Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

Dayjob: Tax – evaluating AI agents on 50 professional tax assignments

https://surgehq.ai/blog/dayjob-tax
As a proof-of-concept, I've been using extra tokens to formalize the IRS tax forms and worksheets, mostly just to prove this can be done. The idea is that something like this could be adapted into a publicly maintained version of the IRS Direct File program (RIP). I'm up to an estimated 60% coverage of US federal tax situations so far.

https://github.com/emmilco/us-tax-model

loading story #50294639
loading story #50282077
loading story #50279241
I recently did something similar, using Claude Code to formalize a set of rules for a sporting event as part of building a computer-based scoring system. It's worked very well.
That's very cool but don't you think the Big AI labs will soon have collected enough data from us that they can easily do this?
I'm not sure it matters. The IRS killed Direct File under lobbying pressure from the tax prep industry. In my opinion the public is owed a free version of this sort of tool. If the IRS doesn't produce it, then citizens ought to. If Google or Anthropic or whoever wants to offer a free version of this, more power to them, but I don't see why they'd bother. They could have done it decades ago.

And to be clear: my vision here isn't "have an agent do your taxes", it's to have agents build a hardened and thoroughly verified deterministic tool that can help you navigate the (somewhat bewildering) forms and instructions decision tree when filing your own taxes.

This is great, and I appreciate the approach. Yes, tax calculation should be a decision tree. Unfortunately it is truly pretty complicated (just this year I had to abandon FreeTaxUSA for TurboTax because the latter handled an important case I needed better). But I have a lot of faith that we can do this right. Good luck!
Funny, after 10+ years of using TurboTax Online I moved to FreeTaxUSA last year and it's like a breath of fresh air. TurboTax couldn't do what I needed to do (e-file a late return) and FreeTaxUSA had no problem with doing that.
I have a probably stupid question: given that the IRS killed Direct File, even if your software can create ready-to-file (or even ones that need some work) tax returns, isn't that moot without a way to like... get the IRS to accept them?
You just mail them in!
If your software can fill out the forms then you can (at the very least) print them and mail them in. The IRS certainly still accepts that.

https://www.irs.gov/filing/where-to-file-paper-tax-returns-w...

Ohhhh I thought Direct File included the mail-in options, not just the online one. Thank you!
Why wouldn't the IRS accept a tax return created by your own software? How would they even know it was custom software? Ultimately your tax return is just a stack of papers that gets sent to the IRS.
Software sending efiles to the IRS has to be tested with and approved by the IRS. The IRS is working toward eliminating paper filing as an option. At this point, paid preparers are legally required to efile all returns and if the return gets rejected and they must paper file, they have to include Form 8948, Explanation for Paper Filing. For the IRS to accept a tax return from software the software has to go through this process. https://www.irs.gov/e-file-providers/how-tax-preparation-sof...
loading story #50282102
loading story #50284248
You can use free file fillable forms to submit online. It's a bit of work to transcribe from other software. It also requires a particular interpretation when filling forms (e.g. you need to round before summing your W-2s).
I think that assuming work can be done more easily in the future should not stop people from doing work that needs to be done in the present.

(If a painter knew that the camera was coming out I would not want them to throw their canvas away)

> (If a painter knew that the camera was coming out I would not want them to throw their canvas away)

That's not a fair comparison because the painter produces different work, whereas tax computations will be the same.

loading story #50279974
Plus there is little chance it will be done in the future by any large entity because of the entrenched interested in the area.
loading story #50283370
I think the IRS already did some version of this and open sourced it https://github.com/IRS-Public/fact-graph

There's an article about it here https://biggo.com/news/202510160717_IRS-Fact-Graph-Public-Re...

These were artifacts from the IRS Direct File program (RIP)

Maybe your project could (re)productionize this dataset.

When I was planning the project, I looked into FactGraph to see if it'd be worth building on. I opted not to for a few reasons:

- It's oriented toward the IRS's internal XML API in a way that's not really useful for this project, since no consumer of my code is going to digitally submit to the IRS.

- The semantics of FactGraph are largely undefined, and the maintainers themselves seem to acknowledge that its development trajectory went off in a bad direction and it needs major divisions.

- It's super verbose.

- It's the year of Lean, so I wanted to find an excuse to use Lean.

Other work has been done in this domain, though. The biggest example is Catala[0], though Prof. Sarah Lawsky at Northwestern seems to have made some strides toward formalizing the Internal Revenue Code.

[0] https://catala-lang.org/

I prepared my taxes this year using Astra + Codex. It did a thorough job on a complicated return, and I sent it to my accountant to fill out the tax form, with everything laid out in a spreadsheet. They sent it back for final review, and I had Codex check it; it was riddled with errors. The refund was nearly $2k lower than it should have been, and they put a bunch of stuff into the wrong fields. Had to go back and forth multiple times to get it 100% correct. Made me wonder how many previous years' returns were wrong.

I feel like we're going to get to a point where it's mandatory to use AI for certain tasks - humans just can't be trusted to get things right that require a level of precision.

loading story #50281907
> Made me wonder how many previous years' returns were wrong

Feed previous year returns into Astra and find out! It's not too late for amended returns, you have 3? years from original date of filing

loading story #50286179
Your anecdote seems to clash heavily with the results of the benchmark announced in the article. I suppose that is part of the jagged experience of agentic AI
The benchmark announced in the article seems to be around weird edge cases (which are often important) and whether it can prompt the person with relevant information rather than just listening to what they want to do.

Top tier tax professionals can do pretty well on this benchmark (better than agents) but won't hit 100%.

The kind of people spending time preparing oodles of returns would not do very well on this metric, though (especially midway through that pile of returns, as opposed to "think carefully about this trick question").

loading story #50299684
I have a non-trivial tax situation, as a US citizen living abroad. I prepare my own tax returns, never having found a cross-border tax preparer I trust, and have for the past few years, fed my draft return along with all the supporting paperwork into Claude. It has:

1. found errors, e.g. where I used the incorrect exchange rate (and managed to work out how I had made that error, which I was impressed by)

2. found items which would appear to be errors except for context it did not know

3. flagged areas where it disagreed with me as to the correct tax treatment, but accepted that the law is ambiguous (and in some cases I preferred its interpretation after additional research and in other cases I did not)

4. flagged areas where it disagreed with IRS guidance, and only acknowledged said guidance after I provided links to it

5. provided highly inaccurate estimated tax calculations, and not been able to fix its estimates even when challenged

So my takeaway is that it is a very useful tool for tax, but perhaps unsurprisingly, it is not good enough to dump all your paperwork into and expect a shiny return you don't need to check. (Possibly it is if you just have a W-2 and no other substantial income, but I can't speak for that scenario.)

I have a company abroad in addition to living abroad. It’s kind of a nightmare to do my US taxes and costs me easily $2000 per year right now. I was hoping I could have an agent do them after I have a few years of data and point it at the source statements and the end result forms
According to these benchmarks. It's not there yet
form 5471?
loading story #50295392
I also had a great experience consulting LLM regarding registering a business as a foreigner. Except I'm still very sceptical since it's not my area of expertise and consequences for a mistake are very high.
you were consulted by an LLM?
He said he's a foreigner, almost certainly a mistranslation.
I'm also in a non-trivial tax situation, GPT Sol did better than my specialist accountant this year. It needed a lot of steering from me and about 2B tokens, but that is better than spending $3-4k in preparation fees. Total time to prepare and handle steering was still less than I normally spend on tax prep with my accountant.

I think what helped is giving it 100+ pdf and csv documents of my full situation so it knew everything about me and could cross-reference with all my bank statements.

So, GPT Sol outputted tax return PDFs that you were able to submit to the IRS? (I'd imagine that you couldn't directly e-file like you could from TurboTax.)
Correct, it first did it in a spreadsheet, then filled out 59 pages of returns and supplement forms and I printed and posted it. It also filed my FBAR.
loading story #50282621
Amazing story!! Honestly, thanks for sharing so completely.
Is it unusual for Americans to spend that much on tax returns?
Yeah for individual tax preparation that is pretty high. Most people get away with filing for $20-150. I used to have a CPA do my consulting business, tiny 1 person company, and personal taxes for $500.

I no longer do consulting on the side so I just use online tax software. It is about $150 but I do that more out of laziness as it integrates with my brokerage and payroll company to import everything automatically. Also I have carry forward losses and such that it already knows about.

Most people’s taxes are simpler than mine but I am sure there are lots of folks here with much more complex tax situations

I am not a normal case because I don't live in USA. The USA government estimates 50-80 hours to complete all my forms.

I have foreign income and foreign businesses, my partner has foreign income from two countries. The tax law is then based on tax treaties, most tax preparers do not have sufficient knowledge to complete a return, and tax software doesn't handle these cases.

The tax treaties are not clear, tax professionals will disagree on interpretation, and tax benefits in one country will not apply to another.

Then there is a thing called AMT, alternative minimum tax, which is a second way to calculate your taxes that you need to submit as well.

It's unusual to spend that much even for a small business tax returns except maybe in major cities
> I have a non-trivial tax situation, as a US citizen living abroad.

Same situation as you. I have a local accountant in the country I'm in plus my US accountant. Claude/ChatGPT have been a huge help for checking, explaining, and finding issues. They also found websites with pertinent information that Google did not, which surprised me.

loading story #50279149
loading story #50277088
check out https://www.multiplierholdings.com/

it's the most ai-native tax experience for US citizens abroad

Are you saying I should use this (or it looks like one of their portfolio companies) as my return preparer, or as a replacement for Claude my return-checker? If the former, I would want to know why I should trust it; if the latter, I would want to know why I should pay for their services given I am already playing Anthropic for a subscription plan anyway.

(It would also help to know if you had a financial interest in or prior experience with this company)

My tax accountant mis-filed my taxes a couple years ago, which cost me about $20K (which I learned after I switched to another accountant later). Don't know if Claude / GPT would make the same mistake or not given SOTA today, but feels like there's an opportunity for models to be saving me thousands or tens of thousands of dollars a year.
>mis-filed my taxes a couple years ago, which cost me about $20K

What do you mean by "cost you $20K"? That your tax liability was calculated by the accountant to be higher than it actually should have been? Or that the accountant calculated your liability too low, which was caught and billed by the IRS?

In the first case, you can still file for a refund within 3 years (I'm omitting some technical details), but in the latter case, as mentioned by others, you still owe the tax whether it was correctly reported on your original return or not.

Years ago I had a similar issue. Accountant did something incorrect, increasing my liability by around $50k. Tax date came so I paid it, but moved accountants. New person fixed the issues, refiled, but it took a long time to get the refund back. IIRC, the IRS did include some nominal interest for the time they had the money.
Sounds like an opportunity which could end up costing or saving $10k and which may be difficult to evaluate.
Someone still needs to take liability for mistakes.

The real issue is that accountant most likely has a track record of those kinds of mistakes - but you have no info on other clients. So you weren’t as informed at the time you chose them vs the new one.

People misunderstand the concept of liability. Yes your tax professional is liabile for fraud or gross misconduct, but if they make a mistake which results in unpaid taxes or fees you're still the one on the hook.
Typically you are on the hook for paying the actual taxes and penalties, but if you acted in good faith on the negligent advice of a tax professional many jurisdictions allow you to recover the costs of penalties and interest accrued as a result of the negligent advice.
loading story #50277509
Yeah, I looked him up just now actually, and he has a 3-star rating on Yelp... Which I think is pretty low for accountants?

I think the red flag should have been when he printed out all my tax returns and made me pick them up in person, and didn't even send a digital copy.

In this case accountant DID NOT take liability for mistakes.

It's not the accountant that paid $20k for his mistake but the accountant's client.

i'm a bit unclear who has the liability even when you use a CPA. accountants are humans that sometimes make mistakes.
The IRS made it crystal clear to me long ago. The tax filer is responsible for everything on the tax return, regardless of the preparer. Of course, accountants can be liable in other ways, but the filer has to pay the fines if the accountant makes a mistake.
From the IRS' point of view, the tax-payer is responsible for paying all of it. You can then turn around and sue to recover any of the fees/fines or penalties incurred as a result of an error made by the accountant, not the actual taxes though.
It seems disingenuous by our government. Create a tax strategy that is so complicated, people feel like they have to hire professionals. However, if the professionals err, it's the citizenry that pays the penalty.

Seems like simplify or just erradicting the tax code would be more just at this point.

You can - literally - have the same government force the negligent CPA pay via the judiciary. That’s what a lawsuit is.

Normally it doesn’t get to that point though. CPAs do not want to be known as the person that misfiled taxes and got a court to rule them negligent. They carry insurance for errors so mostly just end up queitly making it right when there is an error.

loading story #50284883
In NZ the liability is generally on you and not the accountant.
{"deleted":true,"id":50277018,"parent":50276116,"time":1793207693,"type":"comment"}
> Someone still needs to take liability for mistakes.

I am not aware of setups available to me that would transfer liability onto accountant.

So in either case I am taking liability.

(also, I am pretty sure that if corporation loses 10 millions over accountant making bad decisions, they are not going to recover that funds either)

{"deleted":true,"id":50276640,"parent":50276259,"time":1793206211,"type":"comment"}
yeah i think liability ultimately lies on the individual. of course, you could sue your accountant, but that feels hard, maybe almost as hard as suing the model providers.
Yes, at least in the US the individual must sign their own return.
At least in Poland it is not viable. Friend's business lost noticeable amount of money because accountant has not filed taxes and lied that they filed and lied that they checked it.

And there was no real path to recovering funds, except small part, after long court case.

At least they were able to fire them without severance pay.

This seems to be usual. Accountants are liable for crimes like embezzlement, but tax authorities hold individual tax payers responsible. If tax payers want to recover losses they have to go to court, which is often risky because accountants will say the client didn't do A, B, and C.
loading story #50292022
My obligatory comment about my experience with tax accountants:

https://blog.nawaz.org/posts/2022/Nov/do-you-trust-your-tax-...

I'm also 0 for 4 on tax preparers / tax accountants, so I concur with you its best to just do it yourself, which is what I now do. Only time I ever got audited (and failed) was when I had employed an accountant, since then I've never had a problem including passing audits. The tax code isn't /that/ complicated for most people's situation, and it's well worth understanding it.
I'm 1 for 6. And my current firm is overworked. I'm moving to do it myself (three companies, fund admin and personal). Recently Found a Tax-Accountant, not a CPA, who does advice only, no paperwork, who I'm using to cross-check my AI tools.
I am a CPA with 20+ years of experience and I feel like I need to defend our industry here.

There is no such thing as "failing" an IRS audit. You either under reported income, overstated deductible expenses, or your "accountant" changed the numbers you provided and committed fraud, which would have resulted in immediate legal proceedings by the IRS against the preparer. So did you "fail" because your preparer committed federal tax fraud or did you underreport your income?

The statement that the one time you used an accountant you got audited implies that you are confusing causation with correlation. There are about 6 ways that the IRS selects returns for audit but only 3 are actually relevant here.

- Information Matching (ie. if your W2 does not match the W2 submitted by your employer). This mostly used for your basic W2, 1099DIV, etc. kind of taxpayer and is usually just a letter from the IRS telling you your numbers are wrong and you need to amend your return.

- If they are examining a related return (ie. you own a business and another partner in that business is being audited)

- Computer scoring which breaks down into the Discriminant Function System (DIF), basically, how does your return compare to similar returns, and Unreported Income DIF, what is the potential that your return underreported income. This is what is commonly used for businesses and self employed individuals' Schedule C. Basically, when you prepare a business return (1040 Sch. C, 1041, 1065, 1120, 1120S, or 990) you have to report your business industry's NAICS code, and provide a single line explanation what your business does. Using this and the return data, the IRS is able to score a return on the likelihood that profit is understated by comparing a businesses income and expenses to the norm for a similarly sized businesses in that industry. High scoring returns are then reviewed by IRS personnel.

One of those three things happened to you and none of them are the fault of a preparer that is using accurate information provided by the taxpayer.

Finally, you keep saying things like "accountant". You disparaging an entire industry without saying what type of tax preparer you used. Was it a CPA, licensed by a state with experience in tax? An Enrolled Agent, licensed by the IRS directly? Or a tax preparer, an unlicensed person preparing your return either on their own or through something like HR Block or Turbotax? Because if you used an unlicensed tax preparer and are blaming licensed individuals that is like hiring an unlicensed electricians and then when your house burns down from an electrical fire, turning around and saying all electricians are bad

Additionally, "the tax code isn't /that/ complicated"... tax law is so complex that it is the only form of US law in which ignorance of the law is an acceptable legal defense.
In his defense, he did say "... for most people".

And that's true if all you do is have W-2 income, and RSUs/ESPPs. ESPPs were the most complex thing I had to deal with until I stupidly decided to do things and get K-1s.

Fair point, but the actual "tax code" (Title 26 of the US Code) is extremely complex for most people to understand. If he is referring to IRS Form Instructions as the tax code, yes those are usually not very complex. From my perspective K1s, RSUs, & ESPPs are as simple as a W2 with state tax withholding and I think that is why I am struggling with so many of the comments on this post - I simply can't relate.
> From my perspective K1s, RSUs, & ESPPs are as simple as a W2 with state tax withholding and I think that is why I am struggling with so many of the comments on this post - I simply can't relate.

Well, you are an accountant :-)

With my K1, the issue was that it was for a real estate investment, and you have to be careful about things like bonus depreciation/cost segregation etc. One tax accountant I used was not carrying over the loss (or perhaps not applying the prior year's loss, or something like that). Another accountant was deducting that loss from my W-2 income, which I can't do as I'm not a real estate professional.

When I finally brought these points up and got all these corrected, I studied the final result and then continued doing them myself. But it was a pain getting the online tax SW (TurboTax, TaxAct, etc) to mimic what they did. I had to be really careful what things I said "Yes" to and what I didn't. I would never have figured it out on my own by reading the relevant tax publications (which I did peruse).

And then later, I formed a partnership with a friend so we could both invest in something. Now I also have to issue K-1s! Not fun! RSUs are much easier.

> There is no such thing as "failing" an IRS audit.

I consider being audited and the IRS finding corrections to prior returns as a "failure". Once I started doing things myself, I was audited and no corrections found (e.g. a "success"). In the case where I "failed" the audit, it had to do with how expenses were being handled by the accountant. At the time I was a contractor working on a 1099 and was tracking and submitting some business expenses for reimbursement, and some expenses were tracked and taken against my taxes but not reimbursed. What was filed did not align exactly with what was reimbursed, which caused an overstatement of deductions, causing me to owe back taxes. I am not making any claim that they committed fraud, as that's a crime which requires intent, I think they were just incompetent.

> The statement that the one time you used an accountant you got audited implies that you are confusing causation with correlation.

I actually didn't say that, I said the only time I got audited and failed was when I used an accountant, however I realize my style of writing made that unclear. During the time where I received income via a 1099 (and for part of that also had to file from a K-1 briefly for an LLC), I was audited three times in total. Only one time did I "fail", and it was the only time where I had professional assistance. In fact, I found the process of being audited surprisingly kind, the IRS folks involved were very professional and weren't mean about it at all. After my first experience being audited, even though I got the nasty surprise of owing back taxes, I was a lot less fearful of that process. That said, I have never had any understanding of how someone is chosen to be audited, but I have not been selected for an audit since moving to a W-2 for all of my income, which has been quite some time now. The experience of being audited did get me into the habit of storing all my tax related records carefully organized by year long-term, however, which I think is probably a good habit for everyone.

> You disparaging an entire industry without saying what type of tax preparer you used.

My intent isn't to disparage anyone, it's to share my own personal experience. I hired a CPA licensed in the state of Missouri (where I resided at the time) when I previously had a professional handle my taxes.

loading story #50285631
Is this just giving a general-purpose agent a workspace full of documents and an assignment, then seeing what happens? I feel this doesn't really say anything. It appears they mostly dumped all of this in base models with little to nothing in the way of infrastructure to support it. If you just randomly grab some person off the street and say 'do taxes' they would probably mess up just as badly. The interesting question would be what the models could do in a well engineered harness focused on taxes. That would be reflective of the performance boundary and how serious we would have to take AI in that field.
Agree. Even a dumb step like "list every rule and deadline that applies, then check each one" would probably catch the missed 2-of-5-years deadline from their own example.
The goalposts shifted so hard here I think we're playing rugby instead of football
How do you think 99.95% of people who do taxes with gen AI are doing it?
loading story #50286243
loading story #50296222
loading story #50298409
I'm surprised Sonnet 5.5 did noticeably better than Opus and Fable. Same pattern in their other benchmarks.
It didn't really do any better, the difference is well within the error bars for their benchmark.
loading story #50276500
There is currently a bill in Congress to finally allow regulation of paid tax preparers. Not sure if addresses AI, but probably not.

https://www.accountingtoday.com/news/new-bill-calls-for-irs-...

There is also an IRS form (14157) to report a return preparer complaint, which of course does not include an option to report a faulty AI.

It does not go far enough. If the government won't allow the IRS to autoprepare the 90%+ returns that they already have the data for than paid tax preparers should be licensed, whether it is as an Enrolled Agent, CPA, or some newly created tax preparer that cannot represent you before the IRS license. The fact that a company like HR Block or Turbotax can hire someone with no experience, sign them up for a PTIN, teach them how to use turbotax, and then call them an "expert" is insane.
Everybody is saying their tax accountant messed up and the models caught it which makes me think, why aren't tax accountants doing the same thing lot of us are doing - ask LLM to do the prep and they just review and finalize?

Can't be good getting caught with mistakes and losing customers?

loading story #50285952
loading story #50289955
loading story #50285443
I find TurboTax is easy enough to use, except that data collection and entering is a huge hassle (to me, merely logging onto each website and getting the corresponding tax doc is painful chore). What would be a good way to collect the data easily? If I solve that problem, tax filing will become an easy task.
The best thing in my opinion is using the TurboTax Desktop software, installing it on a VM and spinning that up only when you need to do taxes. The import/export relies on tax files from the previous season, but they seem to essentially be slightly encrypted archives.
loading story #50286580
I wasn't able to quickly see what tools/system-prompts were provided in the tasks. [0]

These types of detail-oriented professional tasks seem like they would perform better with task-specific harnesses. The example they give, of Astra missing the property excluded gains requirement, seems easily fixed by scaffolding ensuring that requirements are compiled first, then checked.

If the scaffolding is absent, is this benchmark testing that a model can self-scaffold, or track requirements in-context?

0 - https://huggingface.co/datasets/surgeai/DAYJOB-tax/tree/main...

loading story #50294773
I had Gemini help me with RMD calculations for an estate I manage. Advice was mostly good. Wrong about withholding for both US and CA. Missed deductions on US. Was accurate on MFJ and spousal death impacts.

I've found it so far more effective for preparation than for planning/advice.

I've got a plan to feed the laws and rules and instructions into the machine before the prompts - is RAG still cool? Maybe I should small-language this?

I wonder if you use opus 5.5 and let it research using the internet what you would get. I use opus 5.5 for legal stuff and it's generally great, but you do have to give it access to the web.
Gemini has access to the web. It should have had access to this, if not even already known some of these rules.

Admittedly, it could be promting issue, lots of context for these decisions.

loading story #50276749
Useless benchmark as it seems to be evaluating literally only the weights.
Sharing all my financial info with LLM companies is not something that I like.

EDIT: good point that paying accountant does not ensure avoiding it

wonderful, you made a good point that make me dislike situation even more

loading story #50287164
Your accountant sure will.
Most accountants will not in fact share client data with an LLM company.
loading story #50281099
I'm for sure reinventing the wheel here but I've had an LLM generate an app that walks me through my existing tax routine I've been running with for years. Thus no real numbers go to any LLM I just give it my situation and it fills out the form.

The plan now is to retrieve the current year's tax forms then have an LLM compare them to stored versions from last year, and look for variances (e.g. new field, new form requirements, etc) all of which an LLM would excel at (whilst basic math it historically did not).

Some inference providers have a Zero Data Retention policy
Worst case scenario what does OpenAI do with your tax return?
- their data will be partially leaked in general, including my financial info

- someone who hates me personally will get access to it (see case where someone put their ex-spouse on no-fly-list etc)

- leak my private info via new version of LLM was trained on it

- sell it to everyone interested (maybe sold after their bankruptcy)

- give it to NSA and whoever else

from obvious ones

Oh look, yet another reason to use local inference.
What is human baseline? How it stacks against 10% LLM accuracy?..
loading story #50277824
loading story #50278634
loading story #50276074
loading story #50281025
Isn't writing out the example in the beginning that Astra missed basically ensuring that every future model will get this task correct?

I guess my point is these benchmarks unless they are constantly refreshed with new scenarios and not ever having their outcomes written about publicly or available on a public server, will always be prone to being gamed

loading story #50279094
loading story #50279863
I used Grok Bot and found out that I could offset some stock value going down and get back ~$300. I gave it my bank statements, email access (which had my stocks monthly report as attachment) and a few other things.

I'd have honestly never been able to do it myself - its just too tedious.

So are the accountants completely fucked yet?
Not yet, and not completely.

Some accountants need to make judgement calls. LLMs are not great at many judgement calls yet.

10% of the time it works every time
loading story #50301876
loading story #50286871
loading story #50281885
loading story #50287751
loading story #50292179
loading story #50298940
loading story #50276607
I'm not sure LLMs will be good at doing taxes any time soon primarily because they're very bad at even simple math unless it's explained in words like in proofs. A good illustration of this is asking an LLM something like this: "If I put a container on a food scale, tare it, add 100g of peanuts, tare it, weigh 100g of almonds and then remove the container from the scale, what does the scale read?" LLMs completely puke all over themselves on this one. They do not account for not taring after the almonds and they do not see the weight of the container needs to be subtracted. The correct answer is minus (100g + container weight). Although this particular question also exploits another LLM weakness which is physical world concepts. LLM are just guessing. For an LLM to do taxes well, it would need to be trained on many scenarios and it would need a math service that it can use as a support service.
You just need to give an instruction something along the lines of "any initial calculation or derived value must be computed through the use of a $LANG program."

Pretty sure the LLMs could implement tax calculations better than the average accountant, were they given the rules.

In my experience agents will reach for numpy for any non trivial math without being instructed
It's the judgement of "trivial" where I find issues.

Most calculations are trivial.

It is also trivial to specify deterministic tool calling for all math
Exactly. That's why I specify it that way.
loading story #50280737
As a veteran tax CPA, I think LLMs can be very good at preparing taxes but I would not trust them to complete a tax return start to finish. An LLM that can take data from tax documents and input that data into the correct boxes of tax preparation software has no need for math, it just has to identify data in a pdf, spreadsheet, or handwritten note and transcribe that data to the correct box in professional tax software that then does the math. In your typical local CPA firm, an LLM could replace the unlicensed preparers/interns/early career stage CPAs in filling out the return for the experienced professional to review and adjust according to their specialized knowledge. As with many industries, I think the LLMs are suited at replacing entry level automated turks but lack the skills necessary to fully complete the project.
Look at multiple posters here explaining that their accountants made O($10k) errors that were discovered by LLMs.

I’m not sure the evidence is on the side of the CPAs. Maybe CPAs with LLM assistance.

“The scale reads −(100 g + the weight of the empty container).”

I literally gave it your question. What models did you test?

loading story #50282990
{"deleted":true,"id":50285725,"parent":50279446,"time":1793260429,"type":"comment"}
{"deleted":true,"id":50280639,"parent":50279446,"time":1793220321,"type":"comment"}