Judge For FTC Rules Intuit Can’t Continue Its ‘Free To File’ Advertising Bullshit
from the feel-free dept
The old saying goes: there’s only two things that are permanent, death and taxes. For quite a while now, we could have added a third item to the list: Intuit annoying us to death with its bullshit advertisement about filing for taxes for “free.” You really should go back and read our posts on this topic if you’re not familiar with it, but the topline summary is simple enough. Intuit has spent years advertising to the masses that they can file taxes for free using its TurboTax platform as part of a government program, except only a third of the public qualifies for free filing and Intuit did every last thing possible to hide the options for free filing and collected money from many who would qualify to file for free instead.
While NY Attorney General Letitia James gathered all fifty states for a lawsuit over this nonsense, and managed to settle that suit for $141 million, the FTC also took note and filed its own administrative complaint against Intuit. That complaint, filed over a year ago, didn’t seek fines or damages, instead merely seeking to allow the government to force Intuit to stop lying to the public. With these sort of FTC filings, it’s an FTC administrative judge that rules on them, and that ruling has finally come down against Intuit.
The initial decision by Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell was released today and is subject to an automatic review by the full commission. The FTC commissioners will likely rule against Intuit, which issued a statement indicating that it will take the matter to federal court. The order would be in effect for 20 years if it survives appeal.
The response from Intuit noted that the administrative law judge is “an employee of the FTC” and “ruled in favor of the FTC in the agency’s own lawsuit.” The FTC filed an administrative complaint against Intuit in March 2022.
“Intuit will appeal this groundless and seemingly predetermined decision by the FTC to rule in its own favor and is confident that when the matter ultimately returns to a neutral body Intuit will prevail, as it has previously in this matter,” the company said.
Intuit can appeal away, but complaining that FTC complaints work as prescribed by FTC process is rather silly. More important to the appeal would be Intuit’s claim that it has already implemented most of what the FTC wants to force down Intuit’s throat, though because it’s Intuit I have my doubts. This company’s practices when it comes to its supposed free to file program have been so shady, so rife with obfuscation, that I’m simply unwilling to take the company at its word.
And even if that were true, then why should the company care all that much about the provisions in the FTC judge’s order as to how it should behave in its advertising practices?
The order said Intuit “must not represent that a good or service is ‘Free'” unless it actually offers the good or service for free to all consumers, or “All the terms, conditions, and obligations upon which receipt and retention of the ‘Free’ good or service are contingent are set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer so as to leave no reasonable probability that the terms of the offer might be misunderstood.”
Moreover, if an Intuit good or service is not free for most US taxpayers, that fact must be “disclosed clearly and conspicuously at the outset of any disclosures required” by the order. The order defines “clearly and conspicuously” in some detail.
“In any communication that is solely visual or solely audible, the disclosure must be made through the same means through which the communication is presented,” it says. “In any communication made through both visual and audible means, such as a television advertisement, the disclosure must be presented simultaneously in both the visual and audible portions of the communication even if the representation requiring the disclosure is made in only one means.”
So Intuit’s objection to all this appears thus far to amount to: the FTC’s decision is erroneous because the judge is an FTC employee, which is how this all works, and because we’ve already cleared up a portion of the shady practices the FTC wants us to clear up.
I’m fairly sure the suit will end up on appeal in federal court, but Intuit better come up with something stronger than that.
Filed Under: free to file, ftc, turbotax
Companies: intuit
Comments on “Judge For FTC Rules Intuit Can’t Continue Its ‘Free To File’ Advertising Bullshit”
'If you know we're wrong your aren't qualified to judge us'
By Intuits’s argument any state or federal judge remotely familiar with anti-fraud law is also right out since they’re going to be unfairly biased against companies advertising services they are doing everything possible to make impossible or as difficult as possible for customers to find and use.
Re:
Surely you can see the difference between an independent judge and an employee of the agency that is bringing the complaint?
See immigration “judges”.
Re: Re:
I could certainly see the potential for conflict of interest but so long as the underlying complaint and the evidence supporting the ruling is sound I’m not seeing too much of a problem compared to the alternative that would be regulatory agencies that could only write up and bring complaints and then had to shuffle everything onto outside judges who might not have the time, resources or knowledge to deal with what’s just been dumped on their lap.
Except… I’ve been using TurboTax for decades, and the free filing has always listed the usual caveats for what is and isn’t free, just like every other tax prep vendor. I don’t recall ever seeing anything that said it was always free for everyone (because that would really be a lousy business plan). So, it’s free for a large number of filers, and they tell you what isn’t free. I see nothing to complain about there. On the other hand, they have had “confusing” notices during prep that suggest you need to pay for something to get the best results (i.e., bigger refunds), but all you have to do is always turn down those “offers” to continue on the free path. Looks like a molehill to me, not a mountain.
Re:
You might want to check the earlier articles as they list details about the company/service being anything but transparent and easy to find and use.
Re:
You have not actually addressed whether Intuit complied with the order, or just your understanding of the order based on a common language read of the summary of the order. In fact, you’ve substituted statistical data with your anecdotal evidence in a somewhat strange attempt to suggest anyone dumber than you deserves to be ripped off? Im sure since you personally aren’t confused when TurboTax says “Upgrade to file your state taxes with turbo tax”, and know that a light grey on white link will move you forward, but not everyone does. Not everyone can easily find that. Many people might consider the language and design intentionally misleading and intended to confuse and befuddle those dumber than you. Something you are so okay with, ill have to assume you are already doing.
There is considerable room between the dumbest person who needs to file their taxes and you. If you wish to disagree, I invite you to argue how dumb you are.
Re: Re:
I would argue “dumb” is the wrong word. Some people just don’t “get” computers, especially when it comes to the older generation. Plus, we are talking about visual cues here that even technologically literate people can miss or misinterpret, like the dark patterns used by Intuit.
Re: Re: Re:
Im speaking the language of glenn, who thinks scamming people is fine so long as he doesn’t get scammed. Glenn thinks they are dummies. That’s why its okay to take advantage of them.
glenn already rejected a framework in which dark patterns like a light grey link on a white background contrasted to a giant green button and 32 pt font telling you to upgrade are in any way a problem or manipulative. I wasn’t going to engage glenn within that framework.
There is no reason for the complexity of tax code with regard to those who do not earn much, this is applicable to the 90%. Complex tax code is for those who receive untold millions for undisclosed reasons.
Oh, who am I kidding … tax code is there to torture the proles.
Re:
Part of the whole tax prep problem, of which this case is just a later part, is the the tax prep industry fought to keep the IRS from providing its own comprehensive and free service, or, the obvious solution of the IRS sending you a complete tax bill and you decide if they did something incorrectly.
Complexity would matter not so much then, but i am sure the IRS, too, would like it if it weren’t so stupidly Byzantine, thanks to all the lobbyists and morons in Congress.
Re: Re: A+ 10 points full stars.
There are two issues that need to be fixed
One: the government should (and by lie must but doesn’t) make the process easier.
2) this whole thing would be very easy if they CLOSED THE FUCKING LOOPHOLES
Personally, rather than prevent them from advertising things that aren’t true again in the future, I’d prefer an injunction forcing them to provide the free services they’re been advertising all along.
Solve this with 1 simple trick…
Make taxes so a 4 yr old can file them.
Re:
Better yet – IRS sends you a postcard with the amount you owe or your refund amount. If you agree just send or receive a check, otherwise fill out the forms.
This was proposed some time ago and the vested interests vigorously opposed it, therefore it went away.
Re: Re:
This is also how taxes work in many European countries.
A vast majority of people only have 1 job and 1 source of income. That employer sends a tax statement to the IRS to let them know how much they paid the employee. Then the IRS could send a postcard to the person saying the company reported their income of $X and they owe $Y. There’s no need for these people to even fill out the 1040EZ form.
But, as many people have said, there’s a huge industry of financial companies who offer to do taxes for people with promises to get their “maximum refund”.
Well, then…
Nothing is “ clearly and conspicuously” stated in taxes. Not from the government or from the tax prep field.
Not in this country. That only about half (is more accurate) of the population can use the service l’s free option…
In an ideal world the government would supply a usable website service for taxes.