Latest news with #ThomasKarol
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Direct File is free, easy and trusthworthy — so why does Trump's administration want to end it?
Filling out tax forms, in this file photo from 2022. (Photo by Senior Airman Thomas Karol/U.S. Air Force) It takes most Americans an average of $270 and 13 hours to do their taxes. With Direct File, it takes less than 60 minutes to do it yourself and costs nothing. Direct File is the IRS's new electronic option for taxpayers to file their income tax returns directly with the IRS for free. This tax season, Direct File's pilot expanded to 25 states, including Maryland. Our nonprofit organization, the CASH (Creating Assets, Savings and Hope) Campaign of Maryland (CASH), supported the development of the Maryland State Return add-on to IRS Direct File that directly linked taxpayers to a state return upon completion of their federal tax return. Through targeted outreach and partnerships with local organizations, we helped raise awareness about Direct File and connected thousands of Marylanders with free, accessible tax filing options. This work builds on our long-standing commitment to financial stability and economic empowerment for working families: We promote economic advancement for low- to moderate-income individuals and families and lead a coalition of over 50 free tax preparation sites known as Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) sites across the state. Maryland Matters welcomes guest commentary submissions at editor@ We suggest a 750-word limit and reserve the right to edit or reject submissions. We do not accept columns that are endorsements of candidates, and no longer accept submissions from elected officials or political candidates. Opinion pieces must be signed by at least one individual using their real name. We do not accept columns signed by an organization. Commentary writers must include a short bio and a photo for their bylines. Views of writers are their own. Like VITA, Direct File gives Marylanders a free, easy, and trustworthy option to meet their tax filing obligations. Unlike VITA, Direct File gives taxpayers an option that doesn't require securing limited appointments and allows them to get their taxes done from home (or even cellphone!). This flexibility is especially important for people with nontraditional work schedules, caregiving responsibilities or transportation barriers. By removing these obstacles, Direct File ensures that more people can meet their tax obligations on their own time, without sacrificing work hours or family commitments. Direct File echoes the goals of VITA while expanding its capacity, giving more low- and moderate-income Americans the opportunity to file their taxes for free rather than paying for and using a third-party tax preparer or software. While VITA is reliant on trained and certified volunteers and nonprofits for capacity, Direct File can be accessed by millions. The Trump administration and Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) told reporters in April that Direct File would not continue next year, citing 'hidden costs,' 'taxpayer confusion' and the expense of administering the program. There are no costs, hidden or otherwise, to use the program. Direct File is completely free to eligible taxpayers. Because the program allows taxpayers to file directly with the IRS and their states, users are never redirected to paid options. The same cannot be said about Free File compliant software offered by traditional tax software developers like TaxAct and TaxSlayer. Notably, TurboTax by Intuit and H&R Block, two of the largest and most well-known paid tax preparation companies, withdrew from the Free File Alliance in 2021. Filing your taxes can be confusing, but Direct File is simpler and more user-friendly than third-party tax software. Participants during the first year of the program said it themselves: 90% ranked their overall experience as Excellent or Above Average, 90% who used customer support rated that experience as Excellent or Above Average, and 86% of respondents said that their experience with Direct File increased their trust in the IRS. Plus, Direct File users have access to customer support from real people during the entire process. Continuing to build Direct File is an investment that will save time and money for Americans far into the future. If Direct File continues, the taxpayer dollars already invested will not go to waste. Progress has already been made to expand the program. Direct File can grow to serve more states and a wider range of tax situations. Future versions of the program can simplify the process by prefilling information the IRS already has (like the details of a W-2 form). If it is not preemptively shut down, Direct File will continue to be improved based on real feedback from its users. Paying taxes allows our country to thrive, and Americans should not be burdened with extra costs and time-consuming processes to meet their filing obligations. Protecting the Direct File program is an investment in everyday Americans – making their government work for them.
Yahoo
10-04-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
It's time to hit pause on the PDAB
A pharmacist counts out pills for a prescription in this 2024 file photo. (Photo by Senior Airman Thomas Karol/U.S. Air Force) I had hoped voices like mine – a Black woman with Crohn's disease – would still have impact in the state of Maryland. Yet, there seems to be little concern that Maryland's Prescription Drug Affordability Board may reduce access to care for those already experiencing health disparities. The legislature created the board to make drugs more affordable – though to whom is still an open question. I founded a nonprofit representing patients like me, Color of Gastrointestinal Illnesses, based on my own personal experience. I have been on 16 medications, from pills to injections to suppositories. I started having rectal bleeding at age 13, yet was not diagnosed with Crohn's disease until 2018, after a 30-year journey. And even with diagnosis, I did not get an advanced therapy prescribed until five years later. That medication changed my life. Yet, I also recognize that I have a progressive disease and my health has been forever impacted by a delayed diagnosis and delayed prescribing of the advanced therapy I needed. Based on my experience and so many like me, I worry the activities of the Maryland Prescription Drug Affordability Board will exacerbate existing health disparities. In this age of personalized medicine, clinicians can prescribe treatment based on evidence of clinical effectiveness based on personal characteristics. Drugs do not have the same impact on different patients, and policies should not allow physicians to be steered by payers into prescribing decisions. Insurers are not doctors. Maryland Matters welcomes guest commentary submissions at editor@ We suggest a 750-word limit and reserve the right to edit or reject submissions. We do not accept columns that are endorsements of candidates, and no longer accept submissions from elected officials or political candidates. Opinion pieces must be signed by at least one individual using their real name. We do not accept columns signed by an organization. Commentary writers must include a short bio and a photo for their bylines. Views of writers are their own. Patients face a flurry of threats to our access to health care in Congress right now, giving state policymakers an opening to slide past us what they might call policy tweaks or simple data collection to inform payer decisions. Yet, any patient that has fought for coverage of their treatment knows that the policies governing payers really matters. What sounds good to save the system money does not translate into affordability and access for patients and people with disabilities. Adding to the insult, the Maryland legislature passed legislation to expand the reach of the state's Prescription Drug Affordability Board to the commercial insurance market. We all want drugs to be accessible and affordable. Patients like me are literally fighting for their lives to achieve policies that allow them to receive care prescribed by their doctors without the barriers of utilization management, such delayed treatment due to prior authorizations, step therapy forcing patients to fail on a treatment before accessing what their doctors prescribe, and nonmedical switching at the pharmacy to a different drug. Patients pay for the mistakes of insurers that impose their judgement about medical treatment – based largely on cost effectiveness and not clinical effectiveness – in the form of costly adverse medical events or by having to pay out-of-pocket for denied care they know they need. When patients have raised concerns that this Board's decisions may trigger insurers to change their formularies and raise costs to patients, there has been no serious consideration of the issue other than a commitment to monitor and study it. We all know what that means – nothing. We have also shared concerns individually and as coalitions that the board's work may conflict with the laws governing disability nondiscrimination, which bars their use of measures of cost effectiveness known to devalue people with serious, disabling and chronic conditions like mine. In response, a board member bluntly stated it was better to have more data than less and expressed intent to collect data using the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) measure to value treatments. The board did not acknowledge the QALY is known to devalue disabled lives and is barred from use by federal law to make decisions in programs such as Medicaid. It was developed for the purpose of rationing care in other countries, which does not bode well for the disproportionate share of people of color that have disabling conditions or older adults. The National Council on Disability is an independent federal agency advising Congress and the states on disability policy. It has consistently recommended against use of QALYs and similar measures, including by reference to other countries. The question now is whether the board will pause its work and listen to people like me about what really drives our affordability challenges.
