6 ms·

Overlooked in this article and comments is the influence of one man -- Grover Norquist. He runs an extremely influential organization that administers a sort o

Overlooked in this article and comments is the influence of one man -- Grover Norquist. He runs an extremely influential organization that administers a sort of purity pledge that, for most Republican candidates for Congress, is necessary to sign in order to avoid being primaried. He has decided that making taxes easier to do would make people more okay with tax increases, and so he has decreed that support for the kind of systems other countries use is a violation of this pledge. His excuse is that such a system would effectively slightly increase taxation by preventing people from getting away with taking erroneous deductions. This excuse is obvious, total bullshit. Grover Norquist wants taxes to be painful because he wants people to dislike government and the concept of taxation in general. Thus, Republicans in Congress must take the same opinion or risk having their purity stamp revoked. Thus, no reforms get passed. Perhaps this is one area Trump can do some good; certainly he's much less beholden to the traditions that bind the old guard (for better or for worse).

narrowrail 9y ago
Norquist started Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) is a politically conservative U.S. taxpayer advocacy group whose stated goal is "a system in which taxes are simpler, flatter, more visible, and lower than they are today." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Tax_Reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Tax_Reform Doesn't sound like you are describing Norquist's organization they way they do in their mission statement. Do you have any references?
- lern_too_spel 9y ago
  https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax-fought-free-simple-tax-filing https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax... > In 2005, Norquist testified before the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform arguing against return-free filing. The next year, Norquist and others wrote in a letter to President Bush that getting an official-looking "bill" from the IRS could be "extremely intimidating, particularly for seniors, low-income and non-English speaking citizens."
- talmand 9y ago
  A quick search provided an ABC story that showed the rather short and simple pledge and the reasoning behind it. Nothing stated in the article supports the claim made above. I believe that's just someone's interpretation in an effort to make certain people they disagree with look bad.
- s73ver 9y ago
  Wait, you're telling me that there's an organization who's actions differ quite a bit from what they tell people their mission statement is? Next you'll be telling me that Google does evil.
- hibikir 9y ago
  There's plenty of sources. For example, Planet Money, episode 760, where we hear a story of how a program to make filing easier and less error prone, without changing the tax code in any way, is axed when Norquist starts to pressure republicans. I for one find the grandparent's explanation of the organization to be quite accurate. My guess is that you aren't getting the subtext: His main goal is, in practice, to lower taxes for those with high incomes, and the rest of that group's stated goal is just mandatory steps to make it possible to pass that. The visibility factor is huge, just because without it, his movement would not have legs: The more visible, the more likely it is for people to dislike taxes, whether they are getting a lot out of them or not. Making all taxes lower is also key to sell that goal too, as flattening the system while maintaining revenue would mean a tax increase for a large majority of Americans, which is also a non-starter. Once you get those real, non-stated goals, then the stated goals make perfect sense, as they align 100% with what one would need to do to get the real goals achieved in practice.
- smacktoward 9y ago
  Are you seriously proposing that a group that decided it was in their interest to lobby for confusing, painful taxes would say so in plain language on their Web site?
- greggman 9y ago
  it's a matter of perspective . making taxes more invisible to some people, myself included, makes them easier to raise. so, the argument would be to first make taxes more painful. the best would be to remove auto withholding. if the average $50k a year family had to write a check for $3k to the government every 3 mouths they'd likely push much harder for lower taxes. less taxes means less money for government which would seem to mean smaller government. once the taxes are low and government is small you can simplify the tax code. I'm not saying I agree with that or that I could ever actually happen but I don't see a flaw in the logic and why their own description of their mission can both say they are for simpler taxes and also be against the kind of simpler the linked article is about
  - mgkimsal 9y ago
    not sure what area they're in where a $50k/year family pays $12k in taxes. NY? CA?
    - Mr24601 9y ago
      Nowhere. $50k a year family probably only pays $5k a year all in including ss.
      - mgkimsal 9y ago
        that's pretty much what I was thinking.
      - spc476 9y ago
        I just looked it up [1] and depending upon filing status (single, married, head of household) the tax on the net taxable income of $50,000 (after deductions, expenses, etc) is between $6,576 and $8,278. $12,000 in taxes don't start until $65,000 net income. [1] https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040gi.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040gi.pdf
andrewla 9y ago
> He has decided that making taxes easier to do would make people more okay with tax increases ... I'm sympathetic to this point of view -- in theory, bearing the pain of taxation, the taxpayers will be amenable to solutions to simplify the tax code to make that pain lessen. I think, though, at this point, we can say that this has empirically failed. Ironically enough, TurboTax and its ilk have rendered this part almost moot -- the government can keep increasing the tax code complexity, and the software will gloss over the difficulties. Small, gradual simplifications to the tax code will have absolutely no effect, since people will still just use electronic systems to assist them. In addition, the payroll tax withholding is probably responsible for the remainder -- it's hard to get clear visibility into how much you're actually paying. I only just did my taxes, and I could tell you what my refund was, but I couldn't tell you what I actually paid in taxes offhand.
caseysoftware 9y ago
There's good evidence for this. That was part of the reason the Feds pushed employers to do withholding "on our behalf" during the 1930s. Prior to that, taxes were filed quarterly and then only a small % of people. But people actually saw how much they paid. Withholding was a clever and subtle way for us to never see part of our paycheck so then any tax return we get feels like a bonus when it was actually just an interest free loan to the government. Another way to look at it.. people here talk about $Xk that they make but it's always pre-tax. Ask the same people what they make post-tax and I'd wager less than a quarter can answer it accurately.
- sidlls 9y ago
  How can one not know what they make post-tax, at least well enough to not be off by a few dollars? That is, after all, what one has to actually pay bills with. I know what my net earnings after taxes, retirement, etc. are to the nearest dollar, every paycheck. When I was substantially poorer (in academia, and prior to that school) I knew down to the penny (as a function of hours worked, even, when I worked hourly pay jobs).
  - rbcgerard 9y ago
    I think the allusion was to what their all-in tax rate is. Everyone knows what their take home paycheck is, but ask the same person what their effective tax rate was for the year, and most people don't have a clue (over withholding, 401k deduction, mortgage interest deduction, state and property tax deductions, phase outs etc)
    - secabeen 9y ago
      Not everyone uses it of course, but TurboTax includes your effective tax rate in the Tax Summary they provide at the end of the process.
      - lern_too_spel 9y ago
        According to the article, people using TurboTax is why we have this problem. You are not going to convince anybody to use TurboTax in this forum.
chaosphere2112 9y ago
Grover Norquist is also the basis of one of my personal engineering mantras: "I don't want to abolish dependencies. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."
guelo 9y ago
Trump seems to have the same extreme anti-tax ideology as Norquist.
nebabyte 9y ago
> He runs an extremely influential organization that administers a sort of purity pledge that, for most Republican candidates for Congress, is necessary to sign in order to avoid being primaried How in the hell is that legal Ugh, subproblems everywhere. Fucking campaign finance private-sectorizing the practical viability of taking public office.

narrowrail 9y ago

Norquist started Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) is a politically conservative U.S. taxpayer advocacy group whose stated goal is "a system in which taxes are simpler, flatter, more visible, and lower than they are today." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Tax_Reform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_for_Tax_Reform Doesn't sound like you are describing Norquist's organization they way they do in their mission statement. Do you have any references?

lern_too_spel 9y ago
https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax-fought-free-simple-tax-filing https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax... > In 2005, Norquist testified before the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform arguing against return-free filing. The next year, Norquist and others wrote in a letter to President Bush that getting an official-looking "bill" from the IRS could be "extremely intimidating, particularly for seniors, low-income and non-English speaking citizens."
talmand 9y ago
A quick search provided an ABC story that showed the rather short and simple pledge and the reasoning behind it. Nothing stated in the article supports the claim made above. I believe that's just someone's interpretation in an effort to make certain people they disagree with look bad.
s73ver 9y ago
Wait, you're telling me that there's an organization who's actions differ quite a bit from what they tell people their mission statement is? Next you'll be telling me that Google does evil.
hibikir 9y ago
There's plenty of sources. For example, Planet Money, episode 760, where we hear a story of how a program to make filing easier and less error prone, without changing the tax code in any way, is axed when Norquist starts to pressure republicans. I for one find the grandparent's explanation of the organization to be quite accurate. My guess is that you aren't getting the subtext: His main goal is, in practice, to lower taxes for those with high incomes, and the rest of that group's stated goal is just mandatory steps to make it possible to pass that. The visibility factor is huge, just because without it, his movement would not have legs: The more visible, the more likely it is for people to dislike taxes, whether they are getting a lot out of them or not. Making all taxes lower is also key to sell that goal too, as flattening the system while maintaining revenue would mean a tax increase for a large majority of Americans, which is also a non-starter. Once you get those real, non-stated goals, then the stated goals make perfect sense, as they align 100% with what one would need to do to get the real goals achieved in practice.
smacktoward 9y ago
Are you seriously proposing that a group that decided it was in their interest to lobby for confusing, painful taxes would say so in plain language on their Web site?
greggman 9y ago
it's a matter of perspective . making taxes more invisible to some people, myself included, makes them easier to raise. so, the argument would be to first make taxes more painful. the best would be to remove auto withholding. if the average $50k a year family had to write a check for $3k to the government every 3 mouths they'd likely push much harder for lower taxes. less taxes means less money for government which would seem to mean smaller government. once the taxes are low and government is small you can simplify the tax code. I'm not saying I agree with that or that I could ever actually happen but I don't see a flaw in the logic and why their own description of their mission can both say they are for simpler taxes and also be against the kind of simpler the linked article is about
- mgkimsal 9y ago
  not sure what area they're in where a $50k/year family pays $12k in taxes. NY? CA?
  - Mr24601 9y ago
    Nowhere. $50k a year family probably only pays $5k a year all in including ss.
    - mgkimsal 9y ago
      that's pretty much what I was thinking.
    - spc476 9y ago
      I just looked it up [1] and depending upon filing status (single, married, head of household) the tax on the net taxable income of $50,000 (after deductions, expenses, etc) is between $6,576 and $8,278. $12,000 in taxes don't start until $65,000 net income. [1] https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040gi.pdf https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040gi.pdf

andrewla 9y ago

> He has decided that making taxes easier to do would make people more okay with tax increases ... I'm sympathetic to this point of view -- in theory, bearing the pain of taxation, the taxpayers will be amenable to solutions to simplify the tax code to make that pain lessen. I think, though, at this point, we can say that this has empirically failed. Ironically enough, TurboTax and its ilk have rendered this part almost moot -- the government can keep increasing the tax code complexity, and the software will gloss over the difficulties. Small, gradual simplifications to the tax code will have absolutely no effect, since people will still just use electronic systems to assist them. In addition, the payroll tax withholding is probably responsible for the remainder -- it's hard to get clear visibility into how much you're actually paying. I only just did my taxes, and I could tell you what my refund was, but I couldn't tell you what I actually paid in taxes offhand.

caseysoftware 9y ago

There's good evidence for this. That was part of the reason the Feds pushed employers to do withholding "on our behalf" during the 1930s. Prior to that, taxes were filed quarterly and then only a small % of people. But people actually saw how much they paid. Withholding was a clever and subtle way for us to never see part of our paycheck so then any tax return we get feels like a bonus when it was actually just an interest free loan to the government. Another way to look at it.. people here talk about $Xk that they make but it's always pre-tax. Ask the same people what they make post-tax and I'd wager less than a quarter can answer it accurately.

sidlls 9y ago
How can one not know what they make post-tax, at least well enough to not be off by a few dollars? That is, after all, what one has to actually pay bills with. I know what my net earnings after taxes, retirement, etc. are to the nearest dollar, every paycheck. When I was substantially poorer (in academia, and prior to that school) I knew down to the penny (as a function of hours worked, even, when I worked hourly pay jobs).
- rbcgerard 9y ago
  I think the allusion was to what their all-in tax rate is. Everyone knows what their take home paycheck is, but ask the same person what their effective tax rate was for the year, and most people don't have a clue (over withholding, 401k deduction, mortgage interest deduction, state and property tax deductions, phase outs etc)
  - secabeen 9y ago
    Not everyone uses it of course, but TurboTax includes your effective tax rate in the Tax Summary they provide at the end of the process.
    - lern_too_spel 9y ago
      According to the article, people using TurboTax is why we have this problem. You are not going to convince anybody to use TurboTax in this forum.

chaosphere2112 9y ago

Grover Norquist is also the basis of one of my personal engineering mantras: "I don't want to abolish dependencies. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub."

guelo 9y ago

Trump seems to have the same extreme anti-tax ideology as Norquist.

nebabyte 9y ago

> He runs an extremely influential organization that administers a sort of purity pledge that, for most Republican candidates for Congress, is necessary to sign in order to avoid being primaried How in the hell is that legal Ugh, subproblems everywhere. Fucking campaign finance private-sectorizing the practical viability of taking public office.