Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses

Intuit To Cut About 1,800 Jobs As It Looks To Increase AI Investments (reuters.com) 70

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
TurboTax-parent Intuit said on Wednesday it will let go of about 1,800 employees, or 10% of its workforce, as it looks to focus on its AI-powered tax preparation software and other financial products. From a report: The company, which has invested heavily in providing generative AI powered accounting and tax preparation tools for small and medium businesses in the past few years, expects to close two of its sites in Edmonton, Canada and Boise, Idaho. Intuit will rehire 1,800 new people primarily in engineering, product and customer-facing roles, CEO Sasan Goodarzi said in a note to employees.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intuit To Cut About 1,800 Jobs As It Looks To Increase AI Investments More

Intuit To Cut About 1,800 Jobs As It Looks To Increase AI Investments

Comments Filter:

  • 1,800 non-US I bet (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Robert Goatse ( 984232 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @09:47AM (#64615647)
    So they lay off 1,800 then rehire 1,800. I bet the majority of those rehired will be in non-US locations (i.e. cheaper labor).
    • That would be interesting since they are also heavily lobbying to eradicate the IRS online and free filing program. In fact there's a new House Bill to do just that. https://federalnewsnetwork.com... [federalnewsnetwork.com] I don't know if a lot of customers would knowingly want a underpaid paid foreign worker to have access to their financial information.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @09:47AM (#64615653)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • The problem is, it's likely they can get away with it.

      1) expectations are already low in their customer support and monopoly-like thinking
      2) the IRS is ill-equipped to sense even glaring errors from ghost submissions, and so QC is not a problem
      3) employees were never loved much there, and AI doesn't ask for a union, pay increases, etc.
      4) Wall Street will be pleased; their earnings unlikely to be changed in their race to the bottom.

      And so while what you say may be true, lacking oversight, their conversion ha

    • Re: Good (Score:5, Informative)

      by Bodrius ( 191265 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @10:28AM (#64615809) Homepage

      Generative AI is not a bunch of if-else flows... that is kind of the problem with applying this to taxes.
      If-else automation is well understood and deterministic and has been the core of Intuit's business since turbotax became a thing, this is different and not evidently better.

      • If then is how our tax code works. It's just a seriously convoluted mess of nested if thens. AI takes if then and turns it into a spaghetti mess of possibilities. It doesn't seem the right fit for a match + logic problem today. But I think we're at peak AI hype, and all the C suites are fully buying into it, just as they have all the other hype chains over the last couple decades. Once the dot-com boom and bust cycle, it's like they're all afraid they'll miss their chance to get fucked when the inevitable b

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by necro81 ( 917438 )

          If then is how our tax code works. It's just a seriously convoluted mess of nested if thens

          It is for you and me. For certain people and organizations, though, it's more like: "I'm going to concoct esoteric rationales and claim X, rather than the straightforward Y, because $X $Y. IF the IRS audits us, THEN we will fight it, and probably still end up paying $Y."

        • This reminds me of this Futurama episode https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by narcc ( 412956 )

        Generative AI is not a bunch of if-else flows

        To be fair, the parent didn't specify generative AI. Further, Generative AI just means any AI system designed to produce content. That isn't limited to just the neat toys you've seen recently. You'll find no shortage of older generative AI systems that are exactly that.

        Maybe I'm being overly generous, but I don't think he intended that to be taken literally, only to imply that AI doesn't have some special power beyond what an ordinary computer program can do. That is, he could have just as easily said t

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Z80a ( 971949 )

      AI is a bunch of multiplication operations and some if (but not else) operations.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by narcc ( 412956 )

      its nothing more than if-than-else logic flows

      They're computer programs, I'm not sure what else they could be?

      Though it's worth noting that AI is very often less than that. For example, in terms of computational power, neural networks live in the realm of combinatory logic, equivalent to lookup tables. (This should be obvious as every input maps to exactly one output.) Hardly the "electronic brains" of limitless potential implied by the name. The power of AI isn't in the models, but in how we make models. The difference between the two, I suspect

  • I'm sure AI isn't taking jobs (Score:3)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @09:49AM (#64615659)
    And we have absolutely nothing to worry about. I'm sure that they'll be so much futuristic jobs that nobody can imagine or tell me about that I don't have anything to worry about. And I'm sure the stories of recent college graduates with business, law and various stem and medical degrees being unable to find work are just outliers.

    Also I'm sure the studies showing that large swath of middle class jobs have been destroyed by automation in the last 40 years can be safely ignored and that our continual transition to a service sector economy where we all Make a living driving each other to our McDonald's shifts via Uber will be just fine....

    Seriously guys now would be the time to do something about this. You won't get a second chance. And I know damn well most of us are too young to die before this hits. At least if you're talking natural causes.

    • ... And I know damn well most of us are too young to die before this hits. At least if you're talking natural causes.

      At least you qualified that with "most" to acknowledge those of us who are only worried about our progeny.

      • I was talking to the ones who don't give a fuck about their progeny. There's lots of 'em. They make excuses.

    • Re:I'm sure AI isn't taking jobs (Score:5, Funny)

      by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @10:17AM (#64615769)

      Dude. Service economy is so last century. Now we're an advertising based economy. Because marketing and advertising is all we have left.

    • One solution to help tide us over: Universal basic income

      • Those who think UBI is a solution at all, think it's a solution for everything.

        We've had self-driving cars for a couple of decades already. Why aren't all the taxi and Uber jobs gone?
        We've had self-flying planes for even longer. Why aren't all the pilot jobs gone?

        It's going to take a long, long time for AI to be able to replace any significant number of jobs.

        And even if it does, those who believe in UBI seem to think money comes from thin air. Somebody's got to pay that money in taxes, in order to provide U

        • Tax the rich.
          The math works.

          • How rich is rich? Shall we say, anyone who makes over 200K per year?

            OK. so there are 15 million people in the US who make over 200K per year.
            The average income, for people who make more than 200K per year, is 330K.
            https://www.ncesc.com/how-many... [ncesc.com]

            Doing the math, that's a total income of people who make over 200K per year, is 4.95 trillion.

            Now, split that up between the other 315 million people in the US, and you get $15,700 each, per year. That is equivalent to the US minimum wage, about $7.50 per hour.

            Now,

            • The Ultra Millionaire Tax Act can help balance the scales and restore fairness to the system. By simply asking the wealthiest 100,000 households to finally pay their fair share, we could generate at least $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years.

              https://www.warren.senate.gov/... [senate.gov].

              Math

              • Funny, my number (4.95 trillion) was bigger than your 3 trillion.

                If 4.95 trillion isn't enough to finance UBI, how in the world will 3 trillion finance it?

                Math is hard.

                • Your number is simplistic.
                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]

                  American economist Karl Widerquist argues that simply multiplying the amount of the grant by the population would be a naive calculation, as this is the gross costs of UBI and does not take into account that UBI is a system where people pay taxes on a regular basis and receive the grant at the same time.[70]

                  According to Swiss economist Thomas Straubhaar, the concept of UBI is basically financeable without any problems. He describes it as "at its cor

                  • No matter how you slice it or rename it, there's not enough money to go around. I gave you my simplistic math, which yields more money than your more sophisticated calculation. Yet you think there's enough to go around. Did your economist source actually crunch the numbers, or is he just spouting his beliefs?

                    There is actually already a name for UBI. It's called Socialism, or Communism. It's never worked, anywhere that it's been tried.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by mspohr ( 589790 )

                      Except Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and a few others.
                      There's lots of money available if you keep it from the rich and the corporations who hoard it.

                    • None of those countries have UBI.

                    • They all have socialism. I.e. social support programs that go beyond UBI

                    • The subject here is UBI, not "social support programs." I do agree that these governments offer "social support programs." They do not implement UBI, because...the math does not work.

                    • Here is a better plan than your mom's basement simple math.

                      It would be easier than you might think. Andrew proposes funding the Freedom Dividend by consolidating some welfare programs and implementing a Value Added Tax of 10 percent. Current welfare and social program beneficiaries would be given a choice between their current benefits or $1,000 cash unconditionally â" most would prefer cash with no restriction.

                      A Value Added Tax (VAT) is a tax on the production of goods or services a business produces.

                    • Your plan might or might not be mathematically sound, there are a lot of moving parts, it would take a lot of research to figure out whether it would work or not, as far as the dollars go.

                      But one thing is clear, your plan is *not* UBI.

                      This is what UBI proponents always do. They push UBI as the cure-all, and then when the numbers don't add up, they start talking about improved welfare plans. How about let's start by admitting that UBI doesn't actually work mathematically, and stop pushing it.

                      As for improving

                    • I know who Mark Twain was, but I have no idea how it applies to the UBI discussion.

                    • > Quotes > Quotable Quote

                      Mark Twain
                      âoeNever argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.â

                    • Ah, got it! Mark Twain had many quotable quotes, so there was no way to narrow it down to this one without your pointing it out.

                      Yes, Mark Twain had a great deal to say about government "help."

                      there is great danger that our people will...sink into the helplessness of the Frenchman or German who expects his government to feed him when hungry, clothe him when naked, to prescribe when his child may be born and when he may die, and, in fine, to regulate every act of humanity from the cradle to the tomb

                      http://www.twainquotes.com/Gov... [twainquotes.com]

      • not with the current culture. There's nothing we hate more than somebody gettin' something for nothin'. We'd burn our houses down to stop it. Kill our family & pets. Run our cars into the ditch. *anything*.

    • I see you've drunk the Intuit Kool-Aid. Just because they *say* they are going to pivot to AI, doesn't mean they will be *successful* doing so.

      If you've used AI tools like ChatGPT or Copilot enough, you know that it can be a very handy ay to take shortcuts. But you also know it can provide answers that are very, very wrong.

      When you make tax and accounting software, you can't afford to be wrong.

      If they are really serious about replacing 1800 people with AI, they have a very hard lesson heading their way.

  • AI is the last thing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gillbates ( 106458 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @09:52AM (#64615661) Homepage Journal

    AI is the last thing a tax preparation software package should be doing. Who wants to face federal prison because AI miscalculated their tax liability?

    • you can do pretty much anything. The IRS is so underfunded that you're basically on the honor system. There's been a little more enforcement lately, but there's something like half a trillion in uncollected taxes a *year* now.
      • the interesting thing to me is that if you make $75k/year and goof up your taxes you are more liable to be audited than if you make $7.5 million/year. Why do you suppose that is? (I have my theories, but I want to hear other's theories.)

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by AvitarX ( 172628 )

          Probably because it's easier.

          My dad got audited recently, but the audit was basically "you didn't send proof of health insurance, send that or pay the fine".

          He found proof of health insurance and sent it, done.

          Allows for an easy get the case finished for an over worked agent.

          • you are right. I mean, some rich person will lawyer up and even if the IRS is 100% right and the money is owed the rich person will keep that agent tied down for a year or more, probably spending more on his/her lawyers than the bill owed to the IRS in th e long run.
          • The only time I had a big tax problem was when I used an accountant to do it. He tried to be too smart.

        • Re:Honestly right now (Score:5, Insightful)

          by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @11:26AM (#64615943)

          Because the guy/gal making 75k a year will probably just sit down with the auditor and figure it out, while the guy/gal at 7.5 mill will hire a literal busload of lawyers to clusterfuck the auditor into shameful oblivion for daring to question their superiority.

          • yeah, that's my number 1 theory, thanks for sharing, it is nice to know at least one other person sees it the same as I do. I believe that the superiority thing for the rich person is the most important part for them and that they will gladly spend more on lawyers to 'win' than the actual money owed the IRS!

            • yeah, that's my number 1 theory, thanks for sharing, it is nice to know at least one other person sees it the same as I do. I believe that the superiority thing for the rich person is the most important part for them and that they will gladly spend more on lawyers to 'win' than the actual money owed the IRS!

              Having been, I don't want to say friends because that word doesn't really register for those folks, but acquaintances with someone far enough up the economic ladder to have several multi-million dollar homes scattered across the US, you are absolutely right. There's a point up there where some switch goes off in the brain that says, "I'm a winner. And I *will* win this." No matter the situation, it's always win-lose, and they will forever associate themselves with the win column. Which also explains why the

        • the interesting thing to me is that if you make $75k/year and goof up your taxes you are more liable to be audited than if you make $7.5 million/year. Why do you suppose that is? (I have my theories, but I want to hear other's theories.)

          Effort.

          An average person who makes a mistake on their taxes gets a notice in the mail from the IRS saying "You owe $$" and pays it, or signs up for a payment plan, or ignores it and just gets another notice that they owe $$+late fee. This can go on for years, with the IRS just sending more notices and attaching (keeping) any tax refunds until it is all paid or until it crosses the threshold where it is worth collections action (when they seize your bank account and other assets or attach your wages). It

      • Re:Honestly right now - IRS has more funding now. (Score:5, Interesting)

        by mspohr ( 589790 ) on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @01:13PM (#64616277)

        Congress Democrats passed a massive increase to IRS to help them go after high income tax cheats and this has already paid for itself many times over.
        Also, they funded free tax filing. Pilot last year will be rolled out to more states.
        Of course, the Republicans keep trying to kill this funding since it threatens the Republican's tax base (rich people and corporations).

        • Congress Democrats passed a massive increase to IRS to help them go after high income tax cheats

          Do you remember the IRS of the 70s and 80s? Yeah, we will back there again soon. I am all for collecting from the rich and powerful; however, the rich and powerful have a way of turning that intense weapon on to the plebeian which destroys small business, ruins lives, and ends any hope of a future. Regular folk stand no chance at all against such an agency... and the Democrats brought it back. Assholes. Find a better way than ultimate authoritarianism and extreme moral standards that nobody can follow.

    • well, remember, Intuit is in now way liable for any mistakes they do when doing your taxes, and that is the way it is now, before any AI... and, well, why do you need AI for taxes? I mean, the tax code is convoluted, sure, they do that so that the 'special few' can pay less taxes than us plebs, but it is still just math.

    • If this thing doesn't work out, they can always say that they meant Artificial Intuition which they felt should be sufficient to fill out your tax return. Their true AI will be ready come tax audit time.

  • I know that from the perspective of those who are exited that this is a distinction without a difference... but "Cut" might be the wrong word. Seems like their workforce is flat... it's composition is different. One job in, one job out. But because the jobs are not related, the people in them will change. 1800 exited, 1800 new.

    Yes, yes... one could argue that "cut" is still correct. I'm saying that the nuance is under-served in this title.

    • ...well yes and no. 1800 people lose their jobs in boise and edmonton. then intuit "expects" to hire 1800 headcount back in 2025. so cut is the correct term...

  • ...and they think it will help with doing taxes?
    Seems like another forced insertion of the magic two letters "AI" into a press release in order to show investors that they are on the hype train

  • "AI" (Score:3)

    by MilenCent ( 219397 ) <johnwh AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday July 10, 2024 @10:30AM (#64615815) Homepage

    "Let's fire all of these people we trained and replace them with a system that uses up a ton of power and can't be counted on to give factual information, and use it to give advice for which we're legally liable."

    BTW, "AI" is not the right word for these things. There is no intelligence, just a system that apes language.

  • Rule #1

    Every headline is either clickbait or a failed attempt at search optimization.

    Rule #2

    Every headline should be presumed to be an outright lie until conclusive proof is established otherwise.

    Rule #3

    The only qualification for employment is if you make others look good.

  • I read that as "Susan Goodnazi."

  • If this thing does not work out they can claim they were aiming for Artificial Intuition which would be all it takes to fill out your tax return anyway. The real AI would be launched around the time of your tax audit.

  • 1. doing something with AI that would be vital o the future of the company
    2. got rid of an amount of excessive engineers.

  • I havenâ(TM)t once had my question answered by their customer service.
  • I remember when I was swamped with my accounting assignments during my MBA. Hearing about Intuit's job cuts and focus on AI investments brings back those stressful days. I wonder how AI will change the game for students. I used to struggle so much with complex accounting concepts, and finding help was a nightmare. Only accounting assignment help at https://essays.edubirdie.com/accounting [edubirdie.com] saved me big time back then. With companies like Intuit investing heavily in AI, maybe we'll see more innovative solution

Slashdot Top Deals

As you will see, I told them, in no uncertain terms, to see Figure one. -- Dave "First Strike" Pare

Close