department because Antonio again was not in the office.

I spoke with Aaron Sinclair in Billing, and his records did not show that a change in billing dates had occurred. Unfortunately, Aaron bore the brunt of my anger and I apologized to him for that. This is not Aaron’s problem. Aaron did tell me that the initial deposits are non-refundable. At no time was I told this by Antonio nor is this shown in any paperwork that I have read through.

I have not signed the incorrect Engagement Agreement or the Power of Attorney, an installment of $2375.00 has been drawn from my checking account, I’ve been told that that money is non-refundable, the agent will not return my phone calls, and I’m stuck with something I no longer want to be a part of. At this point in time, I want to end the services from Tax Masters, receive my first installment back, and be done with it. I’m hoping that we can work together to resolve this problem. And I would expect to be contacted by Tax Masters Quality Assurance Offices and by Antonio.

Sincerely

Thank you for sharing your story with us. I was thinking of using Tax Maters to negotiate my tax liabilities but after reading a few of these posts I decided not to retain their services. I understand that fraudulent companies exposed on Twitter get communicated to millions in a matter or hours or a few days. If they are exposed to millions of shareholders who knows what would happen to their stock.

I have a MAJOR complaint about Tax Masters! I called, of course in a desperate attempt to make things right with my tax issue on Jan. 11, 2010. I was sent paper work and told that I was to pay a fee of $1265.00 up front, and payments of over $700 a month for 5 more months. Because of the nature of my situation, which is what I believed them to deal in, I did send the first payment. Within minutes of my first conversation, they had charged my credit card the $1265.00 this was the FASTEST thing they had done the entire time! I called back immediately after, and said I would NOT be signing the paper work as I was advised be an attorney. I mean it hadent even been a day, and now it has been WEEKS! Every time I call, they send me through a voice mail black hole, that I truely believe leads nowhere. After repeated attempts to speak to someone, and many many messages and e mails, the only word I ever got was that I may receive something in the mail 6 to 8 weeks from now that will simply tell me they will review my file. Who knows how many weeks that will take. I can only say that I WILL NOT be giving up and there will be justice in the future. I cannot believe that I actually trusted them, and I was sooooooooo wrong to do so. If you are in the same situation I cannot SCREAM it lous enough "THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY! DONT DO IT!" You would be better off calling the IRS yourself, and sending that money directly to them in an effort to show youre trying! They will work with you, and I truely believe, BETTER than Tax Masters ever could in the first place!

Hello Everyone:

POTENTIAL CLASS ACTION:

I am trying to forward information to the attorney who is reviewing our potential Tax Masters class action suit. Please forward the following for our preliminary summary:

Name
Contact Information
Summary of Your Issue with Tax Masters
Amount Loss

Please forward this information to me at your earliest convenience (triplejassoc@aol.com) in order for me to compile and forward to the attorney. I will keep you abreast of the status.

Thanks,

Pam Mitchell, Sr. Paralegal
[protected]

THANK YOU FOR SHARING, CONSIDER ME EDUCATED AND RUNNING VERY FAST IN OTHER DIRECTION FROM THAT FIRST ALL CALMING PHONE CALL.

THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH. AMW

I gave Tax Masters my bank information to the tune of $2125.00 (one of 4 installments). After many reviews on the internet I got a very bad feeling. In less than two hours I called to cancel after I found out how bad they are. Of course, I tried to cancel the bank draft as well. They said they could not stop the transaction but I did at the bank. They emailed documents to sign and I never did. Got an email from the rep that I originally talked to. Emailed back that I had canceled the service. The guy had the nerve to call me back and tell me that I had entered into a contract and was liable for the payments. With no money changing hands and no signed contract I told him good luck.

STAY AWAY FROM THESE GUYS!

1. There used to be a huge blog filled with TaxMasters stories and complaints. The sued the guy and he took it down. Here's an archive of it though:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080621192338/www.enormousincongruities.com/2006/02/22/tax-masters/

----

2. Apparently there is a US Treasury investigation into TaxMasters.

US Treasury Department
Attention: Agent Farwell
1919 Smith Street
Suite 2270
Houston, TX 77002

----

3. And a potential class-action suit:

Pam Mitchell
[protected]

----

4. Additionally:

If you've been a victim of TaxMasters, below is a good starting list of everyone you should send a letter to, detailing your experience. Signed and mailed letters are often still taken more seriously than an emailed or faxed one. You should also include any/all supporting documentation/evidence.

This really is needed. The sooner these agencies receive more complaints about this company, the more they will investigate.

1. Your state's Attorney General
2. All of your state's Senators and Representatives (Federal and State)
3. All of the following:

U.S. Treasury Department
ATTN: Special Agent Farwell
1919 Smith St.
Suite 2270
Houston, TX 77002

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
333 Guadalupe, Tower 3, Suite 900
Austin, TX [protected]

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
Hotline
P.O. Box 589
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC [protected]

Office of the Attorney General of Texas
PO Box 12548
Austin, TX [protected]

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Attorney General
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530

Internal Revenue Service
Office of Professional Responsibility
SE: OPR, Room 7238/IR
1111 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20224

Better Business Bureau of Houston
http://houston.bbb.org/

Federal Trade Commission
Consumer Response Center
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580

Mayor Annise D. Parker
City of Houston
P.O. Box 1562
Houston, TX 77251

I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE INSTANCES ARE QUITE TRUE THEY ARE SO SIMILAR TO MY EXPERIENCES WITH TAXMASTERS. FROM BOSTON MASSACHUSETTS I TOO HAVE FALLEN PREY TO THE MALPRACTICE OF INCOMPETENT SCAMMERS AT TAXMASTERS WHO PROMISED TO PREVENT LIENS AND LEVIES FROM THE IRS . INSTEAD THEY NEVER REPRESENTED ME EVEN AFTER I SIGNED THEM ON AND GIVEN THEM THE POWER OF ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT AND ALL LEVIES WAGE GARNISHEES AND LIENS WERE FILED BY THE IRS. I CAN EVEN NOW LOSE MY HOME. WHEN TAXMASTERS SUBMITTED THEIR NAME ON MY BEHALF TO THE IRS. THE OFFICER SAID THEY WERE NOT QUALIFIED TO SPEAK ON MY BEHALF BECAUSE OF THEIR LACK OF CREDENTIALS.
I HAVE CALLED THIS OFFICE SO MANY TIMES TO NO AVAIL AND JUST TO BE GIVEN THE RUNAROUND AND THEY NEVER RETURN YOUR CALLS. IT IS VERY FRUSTRATING TO PAY THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS AND GET NO SERVICE IN RETURN. ONE CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE IN THEIR OPERATIONS OFFICE TURNED OUT TO BE THE SAME PERSON REPRESENTING HIMSELF AS A TAX SPECIALIST WITH A DIFFERENT NAME . WHY THESE PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO ADVERTIZE NATIONALLY IS BEYOND ME. THIS IS NOTHING BUT A HUGE SCAM THAT SEEMS TO BE THRIVING UNDER THE PROTECTION OF TEXAS LAW TO BE THIS SUCCESSFUL FOR THIS LONG. I JOIN ALONG WITH OTHERS WITH A COMPLAINT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

I having the exact same issue---I called, (stupidly) gave them my credit card info so that they could fill out the authorization form and send it to me to be signed. But that same day I had second thoughts---particularly after reading the fine print in the agreement. So I didn't sign the authorization and left multiple messages over the next 24hours. I checked my account and they've aleady debited what was going to be my initial payment ($1500!) !
And I've never signed the authorization!

And yes---NO responses to emails and messages.

Any suggestions?

Ok so what rights do I have...I have been robbed for an amount of 1, 150 dollars for a FREE consultation...I did not sign their agreement not one stinking page and they wouldn't give me the 500 dollars that I paid the same day on the same call which was supposed to be FREE...retainer my butt...so I figured I would call the BBB and have a case with them on this matter...well while waiting three weeks for my 500 dollars to appear in my account and guess what?...Tax Masters took an additional 650 dollars from my account and all I can do at this point is watch all the insufficient fund fees add up...I only had 150 dollars in the bank. I called them and used lots of four letter words only to be given the famous answering machine...so I gave it some four letter words...I also called the bank and reported an unauthorized transaction...emailed the BBB to request a conference call with Tax Masters...if that doesn't happen...I will call the Attorney General and demand Justice...I wonder if Tax Masters will call me when they find my Bank Numbers are changed?

I confirm all the complaints are real and a sorry state of affairs that the consumer protection laws can't do anything about it! I am still trying to get my deposit of 1200 dollars back. Also I have called till I'm blue in the face to get them to stop try to lift 500 dollars from my bank account. Thankfully my bank is helping me but after many new tricks each month I finally had to close my account. They are the worst criminals of preying onpeople that are scared because the IRS is so heavy handed in their contact with honest tax payers.

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagnews/release.php?print=1&id=3328

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 13, 2010
www.texasattorneygeneral.gov CONTACT
Press Office at
[protected]

Houston-based "Tax Resolution" Firm Charged With Unlawful Conduct, Misleading Customers

Texas Attorney General files enforcement action against TaxMasters, Inc.; cites nearly 1, 000 complaints about defendants’ conduct and business practices

HOUSTON – Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott today charged Houston-based TaxMasters, Inc., and its chief executive officer, Patrick Cox, with multiple violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act and Texas Debt Collection Act.

According to the state’s enforcement action, the defendants unlawfully misled customers about their service contract terms, failed to disclose its no-refunds policy, and falsely claimed that the firm’s employees would immediately begin work on a case – despite the fact that TaxMasters did not actually start to work on a case until its customers paid in full for services, even if that delayed response meant taxpayers missed significant IRS deadlines.

“In the midst of a national economic downturn, TaxMasters used a nationwide marketing campaign to offer services for distressed taxpayers who needed help dealing with the IRS, ” Attorney General Abbott said. “A state investigation and nearly 1, 000 customer complaints indicate that the defendants routinely misled customers about the nature of their tax resolution service agreements – and worse, attempted to enforce those improper agreements through unlawful debt collection tactics. The state’s enforcement action seeks to prohibit the defendants from continuing to violate the law and seeks restitution for the financially struggling taxpayers who were harmed by the defendants’ unlawful conduct.”

The defendants advertise a tax resolution service for federal taxpayers who have received notice from the IRS of an audit, garnishment, lien, levy or tax deficiency. Citing a self-styled “national advertising campaign” and high-profile “endorsements, ” TaxMasters purports to have “one of the most effective tax relief teams in the tax representation business.” However, a state investigation – and nearly 1, 000 complaints submitted to the Office of the Attorney General and the Better Business Bureau of Houston – indicate that the defendants have unlawfully misled their customers and failed to disclose material facts about their service agreements.

TaxMasters’ advertisements encourage taxpayers to call its toll-free number for a “free consultation” with a “tax consultant.” Court documents filed by the state indicate that callers are not connected to an employee qualified to give tax advice, but rather with a TaxMasters salesperson who recommends a “solution” for between $1, 500 and $9, 000 or more.

According to court documents, many callers were offered an installment plan so that they could pay the defendants’ fee over a specified period of time. However, callers who asked to see written terms and conditions prior to making a payment were informed that a credit card or bank account number is necessary to generate a written TaxMasters service contract. As a result, TaxMasters customers were unaware – and the defendants’ personnel did not have a practice of disclosing – multiple aspects of the TaxMasters service agreement that were harmful to taxpayers.

For example, the defendants did not disclose that all customer payments submitted to TaxMasters are non-refundable. Because customers were not provided written contracts and sales personnel did not reveal the no-refunds policy, customers did not know that they would not be able to recover any installment payments they submitted to TaxMasters – even if they ultimately decide to cancel before TaxMasters actually did any work on their tax case.

The state’s enforcement action also cites TaxMasters for failing to reveal that it would not begin work on a case until all installment payments had been remitted and the entire fee was paid. Multiple complaints indicate that customers entered into an installment agreement with the understanding that TaxMasters would immediately begin work on their case – only to discover later that no action was taken. Customers often learned that there was a problem when they received a notice from the IRS indicating that an important deadline had been missed or that additional fees and penalties had accrued.

Court documents filed by the state also indicate that the defendants failed to disclose TaxMasters’ requirement that customers pay the entire service fee – even if they opt to cancel their contract. Because customers are not provided a written contract, they were not properly informed that agreeing to make a single payment over the telephone obligated them to pay the entire fee quoted by sales personnel. Further, not only did TaxMasters attempt to obligate its customers to a fee in the absence of a signed contract, the defendants used unlawful debt collection tactics to enforce the unauthorized obligation.

According to the state’s enforcement action, the defendants not only failed to disclose material terms and conditions governing its services, but also failed to properly provide the “tax resolution” services that were advertised. Customer complaints obtained by the Attorney General’s Office cite TaxMasters for failing to contact and consult with the IRS on the client’s behalf; failing to appear on the client’s behalf at an IRS audit or hearing; failing to postpone or stop a wage or bank account garnishment; and failing to stop a levy or lien against a client’s property.

When customers who were unhappy with the defendants’ services sought refunds, TaxMasters refused to return the customers’ money. Court documents indicate TaxMasters not only refused to honor refund requests, it also pursued debt collection efforts against clients who cancelled their contracts. The state’s enforcement action charges TaxMasters with unlawfully threatening to pursue customers in Harris County courts, even if those customers did not reside in the county. Under Texas law, entities seeking to enforce a consumer contract can only do so in a county where the agreement was executed or where the consumer resides.

The state's enforcement action is seeking restitution for each TaxMasters customer who was financially harmed by the defendants’ unlawful conduct. In addition, the state is seeking civil penalties of up to $20, 000 for each violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

** FILE AN SEC COMPLAINT AGAINST TAXMASTERS HERE **

Tax Masters can't be trusted

Tax Mmasters should be shut down. How come they can't pay their health insurance premiums when they reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission that they took in over $11 million dollars through March 31, 2010 AND had CASH to the tune of over $4 million during that same period. I wonder whether the numbers Tax Masters gave the SEC are correct. Could it be that Tax Masters has committed stockholder fraud by not disclosing accurate financial information on their SEC documents. If you feel the same way as I do and want to complain to the SEC as well as the Texas Attorney General and joining the class action lawsuit, you can file a complaint with the SEC by using the following website: http://www.sec.gov/complaint.shtml

This is an epidemic! luckily i did a charge back and got the money put back on my credit card! @Ulysses i suggest you call your credit card company and dispute the charge. The easiest way to get a charge back is to say the the company charged with out your authorization for a service you did not want. You should have your money back with in the week. These t.v. advertising tax [censor] are scams. they all tell you the same thing and paint a beautiful picture just so they can RIP YOU OFF! If you still need help with a tax issue i suggest you call a real accounting firm [protected] ask for dave. The funny part is that a real firm can tell you what can actually be done, do it, and charge you LESS than what Tax Masters does by Thousands of dollars!

Your allegation is in violation of Circular A230, and related I R S law.
I urge you to contact the Office of Professional Responsibility. Your complaint is most useful to me. As a C.P.A and recent passer of the Enrolled Agent's exam, I am sorry that this outrage happened to you.

There is a complete lack of organization there. I don't know if they are well-intentioned or not, they're just not capable of getting things done. I'm sure most customers end up satisfied or they would not have a business, but it seems like there must be an enormous amount that falls through the cracks. You're better off with a local attorney that handles cases, someone you can sit down in front of.

This company has to be a joke. For one, the dude's name is Cox. He looks like a domineering gay daddy bear. His company is called Tax MASTERS. Is this [censored] is a homosexual leather slave owner with a stable of hairless college boys in his dark basement? I wonder. Get off my TV. Shut up. Nothing, Yer Mama. Pick one.

This company's commercials freak me out. First the guy is named COX. His company is called Tax MASTERS. He looks like a gay daddy bear. Is he a homosexual leather slave owner with a basement full of hairless college boys? I wonder. Get off my tv, you perv. Shut up. Nothing. Yer mama. Pick one.

Tax Masters is a junk service. They are so proud to be publicly traded they advertise it on their commercials - but what this really means is they can close their doors and go bankrupt without finishing your case. I used to work in this industry for some time (glad not to be now), and their reputation is horrible.

When you call them you talk to a "tax advisor" that has no idea what he is talking about. There are companies out their that are legitimate. However, if you search "scam" or "complaint" next to almost any of the nationally advertised companies in any search engine - including Tax Masters, Nationwide Tax Relief, American Tax Relief, Power Tax Relief, and almost all the others - you will find tons of complaints.

Most of these companies are going to be shut down because of new FTC regulations. American Tax Relief was shut down recently by the FTC. None of these companies are owned by licensed tax professionals. Patrick Cox, Taxmaster's CEO, is a CPA (who should have his license revoked), but he does not own the company, it is publicly traded. If you hire any of these companies, it is likely the FTC will shut them down in the next couple months and you will be completely out of luck.

All those companies use a high pressure sales force and a crappy consultation to try to get in as much money as possible while doing the least to help consumers.

When you call any tax company, make sure it is owned by licensed tax professionals.

The following companies I have found to be legitimate, with no legitimate complaints, can help clients anywhere in the USA, and I personally verified the below information:

1. Tax Resolution Professionals - www.taxresolutionprofessionals.com - they are a law firm owned and operated by attorneys who help clients across the country with tax debt issues. When you call them an actual licensed tax attorney answers the phone. I could not find any complaints online.

2. Joe Mastriano - www.taxproblem.org - he is a licensed CPA, and when you call you talk to a CPA, not a salesperson. I could not find any complaints online.

3. Mike Habib, EA - www.myirstaxrelief.com - he is a licensed EA, has a good reputation in the industry. I could only find one complaint but if you read it you can tell it is a illegitimate complaint.

There are other companies too, but the key is to talk to someone who is LICENSED. Most the other companies are just a high pressure sales floor. In addition to that, the FTC will be shutting down the companies who use unlicensed reps within the next couple months.

Jim,
You are obviously a Liar who is defaming people on this site and promoting other companies shamelessly. you should be ashamed of yourself. i hope your parents aren't still alive to see you blatantly slandering other people just to promote for companies you know nothing about. Shame on you!

there are now 4 federal lawsuits against TaxMasters, for varied reasons:

8 Taxmasters, Inc. (dft) txsdce 4:2010-cv-02373 710 07/02/2010
9 Taxmasters (dft) txsdce 4:2010-cv-02373 710 07/02/2010
10 TAXMASTERS, INC. (dft) paedce 2:2010-cv-03331 480 07/07/2010
11 TAXMASTERS (dft) paedce 2:2010-cv-03331 480 07/07/2010
14 TaxMasters Inc. (cnflck) txsdce 4:2010-cv-03055 710 08/25/2010
15 Taxmasters, Inc. (dft) txsdce 4:2010-cv-03055 710 08/25/2010
16 Taxmasters (dft) txsdce 4:2010-cv-03055 710 08/25/2010
17 Taxmasters, Inc. (dft) txsdce 4:2010-cv-03330 190 09/16/2010

DO NOT GO WITH TAX MASTERS! I was shopping around for help with my back taxes so one of the places i called was Tax Masters. They are nothing more than a bunch of shady sales people. They told me that my tax liability could be reduced by over 90% and quoted me a fee right then and there. Complete BS. I did some research on what they were talking about and the IRS even has a section devoted to companies like Tax Masters: http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0, , id=120169, 00.html
I ended up finding a company on here: US Tax Liberty. These people are reasonable, and don't lie to your face. (which is what i like from a firm i'm going to do business with). If you do need help i suggest you check them out. Here is dave's number: [protected]. He helped me.
TAX MASTERS IS NO GOOD.

This is fraud. My 82 year old Mother hired them to take care of her taxes after not filing for two years. She paid them $3750.00 starting in November of 2009 and they did nothing. She died in in January of 2010. They took the last payments out of her account. They refused to return the money, and her income was levied . I filed her taxes for 2007 and 2008 & 09 with the help of our tax accountant for $450.00. These people are totally scam artist. I sent emails, letters and phone calls. I still have not received anything in writing. I filed a complaint with the BBB. I can't believe that Patrick Cox is still on the TV...and in business. This was elder abuse!

Solution: pay your taxes.

I had an IRS problem on a past return and I called them to see if they could be of any help. They said sure send them $ 4, 500 and their Attorneys and accountants would take care of everything. I sent them the forms back and all the documents they needed. Thirteen months later IRS put a lien on my house and I had to pay all fines and fees totalling 29, 000. I sent in a letter of complaint to Mr. Cox wanting my money refunded on Dec. 10th 2010. I am now sending him another certified mail. If I get no response this time I am going to the Better Business Bureau, Attorney General of Texas. This has caused me a lot of tension and problems . I have never had a problem with the IRS but now Tax Masters has caused me to pay more in taxes and penalties . I am 71 yrs old and mad . Mct

[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Pens]replica pens[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Pens]replica pen[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-CuffLinks]replica cufflinks[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Ties]replica ties[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Lighters]replica lighters[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Wallet]replica wallet[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/T-Shirt-Replica]t shirt replica[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Belt-Replica]belt replica[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Pens/replica-mont-blanc-pens]mont blanc replica pens[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-Pens/Cartier-Replica-Pens]cartier replica pens[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/Replica-CuffLinks/bvlgari-cufflinks-replica]bvlgari replica cufflinks[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/]replica pens[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/]replica cufflinks[/url]
[url=http://www.deluxe4less.com/]replica pen[/url]

Ive been through all of this. Bait and switch I believe its called. I was able to get some real help with some info from the Tax Relief Foundation. Very informative.

FISCAL POLICY AND THE MULTIPLIER

When the government increases G, the people whom it pays for those extra goods and services now have higher incomes, and they will spend some of that extra income (consumption increases), touching off a whole chain of consumption (C). The ultimate, cumulative increase in AD and Y will be a multiple of the original increase in G, because C will increase, too.

When the government cuts taxes, people spend their extra after-tax income, and that initial increase in consumption leads to more consumption, by the people who sell the goods or services in each round of consumption. Again, because of the multiplier effect, the ultimate increase in AD and Y (which is entirely an increase in C in this case) will be a multiple of the original tax cut.

The government spending multiplier is the same as the regular multiplier:

{spending multiplier} = 1 / (1-MPC),

because G is a component of autonomous spending.

-- Ex.: If MPC = 0.9, then the government spending multiplier is 10 (= 1/(1-0.9) = 1/0.1).

The multiplier associated with a given change in taxes, the tax multiplier, is negative, because higher taxes reduce people's disposable income, thereby reducing their consumption. The tax multiplier is smaller (in absolute value) than the spending multiplier because not all of a tax increase represents income that otherwise would have been consumed -- the marginal propensity to consume is less than 1, so some fraction of every dollar gets saved, which does not add to aggregate demand or GDP. The initial change in consumption associated with a $1 tax increase is
- MPC * ($1) = -MPC.
That amount is the change in autonomous spending that results from a $1 tax increase, and we multiply it by the regular multiplier to get:
{tax multiplier} = - MPC / (1-MPC)

-- If MPC = 0.9, then the tax multiplier is -9 (= -0.9/(1-0.9) = -0.9/0.1 = -9/1).

Q: What would happen if the government increased spending and taxes by equal amounts, applying these multipliers?

-- (The result may surprise you. For most of us, our automatic response is to think that would somehow be a bad thing for the level of GDP, since higher taxes plainly lower our disposable incomes and leave less for our consumption. Or we might think that it would have zero effect on GDP, because the higher spending and the higher taxes would seem to offset each other. But, in the context of the multiplier model, both of those guesses would be wrong. Instead...)

A: An equal increase in G and T would actually raise GDP, in the context of the multiplier model.

-- Why: Recall that the government-spending multiplier is
{spending multiplier} = 1 / (1-MPC),
and the tax multiplier is
{tax multiplier} = - MPC / (1-MPC).

-- Add the two together and you get the multiplier for an equal increase in government spending and taxes. Equivalently, it is the increase in equilibrium GDP that results from a $1 increase in G and a $1 increase in T. We call it the BALANCED-BUDGET MULTIPLIER (BBM; or perhaps more accurately the tax-and-spend multiplier), and it is equal to the sum of those other two:

{BBM} = 1/(1-MPC) - MPC/(1-MPC)
= (1-MPC) / (1-MPC) (combining the two terms, which have a common denominator)
= 1

So the balanced-budget multiplier is 1, meaning that a given increase in G (say, $1 million) coupled with an equal increase in T ($1 million) would raise equilibrium GDP by that same amount ($1 million).

-- We call it the balanced-budget multiplier because an equal increase in G and T would not change, let alone increase, the government's budget deficit. If the budget were balanced to begin with (a deficit of $0), it would still be balanced after an equal increase in G and T.
-- (The term balanced-budget multiplier does not necessarily mean that the overall budget is in balance, just that we're increasing G and T by equal amounts.)
-- This is a startling result. Having grown up in a conservative era in which politicians of both parties say they're against "big government" and talk about how they want to cut government spending ("Put an end to tax and spend!"), it's easy to forget that government spending, even when it's wasteful, is counted in GDP and provides incomes for the people from whom the government is purchasing goods and services. This, by the way, is why many political conservatives hate Keynes, since Keynes originated the concept of the multiplier, including the balanced-budget multiplier.
-- Why the balanced-budget multiplier is positive: The spending multiplier is larger than the tax multiplier, because some fraction of any dollar of income that is taxed would have been saved instead of consumed, and savings do not contribute to GDP. (That fraction, by the way, is the marginal propensity to save, and is estimated as .05 for the United States today.)

What is tax multiplier and expenditure muliplier?

I know what is money multiplier, but what does tax multiplier and expenditure multiplier mean? Can u please elaborate..If anyone have any good links that would be great

Best Answer - Chosen by Voters

In an economic model, a multiplier is a factor which indicates how much a an endogenous variable changes for a one unit change in an exogenous variable. Or, in simpler terms, if government expenditure multiplier is 1.5 it means that for every 1 $ increase in government spending the GDP will increase by 1.5 $. Equally, for the tax multiplier, if the tax multiplier is for example, 0.8, it means that the GDP will fall by 0.8 $ for every increase of the taxes by 1 $.

More formally: take the expenditure definition of the GDP: y = c + i + g. Assuming that investments i, taxes t and government expenditures g are exogenous variables, and the consumption function c = c'(y - t), with c' the propensity to consume and y-t the disposable income after taxes t. This gives y = c' (y -t) + i + g. Differentiate this equation: dy = c'dy - c'dt + di + dg, or: dy = (-c'dt + di + dg)/(1-c') is the general equation for any multiplier. For example, if you hold dg and di constant the tax multiplier becomes: dy/dt = -c'/(1-c').

I'm going to keep at it until you pay attention.

Tax multiplier

How large is the US tax multiplier?

-Carlo Favero, Francesco Giavazzi

10 September 2009

Christina and David Romer have recently produced new estimates of the tax multiplier by using the narrative record to identify exogenous tax changes. This column says that their estimates assume that tax changes are orthogonal to shifts in other macroeconomic variables, such as productivity, taxes, and monetary policy. Relaxing that assumption yields much smaller estimates of the tax multiplier.

Tax cuts have been extensively used in the US and elsewhere as a measure to counter the impact of the financial crisis. The dimension of the tax multiplier (i.e. the percentage response of output growth to a given shift in the tax/GDP ratio) is a crucial magnitude to understand how appropriate the fiscal intervention has been.

So far the received-wisdom estimate is:

--The multiplier is 1.0, four quarters after the shift in taxes;

--The peak- level is slightly above 1.0 and comes after two years; after that the effect levels off.

--There is also evidence that such an effect is weaker over the period [protected] than in the previous 25 years.

These estimates were typically obtained in the context of vector autoregressive (VAR) models applied to quarterly data (see, e.g. Blanchard and Perotti, 2002 and Perotti 200.

In a recent paper Christina and David Romer (forthcoming) find a much larger multiplier. According to their estimates, a tax cut equivalent to 1% of US GDP raises output just over 1% within a year, but the magnitude amplifies in the following periods to reach an effect of nearly 3% after three years. The effect is highly statistically significant and stable over time.

Estimating tax multipliers: Three key issues

The most crucial issue in the estimation of tax multipliers is the identification of truly exogenous shifts in taxes, thus excluding changes in government revenues that are not legislated at all, but occur automatically because the tax base varies with the overall level of income.

Romer and Romer solve this problem brilliantly, in a manner distinct from existing empirical papers. Applying to fiscal policy a method they have extensively applied to analyse the effects of shift in monetary policy, they identify exogenous shift in taxes analysing the narrative record. They use things like Presidential speeches and Congressional reports, which allows them to identify the size, timing, and principal motivation for all major post-war tax policy actions. This allows them to distinguish between legislated changes made for reasons related to prospective economic conditions and those adopted for more exogenous reasons – for instance for philosophical reasons or to reduce an inherited budget deficit. Their estimates of the effects on output of shifts in taxes use only these more exogenous changes. Thus they avoid the bias in measurement that would be generated by the use of aggregate measures of tax changes, many of which – as we said – are not legislated at all, but occur automatically because the tax base varies with the overall level of income, or because of changes in stock prices, inflation, and other non-policy forces.

Previous attempts to separate endogenous and exogenous policy shifts

Previous attempts at identifying exogenous shifts in taxes (Blanchard and Perotti, 2002, Perotti 2008, Mountford and Uhlig, 2002 Fatàs and Mihov, 2001) estimated reduced-form VAR models and mapping the innovations generated by such models into structural shocks using institutional information about the tax and transfer systems and the timing of tax collections. This procedure (which some authors also applied to spending) allowed the authors to identify the automatic response of taxes (and/or spending) to economic activity, and, by implication, to infer truly exogenous shifts in fiscal policy. The tax multipliers estimated using this procedure are much smaller than those found by Romer and Romer.

Romer and Romer suggest that these differences are the result of the failure of structural VARs to identify truly exogenous shifts in taxes.

The estimation of tax multipliers poses a second issue, however, beyond that of identification: the specification of the empirical model used to obtain such estimates. Traditional fiscal VARs were multiple equation models in which all the variables (output growth, government revenues and spending, inflation, nominal interest rates) relevant to determine the effect on growth of a shift in taxes were jointly modelled. Romer and Romer instead evaluate the multiplier estimating a single equation in which growth is a function of contemporaneous and lagged shifts in taxes.

A third issue emerges when one starts thinking about the nature rather than the dimension of the empirical model that is most appropriate to estimate tax multipliers. Both the Romer and Romer model and the traditional fiscal VARs are linear in the relevant variables. However, there is a natural source of non-linearity among the variables included in a fiscal VAR, which arises from the government intertemporal budget constraint.

Whether the government budget constraint belongs in a fiscal VAR depends on whether the level of the debt-to-GDP ratio enters the model. Bohn (199, using a century of US data, finds a positive correlation between the government surplus and the federal debt – a result that suggests that US fiscal policy reacts to the level of the debt ratio. But if fiscal variables respond to the level of the debt, then the estimation of tax multipliers should be conducted by explicitly recognising a role for debt and the for the stock-flow identity linking debt and deficits and thus describing how the debt ratio evolves over time following a fiscal shock.

Results: There is no conflict in our evidence on tax multipliers

In a recent paper (Favero and Giavazzi, 2009), we assess the robustness of the evidence of a large tax multiplier using the same measure of exogenous shifts in taxes constructed by Romer and Romer but a different econometric specification.

We show that the equation Romer and Romer estimate to compute the effects of a shift in taxes can be interpreted as the moving average representation of the equation for output growth in a traditional fiscal VAR which includes a larger set of variables – along with output growth, government revenues and spending, inflation, and nominal interest rates. This representation however is truncated along two dimensions: (i) the number of lags is finite and (ii) no other shocks than shifts in taxes are included. Such an approach relies on the assumption that tax shocks are not only orthogonal to each other, but that they are also orthogonal to any other macro shock – productivity shocks, shifts in government spending, in monetary policy, etc.

When we relax this assumption, we find a tax multiplier much smaller than that estimated by Romer and Romer and similar to the size of the multiplier estimated in the traditional fiscal VARs. When we split the sample in two sub-samples [protected] and [protected]) we find, before 1980, a multiplier whose size is never greater than one; after 1980 a multiplier not significantly different from zero.

We then extend the empirical model by explicitly recognising a role for debt and the stock-flow identity linking debt and deficits. In other words, we estimate the multiplier associated with the Romer and Romer tax shocks, keeping track of the effect that such shocks exert on the path of the debt ratio and allowing for a response of taxes, spending, output, and interest rates to the level of the debt. We find no major difference between a non-linear model with an explicit debt dynamics equation and a VAR that excludes debt and the debt dynamics equation. We suggest that the reason why overlooking this non-linearity does not appear to be important – or at least as important as overlooking the simultaneity between tax shocks and other macro shocks – may be that the variables entering the budget constraint already enter (albeit linearly) the equation of a fiscal VAR that excludes debt. Non-linearity, however, appears to make a difference whenever – as in happens in the US after 1980 – the response of fiscal variables to the level of the debt is particularly strong.

References

Blanchard, Olivier and R. Perotti (2002). "An Empirical Characterization of the Dynamic Effects of Changes in Government Spending and Taxes on Output", Quarterly Journal of Economics.

Bohn, Henning (199. "The Behaviour of US public debt and deficits", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 949-963.

Fatàs, Antonio and I. Mihov (2001). ”The Effects of Fiscal Policy on Consumption and Employment: Theory and Evidence”, mimeo, INSEAD.

Favero C.A. and F.Giavazzi (2009] “How Large are the Effects of Tax Changes?” CEPR Discussion Paper 7439.

Mountford, Andrew and H. Uhlig (2002). ”What Are the Effects of Fiscal Policy Shocks?” CEPR Discussion Paper 3338.

Perotti, Roberto (200. "In Search of the Transmission Mechanism of Fiscal policy"; NBER Macroeconomic Annual.

Romer, Christina and David H. Romer (forthcoming). The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks", American Economic Review.

Pat Attention People.

By comparing equilibria, we found that the introduction of a tax of 500 reduced equilibrium income by 1167. We could have gotten the same result by using the "tax multiplier."

Recall, the "tax multiplier" is . In our examples b/(1-b), the Marginal Propensity to Consume, is 0.7, so the tax multiplier is 0.7/(1-0.7) = 0.7/0.3 = 2.333. Using this multiplier, we would say that a 500 billion increase of taxes (from 0 to 500) would reduce equilibrium income by 500*2.333 billion dollars. That would be 1167, as we found before.

We can also use the tax multiplier to calculate the impact of a change in transfer payments, remembering that an increase in transfer payments will increase -- not decrease -- equilibrium aggregate demand. It has been pointed out from time to time that more complex models could have many "impact multipliers" to express the impact of one variable on another, as the "tax multiplier" expresses the impact of taxes on equilibrium income. In this very simple model, we have discussed and used just two multipliers. But there is one more -- the "Balanced Budget Multiplier.

A tax multiplier is a measure of the change in aggregate production caused by changes in government taxes. The tax multiplier is the negative marginal propensity to consume times one minus the slope of the aggregate expenditures line. The simple tax multiplier includes ONLY induced consumption. More complex tax multipliers include other induced components. Two related multipliers are the expenditures multiplier, which measures the change in aggregate production caused by changes in an autonomous aggregate expenditure, and the balanced-budget multiplier which measures the change in aggregate production from equal changes in both taxes and government purchases.

The tax multiplier measures the change in aggregate production triggered by an autonomous change in government taxes. This multiplier is useful in the analysis of fiscal policy changes in taxes. The tax multiplier differs from the expenditures multiplier based on how the autonomous change affects aggregate expenditures.

The tax multiplier reflects the fact that a given autonomous change in taxes does NOT result in an equal change in aggregate expenditures. Taxes change disposable income, which causes changes in both consumption expenditures and saving. And only consumption expenditures affect aggregate expenditures. The expenditures multiplier, however, reflects the fact that a given autonomous change in an expenditure results in an equal change in aggregate expenditures.

The tax multiplier is actually a family of multipliers that differ based on which components of the Keynesian model are assumed to be induced by aggregate production and income. The simple tax multiplier, as the name suggestions, is the simplest variation and includes only induced consumption. Every other component -- investment expenditures, government purchases, taxes, exports, and imports -- are assumed to be autonomous.

More complex tax multipliers include different combinations of induced components, ranging all of the way up to the "complete" tax multiplier that realistically includes all induced components. Induced consumption, investment, and government purchases all increase the value of the expenditures multiplier. Induced taxes and imports both decrease the value of the expenditures multiplier.

The Simple Tax Multiplier

The simple tax multiplier is the ratio of the change in aggregate production to an autonomous change in government taxes when consumption is the only induced expenditure. Autonomous tax changes trigger the multiplier process and induced consumption provides the cumulatively reinforcing interaction between consumption, aggregate production, factor payments, and income.

The key feature of the simple tax multiplier that differentiates it from the simple expenditures multiplier is how taxes affect aggregate expenditures. In particular, taxes do not affect aggregate expenditures directly (as do government purchases or investment expenditures). They affect aggregate expenditures indirectly through disposable income and consumption. This gives rise to two important differences compared to the simple expenditures multiplier.

First, a change in taxes causes an opposite change in the disposable income of the household sector. An increase in taxes decreases disposable income and an decrease in taxes increases disposable income. This is why the simple tax multiplier has a negative value.

Second, the household sector reacts to the change in disposable income caused by the change in taxes by changing both consumption and saving. How much consumption changes is based on the MPC. The MPC means that for each one dollar change in taxes, consumption and thus aggregate expenditures change by a only fraction. The fraction is equal to the MPC. The reason, of course, is that the taxes affect income and income is divided between saving and taxes.

Suppose, for example, that the government sector reduces taxes by $1 trillion with the goal of stimulating aggregate production and warding off a business-cycle contraction. This tax reduction increases disposable income by $1 trillion. The household sector spends part and saves part of this income. The division between consumption and saving is based on the marginal propensities to consume and save.

If the marginal propensity to consume is 0.75, then consumption increases by $750 billion. This $750 billion change in consumption then triggers the multiplier process much like that for an autonomous change in investment expenditures. The difference, however, is the full $1 trillion change in investment triggers the multiplier process, but only 75 percent of the change in taxes works its way into the multiplier.

I called them last week and just engaged in conversation. Gave them information to fill out forms to send me to sign. Little did I know just because I talked to them and gave them info, I owed them. They charged me $1500 and won't refund. Didn't sign anything. They are sating because I engaged in conversation with them that I hired them, even though they send me papers to sign to hire them. HUH!

Whatever you do, do not even call them. I have sent all the proper complaints to the proper authorities and even made a complaint with my bank. DO NOT TALK TO THEM, IT IS A COMPLETE SCAM. Unfortunate for me they are taking and keeping my children's social security income! For what? Not doing anything.

They never mentioned anything about an unrefundable fee. All of a sudden now that they have my money it is unrefundable!

I have made call after call after call. Read the other Blogs that is my story also. Paid them $5, 000 a year ago and they have done nothing. I think everyone starts with Mr. McCallister and then he disappears and you are sent to someone else. It is never the same person handling your case. When you call in after being on hold for an hour they state “Your case has been passed to someone else” and they never return calls.

Whatever you do not give them any money. I called for 1 week straight just to do a test. I was told the same thing every day and not one return calls. Horrible, horrible company. They should not be allowed to stay in business.

I suggest to all who charged the payments to their credit card companies file a claim of fraud with the credit card company and have the charges reversed to your credit card account. When the report is made to the credit card company the credit card has 30 days to reply to your claim. When the credit card company reverses the charges they will also reverse all interest and fees and in the cases where one has already paid the balance on the credit card you will be owed money by the credit card company and when you see you have the money as a credit to your credit card account you may request a check in that amount be sent to you and you will then have the money in your pocket or in your bank account. This will work for charges made years after the charges were made. I know as I received $17, 000.00 plus interest and fees from two of my credit card companies for charges made two years prior to my claim of fraud on my account. The way to prove fraud is to provide evidence there was fraud as evidence to the credit card companies. This is only true for citizens of the U.S.A., and not for citizens of Canada who have credit cards issued in Canada subject to Canadian consumer protection laws as there are no consumer protection laws for the citizens of Canada. The law for the U.S.A. is found in the United States Code. Here is an example of how to write the letter to the credit card company and refer to the correct part of the U.S. Code when doing so:
“The attached documents serve to support my claim for a reversal of charges, claim of refund of principal and interest to my credit card account with (NAME OF YOUR CREDIT CARD COMPANY), proof of claim of fraud by Tax Masters and proof of fraud made on my account for services which were not delivered to me.
This claim is a notice of demand to (NAME OF YOUR CREDIT CARD COMPANY) for recovery of money to my personal credit card account due to fraud perpetuated by others. This claim is being made pursuant to Volume 15 of the United States Code, Section 1666i.”
It will then be up to the credit card company to deal with Tax Masters and reverse the charges to your account as they are able to take funds from the account of Tax Masters because they have the account information of the charges placed into the account of Tax Masters. The important thing to remember is to have paper documentation of all transaction regarding Tax Masters and your account with your credit card company. There is no time limitation for this recovery of money as some credit card companies may tell you according to Volume 15 of the United States Code, Section 1666i and since the product you paid for wasn't delivered to you the credit card company has no other choice than refund the money to your credit card account and were your credit to have been ruined by this transaction with Tax Masters you may make a Notice of Demand to the credit card company to restore you credit worthiness and if they don't you may take the credit card company to small claims court or hire an attorney to either write a letter to the credit card company or file a lawsuit against the credit card company to force them to have your credit worthiness restored. The credit card companies don't want to go to court and they will settle the matter and do what your attorney tells them to do and by all means make sure the credit card company pays the cost of you hiring an attorney and they will have to pay that fee also. Good luck to all and never give up fighting for your rights as you will win and this fiasco and lawsuits against Tax Masters is soon going to be coming to a head and fraud charges will be made by the United States Attorney against them and the owner of Tax Masters will be arrested and held on charges of consumer fraud and he will eventually be sent to prison and will receive a minimum sentence of twenty years in a Federal prison and will be fined by the court with all the proceeds going to those who were victims of the fraud. That is what eventually happened in my case, except I didn’t ask for any money from the court case as I had already received the money by my credit card companies and were I to have asked for money from the court I would be committing fraud myself and would be prosecuted by the United States Attorney for doing so and be fined and sent to prison. I got all my money back and never had to hire an attorney and did it all myself by writing the letter to the credit card companies and I succeeded my own expectations by the success and satisfaction I got by doing so, and so will you. So do it and get on with your life. You won't be sorry you did and you will succeed.

I wish I had found this before I turned my money over to them. It took them a year to get PART of my problem resolved, . In the meantime they NEVER returned my calls, and then the next year they wanted me to pay another upfront payment to finish the problem. No one should ever use TAX Masters!

And yet CNN continues to to give them air time for advertisements.

I found a company that can help www.americastaxnetwork.com. They offer up to two hours of consultation for $99.00. The person they put you in touch with is an Enrolled Agent that was a FORMER employee of the IRS. They will talk with you, discuss your case and answer any questions during that time. If you wish they will then pull your masterfile and check your records with the IRS. If they can help they will offer solutions after they review all your info. Since they are Enrolled Agents and not sales people like these other groups. Hope this helps...

After I finished my time with the Navy i started my own construction company back home. We did very well for he past ten years up until the housing market crash. I kept my business pretty well under the radar, but i really shot myself in the foot ( didn't pay the payroll taxes for the since we started). Stupid i know, but that in the past. So the IRS started Levying my Bank accounts. I mean all My bank accounts: Checking, savings, CD's the list goes on. So i pulled everything out. I contacted Tax Masters to see if they could help me. A guy named Lexington Steele with a amusing accent got on the phone with me and after speaking to him all of ten minutes he wanted 10, 000 right then and there to handle my tax issue. NO WAY. That should have been the end of it right there… But a manager by the name of Andrew called me up from TM and after talking to me for a while frightened me into thinking that i was going to go to federal prison for tax evasion. I know that it does happen, but i should not have gone with TM! I paid them a "one-time-fee" of 10k. a LOT i know, but they told me that through offer and compromise they could reduce my tax debt to only $1, 500 which is what i wanted. IF IT'S TOO EXCELLENT TO BE RIGHT THEN IT IS! These B*****ds DID NOTHING! I doubt they even contacted the IRS. Contact settlewiththeirs.info.

Through searching for help i really stumbled upoun these guys from a complaint blog. David at settlewiththeirs.info really told me that i am not even qualified for an Offer In Compromise because i have too many assets. He clarified that for someone in my situation the IRS will really file a substitute return on the years i didn't file and ### what my Tax Liability is. ( Tax Masters Did none of this for me, they just frightened me and lied to me into paying). But these guys ran a Tax Investigation for me to see what the government assessed and what could be done about it. and they didn't charge a dime to do. Daves # [protected]. Obviously Tax Masters is the largest RIPOFF they charged me so much before they could have possibly contacted the IRS or even know what it is they could have done for me. Such a waste of my time an CASH! if anyone is interested in filling a class action lawsuit PLEASE let me know! TAX MASTERS IS A SCAM DO NOT USE!

THERE IS AN ATTORNEY IN NY THAT IS TRYING TO GET NAMES AND DETAILS TO FILE A CLASS ACTION! LET ME KNOW IF YOU ARE INTERESTED. PJ