The IRS and providers of free software for filing income taxes recently signed a new agreement that is hoped will increase usage of said free software on the IRS's Free File website. I wrote about it here February 9.
ProPublica is still not satisfied and continues its smear campaign against Intuit, maker of TurboTax, with this article. As usual it has plenty of deception, half-truth, and use of double standards. As usual the IRS or non-savvy people hoping to file for free bear no responsibility for what ProPublica feels is unjust. All blame goes to the software providers, especially Intuit and TurboTax.
Before saying more about the article and to clarify, there are two free versions of TurboTax. The "Free File" version is the one accessed via the IRS's Free File website, which also hosts several competitor products. The "Free Edition" version is not part of the IRS's Free File program. If somebody tries the former and discovers they fail to qualify, they will not be offered a pay version of TurboTax. They will be directed back to the IRS Free File website to start all over again with a different product. If somebody tries the latter and discovers they fail to qualify, they will be offered a pay version of TurboTax capable of handling their situation.
The following are some assertions in the article and my comments about them.
1. "Intuit does not advertise its Free File offering on Google."
Why does ProPublica feel Intuit should pay to advertise something that will produce no revenues for Intuit? The IRS gets the tax revenue, so why shouldn't the IRS pay for all advertising of the Free File program? Why does ProPublica believe Intuit should pay to advertise a website that hosts several products that compete with TurboTax? Furnishing the software costs Intuit time and money, and some people get to use it for free. Why is ProPublica so ungrateful and mean-spirited?
2. "Google searches for 'free tax filing' and other similar phrases still yield ads for a plethora of products such as TurboTax’s 'Free Edition'. ... TurboTax’s version of Free File — the one that doesn’t charge customers anything — typically won’t appear until the second page of search results.”
The Free Edition doesn't charge customers either. Anway, so what? If a person searches for "free tax filing," shouldn't he or she be informed that TurboTax’s Free Edition exists? Or is ProPublica out to prohibit Intuit from advertising? When is ProPublica going to try to prohibit the IRS from advertising its Free File program?
3. "Intuit places its ads strategically in searches for “IRS” and “free file,” among thousands of related search terms."
This baffles me. What is the author's point? Anyway, I did that search. The first non-ad search result was www.irs.gov › filing › free-file-do-your-federal-taxes-for-free. So Intuit is not making it difficult to find the IRS Free File website. The first non-ad search result shown in the screenshot in ProPublica's article is to https://apps.irs.gov/app/freeFile/. So again Intuit is not making it difficult to find the IRS Free File website. Where's the beef?
Additional comments
Nowhere in this article does ProPublica tell readers how to find the IRS's Free File website, which is where you will go if you click on the link in that first non-ad search result.
Again ProPublica doesn't complain about a person not passing the criteria to use the Free File version and later finding "a dead-end street" after wasting a lot of time entering data. However, ProPublica loudly protests somebody not passing the criteria to use the Free Edition version and not "finding a dead-end street" since they can switch to a pay version.
Using the IRS's Free File link, the second option says "Income above $69,000" & "Free File Fillable Forms." Is a person required to have income above $69,000 in order to use said forms? No, but ProPublica hasn't accused the IRS of false advertising.
Addenda 2/23/2020
Justin Elliot has led ProPublica's smear campaign against Intuit, maker of TurboTax. He got this article published by HuffPost. The title, 'Congress Is About To Ban the Government From Offering Free Online Tax Filing. Thank TurboTax.' is both misleading and false. The IRS already offers 11 ways to file free online now, and Congress isn't trying to eliminate them. There are 10 software options in the Free File program. The 11th is the IRS's own Free File Fillable Forms. As said above, a person is not required to have income above $69,000 in order to use said forms.
Again Elliot fails to mention VITA,TCE, and AARP, which prepare millions of tax returns for free and online.
Showing posts with label file free. Show all posts
Showing posts with label file free. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Thursday, January 30, 2020
In the wake of ProPublica
The main purpose of this goingconcern article is to pan a TurboTax ad that will be aired during the 2020 Super Bowl. I agree the ad is pretty bad. Anyway, it seems the author couldn't resist another pot shot at TurboTax and its maker Intuit. Relying on ProPublica's deceptive and biased reporting about free filing income taxes (see this blog May 2019), the reporter says: "But that ad time cost is chump change for Intuit, maker of TurboTax and staunch proponent of charging millions of customers for tax filing services they should’ve gotten for free."
Should've gotten for free? Huh? Perhaps could have, but should have by what standard? That if a filer fails to heed the caveats, plows ahead anyway, and later learns that he or she doesn't meet the criteria for filing free, that Intuit and TurboTax should allow him or her to file free anyway? That Intuit put a copy of TurboTax on an IRS site that some lower income folks could use for free wasn't enough goodwill?
By the way, I recently learned something else about using the IRS's Free File site. Suppose the following. You proceed to use one of the software programs within the IRS's suite and later discover that you don't meet the eligibility criteria. The eligibility criteria aren't fool-proof and you might err. What happens? You are directed back to the IRS's Free File site to try another product -- which might get the same result. That's it; no other options. If you had selected, say, TurboTax, you could not be redirected to a paid version of TurboTax on a TurboTax website. That prohibition is the IRS's. Suggesting a pay version of TurboTax would be akin to advertising. Moreover, wherever you go requires starting again from scratch for input. The data you had entered up to the point of failure cannot be exported to another website. Would you be upset or pleased with the IRS?
In all its reporting about TurboTax, ProPublica never wrote about this feature of the IRS's Free File site. That's a double standard. If a person tries to file free yet fails to meet the criteria for doing so starting on a TurboTax website, ProPublica feels the need to bad-mouth TurboTax's maker. If a person does likewise starting on the IRS's Free File site, ProPublica is mute.
Should've gotten for free? Huh? Perhaps could have, but should have by what standard? That if a filer fails to heed the caveats, plows ahead anyway, and later learns that he or she doesn't meet the criteria for filing free, that Intuit and TurboTax should allow him or her to file free anyway? That Intuit put a copy of TurboTax on an IRS site that some lower income folks could use for free wasn't enough goodwill?
By the way, I recently learned something else about using the IRS's Free File site. Suppose the following. You proceed to use one of the software programs within the IRS's suite and later discover that you don't meet the eligibility criteria. The eligibility criteria aren't fool-proof and you might err. What happens? You are directed back to the IRS's Free File site to try another product -- which might get the same result. That's it; no other options. If you had selected, say, TurboTax, you could not be redirected to a paid version of TurboTax on a TurboTax website. That prohibition is the IRS's. Suggesting a pay version of TurboTax would be akin to advertising. Moreover, wherever you go requires starting again from scratch for input. The data you had entered up to the point of failure cannot be exported to another website. Would you be upset or pleased with the IRS?
In all its reporting about TurboTax, ProPublica never wrote about this feature of the IRS's Free File site. That's a double standard. If a person tries to file free yet fails to meet the criteria for doing so starting on a TurboTax website, ProPublica feels the need to bad-mouth TurboTax's maker. If a person does likewise starting on the IRS's Free File site, ProPublica is mute.
Wednesday, July 17, 2019
ProPublica Targets TurboTax Again #3
Oh my. It’s more deceptive reporting from ProPublica, along with
100% blame for Intuit (maker of TurboTax) and 0% blame for the tax filer.
In ProPublica’s
narrative Kristan Obeng gets and deserves no blame, despite the following:
1. she waited until
the last minute to file
2. she ignored or
didn’t understand the caveats for using the Free Edition
3. if she had
heeded the caveats, she would not even tried using the Free Edition
4. she plowed ahead
anyway, only to find a roadblock
5. rather than seek
out other alternatives that would have let her file for free – Free
File Alliance, VITA, AARP Tax Aide, the IRS’s Free Fillable Forms,
do a paper Form 1040 – she took the easy road of following Intuit’s
prompt, which is not a command, to use a pay version of TurboTax.
Substitute
“ProPublica writers” for “she” in #2 - #4 and #2 - #4
describe perfectly what the ProPublica writers have done with every
example in their articles in order to try to vilify Intuit. And
again, their narrative omits mentioning any of the alternatives in
#5. And, of course, the IRS gets no blame for eliminating Form 1040A
and Form 1040EZ starting with the 2018 tax year.
Edit: I put the above as a comment on ProPublica (linked above).
Previous posts about ProPublica and TurboTax:
ProPublica Targets Free File Tax Preparers
ProPublica Targets TurboTax
Edit: I put the above as a comment on ProPublica (linked above).
Previous posts about ProPublica and TurboTax:
ProPublica Targets Free File Tax Preparers
ProPublica Targets TurboTax
Friday, May 24, 2019
ProPublica Targets TurboTax Again #2
This
article is deceptive. It ambiguously uses “Free File”, which may
refer to (1) the Free Edition on TurboTax web-sites, or (2) the free
version of TurboTax in the Free File Alliance. A military person with
less than $66,000 income can file free using #2. However, some cannot
do so using #1, such as Zimmerman. She wanted a retirement savings
credit, and it not being supported by #1 is disclosed. Click on
“Simple tax returns” and a popup appears, saying that the
TurboTax Free Edition does not support credits, deductions and income
reported on schedules 1-6. The retirement savings credit is claimed
on Schedule 3. Hence, the Free Edition does not support it.
If
Zimmerman had included “Alliance’” among her search terms, a
link to #2 would have been among the top results.
Some
implicit premises behind ProPublica’s
rants against TurboTax follow.
-
TurboTax is responsible for making its web-pages fool-proof.
-
TurboTax is 100% responsible for any user’s lack of knowledge, effort,
or searching skills, such as omitting “Alliance” among the search
terms.
-
TurboTax should direct any user who might be able to file free to the
Free File Alliance, where TurboTax competitors are equally prominent.
How often do you see ProPublica
directing viewers to read its competitors’ websites?
Thursday, May 16, 2019
ProPublica Targets TurboTax Again
ProPublica
targets TurboTax again here. They
show an internal video of Intuit’s CEO defending Intuit from the
numerous attacks on Intuit and TurboTax made by ProPublica.
ProPublica alleges
that Intuit has steered people away from the IRS’s free file site
and to other TurboTax versions. They pooh-pooh the CEO’s defense.
The CEO says ProPublica’s “articles have been written and published
in the context of a specific wider political agenda. That agenda is
to create a centralized government system of pre-filled tax returns.”
The authors reply, “But we don’t have a political agenda.” I
don’t buy that. Who
is “we” – the authors or ProPublica?
ProPublica
has advocated what the CEO truthfully said (link).
I posted about it yesterday. Advocating the IRS or Congress do something is having a
political agenda.
The
authors also show two Google searches they did, with the top search result of each being
TurboTax web-pages. Like I said two days ago, when a user doesn’t
include “IRS” in the search criteria, why
should the user be directed to an IRS web-page? Similarly, when
a user doesn’t include “IRS” or
“Alliance” in
the search criteria, why
should the user be directed to an IRS web-page or the Free
File Alliance web-page? Yet apparently the ProPublica
authors
believe the user should
be
directed to an IRS web-page or the Free File Alliance web-page, as if their wish should trump the user's input. That is ProPublica trying to bully.
Moreover,
the searches they did were April 10 and April 15, a month ago. I used
the same search terms a few days ago and the top search result for both directed me to the version of TurboTax on the IRS free file site. The
authors did not
include that fact in their article. I assume Intuit had something to
do with the new search result. But
ProPublica
did not cheer the change or thank Intuit. What’s good for the goose is good for the
gander. Deliberate
or not, ProPublica’s
article hid -- at least didn't reveal -- the new top search result!
This
latest article is like their earlier ones – biased, deceptive reporting.
Pretty clearly their goal has
not been
to
inform readers about how to find the Free File Alliance, but to smear
Intuit and TurboTax.
P.S. The authors note that only around 3% of eligible taxpayers have used IRS Free File. In an earlier article (April 26), ProPublica said 70% of taxpayers are eligible for free options from TurboTax and other tax software products. So what? Using them takes time, skill and the willingness, which a person may not have. It seems that in ProPublica's opinion none of these matter; it's entirely the fault of Intuit, H&R Block, etc. In addition to free software products, there are many VITA sites and AARP Tax Aide sites that offer free filing.
P.S. The authors note that only around 3% of eligible taxpayers have used IRS Free File. In an earlier article (April 26), ProPublica said 70% of taxpayers are eligible for free options from TurboTax and other tax software products. So what? Using them takes time, skill and the willingness, which a person may not have. It seems that in ProPublica's opinion none of these matter; it's entirely the fault of Intuit, H&R Block, etc. In addition to free software products, there are many VITA sites and AARP Tax Aide sites that offer free filing.
Tuesday, May 14, 2019
TurboTax, Forbes, ProPublica
The people at ProPublica may have believed they were the first to write about the difference between TurboTax's Free Edition and TurboTax's Free File Alliance Edition. ProPublica got a lot of attention from politicians, some IRS people, and other media for writing about it. However, they were not the first to write about it.
Forbes had this story more than 3 years ago. The author didn't qualify for using the Free Edition due to having a Health Savings Account, and used a pay version of TurboTax to file, unaware of the Free File Alliance. Later she learned she could have filed using the Free File Alliance for $0.
She wrote: Moreover, if a low-income person who would qualify for the Free File Alliance Edition starts doing his or her taxes with Turbotax's Free Edition and needs a form that is not supported in the Free Edition, but is supported in the Free File Alliance Edition, Intuit will not transfer the user to the Free File Alliance Edition. (I did not quote her verbatim, but modified her words only to make the terminology consistent with my first two paragraphs.)
Unlike ProPublica, she didn't accuse TurboTax's maker Intuit of deception and fraud. She wrote about what happened to her and differences between the two TurboTax editions without harshly judging Intuit.
There is another fact pertinent to ProPublica's stories (#1, #2) the authors did not mention. Prior to 2018 the IRS allowed filing with Form 1040A or Form 1040EZ for persons with simpler tax situations. These forms were eliminated for 2018 tax returns. A filer could only use Form 1040. The eligibility criteria for using TurboTax's Free Edition versus TurboTax's Free File Alliance Edition prior to 2018 were likely tied to the rules for using Form 1040A or Form 1040EZ. The IRS's changing its rules did nothing to lessen ProPublica's invective against Intuit.
Forbes had this story more than 3 years ago. The author didn't qualify for using the Free Edition due to having a Health Savings Account, and used a pay version of TurboTax to file, unaware of the Free File Alliance. Later she learned she could have filed using the Free File Alliance for $0.
She wrote: Moreover, if a low-income person who would qualify for the Free File Alliance Edition starts doing his or her taxes with Turbotax's Free Edition and needs a form that is not supported in the Free Edition, but is supported in the Free File Alliance Edition, Intuit will not transfer the user to the Free File Alliance Edition. (I did not quote her verbatim, but modified her words only to make the terminology consistent with my first two paragraphs.)
Unlike ProPublica, she didn't accuse TurboTax's maker Intuit of deception and fraud. She wrote about what happened to her and differences between the two TurboTax editions without harshly judging Intuit.
There is another fact pertinent to ProPublica's stories (#1, #2) the authors did not mention. Prior to 2018 the IRS allowed filing with Form 1040A or Form 1040EZ for persons with simpler tax situations. These forms were eliminated for 2018 tax returns. A filer could only use Form 1040. The eligibility criteria for using TurboTax's Free Edition versus TurboTax's Free File Alliance Edition prior to 2018 were likely tied to the rules for using Form 1040A or Form 1040EZ. The IRS's changing its rules did nothing to lessen ProPublica's invective against Intuit.
Sunday, May 12, 2019
ProPublica Targets TurboTax
Yesterday I commented on a ProPublica article about income tax filing. Today I comment on another ProPublica article related to the first.
ProPublica says TurboTax Deliberately Hid Its Free File Page From Search Engines.
Its subtitle is: "The makers of TurboTax as well as H&R Block promised the IRS to offer free filing for many Americans. But they have kept Google from seeing it."
ProPublica alleged:
(1) TurboTax uses deceptive design and misleading advertising to trick lower-income Americans into paying to file their taxes, even though they are eligible to do it for free.
(2) Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, is deliberately hiding the truly free edition — TurboTax Free File — from Google Search.
Note the different Search #1 top search results, earlier versus later. Apparently ProPublica alleged the earlier top search result was deceptive trickery, since it is not an IRS site (it's a TurboTax site) and somebody might need to pay Intuit some money to be able to file. So I ask the reader, does a searcher not being directed to an IRS site when "IRS" is not included in the search criteria constitute "deliberate, deceptive hiding" by TurboTax? I don't, but it seems ProPublica does!
Of course, I don't know what paths actual filers took to the TurboTax Free Edition and tried to file with it but eventually used a pay version of TurboTax to file. The paths probably varied a lot. But I believe my search criteria and the earlier Search #1 path are very plausible. I doubt that ProPublica has any better idea about what paths actual filers took either.
Anyway, in ProPublica's narrative, it is never the taxpayer's failure to find the no-pay path, but always TurboTax's deliberate deception and fraud.
ProPublica says TurboTax Deliberately Hid Its Free File Page From Search Engines.
Its subtitle is: "The makers of TurboTax as well as H&R Block promised the IRS to offer free filing for many Americans. But they have kept Google from seeing it."
ProPublica alleged:
(1) TurboTax uses deceptive design and misleading advertising to trick lower-income Americans into paying to file their taxes, even though they are eligible to do it for free.
(2) Intuit, the maker of TurboTax, is deliberately hiding the truly free edition — TurboTax Free File — from Google Search.
I allege deceptive reporting by ProPublica. Since Google search results have been modified recently (per the April 28 update in the article), I cannot replicate the earlier situation. However, doing two different searches with Google now is a good indicator of the earlier situation. Minutes ago I did two searches:
Search #1: free file TurboTax
Top search result: TurboTax Free File Program, Part of IRS freefile
Search #2: IRS free file TurboTax
Top search result: IRS freefile site
I suspect the earlier situation was:
Search #1: free file TurboTax
Top search result: TurboTax Free Edition, which is not Part of IRS freefile
Search #2: same as above
Of course, I don't know what paths actual filers took to the TurboTax Free Edition and tried to file with it but eventually used a pay version of TurboTax to file. The paths probably varied a lot. But I believe my search criteria and the earlier Search #1 path are very plausible. I doubt that ProPublica has any better idea about what paths actual filers took either.
Anyway, in ProPublica's narrative, it is never the taxpayer's failure to find the no-pay path, but always TurboTax's deliberate deception and fraud.
Saturday, May 11, 2019
ProPublica Targets Free File Tax Preparers
Lately some politicians and senior IRS officials launched a review of TurboTax's and H&R Block's free file software (link). They were apparently inspired by articles written by ProPublica, such as this: Here’s How TurboTax Just Tricked You Into Paying to File Your Taxes.
ProPublica claims to be "a nonprofit newsroom that aims to produce investigative journalism in the public interest." The people at ProPublica allege they tried the TurboTax software, entered pretend info, and then were told they could not file for free after all, as described in their article. They wrote the following:
"We started the process by creating the profile of a TaskRabbit house cleaner who took in $29,000. We entered extensive personal information. TurboTax asked us to click through more than a dozen questions and prompts about our finances.
After all of that, only then did we get the bad news: TurboTax revealed this wasn’t going to be free at all. Turns out the house cleaner didn’t qualify because he is a independent contractor. The charge? $119.99."
Where did they do this? Probably here, or here, where clicking on 'Simple Tax Returns' shows a popup that gives situations not covered in TurboTax Free Edition, including business income, i.e. that of an independent contractor. So they either missed or ignored the caveat. Also, that software is not on the IRS's free file site.
This IRS site (as directed by the Free File Alliance) is the IRS's starting place for filing federal income taxes for $0 online. Clicking on the blue button 'Start Free File Now' does not direct you to a site to start entering data to file, but rather to a page of several free file software offers, including one by TurboTax and another by H&R Block. The TurboTax one says you can file free if you qualify (no guarantee).
So I selected the latter and I did a similar thing myself, pretending to be self-employed with income of $29,000, only not from TaskRabbit. TurboTax did not disqualify my pretend input for being an independent contractor nor say I needed to pay.
ProPublica also wrote the following:
"Then we tried with a second scenario. We went back to TurboTax.com and clicked on “FREE Guaranteed.” This time, we went through the process as a Walgreens cashier without health insurance, entering personal information and giving the company lots of sensitive data.
Again, TurboTax told us we had to pay — this time because there’s an extra form if you don’t have insurance. The charge? $59.99."
Again, where did they do this? Probably here, or here, where clicking on 'Simple Tax Returns' shows a popup that gives situations not covered in TurboTax Free Edition, including things reported on Schedule 4. The so-called "shared responsibility payment" for not having health insurance goes on Schedule 4. So again the ProPublica people missed or ignored the caveat. Again, that software is not on the IRS's free file site.
Per their description the ProPublica people did not use the IRS's gateway to file free! But I went to the TurboTax site via the IRS gateway. I entered data for a person with a W-2 and no health insurance. The software accepted it, even calculated the so-called "shared responsibility payment", and did not say I needed to pay to file!
The Los Angeles city attorney filed a lawsuit against H&R Block and TurboTax's maker Intuit, alleging that the companies defrauded low-income taxpayers.
I assume ProPublica would side with the attorney. What principle are they invoking? I allude to the answer with an analogy. A customer is ready to buy something at Kroger. A Kroger employee knows the customer could buy the same thing at Walmart for significantly less. On said principle, the Kroger employee defrauds the customer if he or she doesn't tell the customer about Walmart's price. Arguably on said principle, Kroger defrauds the customer if there is no prominent sign by the product telling about Walmart's lower price.
P.S.:
1. I had never used any version of TurboTax before seeing ProPublica's reporting.
2. The so-called non-profit ProPublica had a $10 million profit (revenues minus expenses, and 35% of revenues) in 2017 and a $6.7 million profit (22% of revenues) in 2018. 😊 In 2017 the two highest paid employees were paid almost $400,000 each (> $400,000 with other compensation). Source: Annual Statements and Form 990.
ProPublica claims to be "a nonprofit newsroom that aims to produce investigative journalism in the public interest." The people at ProPublica allege they tried the TurboTax software, entered pretend info, and then were told they could not file for free after all, as described in their article. They wrote the following:
"We started the process by creating the profile of a TaskRabbit house cleaner who took in $29,000. We entered extensive personal information. TurboTax asked us to click through more than a dozen questions and prompts about our finances.
After all of that, only then did we get the bad news: TurboTax revealed this wasn’t going to be free at all. Turns out the house cleaner didn’t qualify because he is a independent contractor. The charge? $119.99."
Where did they do this? Probably here, or here, where clicking on 'Simple Tax Returns' shows a popup that gives situations not covered in TurboTax Free Edition, including business income, i.e. that of an independent contractor. So they either missed or ignored the caveat. Also, that software is not on the IRS's free file site.
This IRS site (as directed by the Free File Alliance) is the IRS's starting place for filing federal income taxes for $0 online. Clicking on the blue button 'Start Free File Now' does not direct you to a site to start entering data to file, but rather to a page of several free file software offers, including one by TurboTax and another by H&R Block. The TurboTax one says you can file free if you qualify (no guarantee).
ProPublica also wrote the following:
"Then we tried with a second scenario. We went back to TurboTax.com and clicked on “FREE Guaranteed.” This time, we went through the process as a Walgreens cashier without health insurance, entering personal information and giving the company lots of sensitive data.
Again, TurboTax told us we had to pay — this time because there’s an extra form if you don’t have insurance. The charge? $59.99."
Again, where did they do this? Probably here, or here, where clicking on 'Simple Tax Returns' shows a popup that gives situations not covered in TurboTax Free Edition, including things reported on Schedule 4. The so-called "shared responsibility payment" for not having health insurance goes on Schedule 4. So again the ProPublica people missed or ignored the caveat. Again, that software is not on the IRS's free file site.
Per their description the ProPublica people did not use the IRS's gateway to file free! But I went to the TurboTax site via the IRS gateway. I entered data for a person with a W-2 and no health insurance. The software accepted it, even calculated the so-called "shared responsibility payment", and did not say I needed to pay to file!
The Los Angeles city attorney filed a lawsuit against H&R Block and TurboTax's maker Intuit, alleging that the companies defrauded low-income taxpayers.
I assume ProPublica would side with the attorney. What principle are they invoking? I allude to the answer with an analogy. A customer is ready to buy something at Kroger. A Kroger employee knows the customer could buy the same thing at Walmart for significantly less. On said principle, the Kroger employee defrauds the customer if he or she doesn't tell the customer about Walmart's price. Arguably on said principle, Kroger defrauds the customer if there is no prominent sign by the product telling about Walmart's lower price.
P.S.:
1. I had never used any version of TurboTax before seeing ProPublica's reporting.
2. The so-called non-profit ProPublica had a $10 million profit (revenues minus expenses, and 35% of revenues) in 2017 and a $6.7 million profit (22% of revenues) in 2018. 😊 In 2017 the two highest paid employees were paid almost $400,000 each (> $400,000 with other compensation). Source: Annual Statements and Form 990.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)