2 ms·

> Maybe governments should simplify their own tax rules I can't see that happening. Tax policy is used by most governments as a fine grained tool for all forms

> Maybe governments should simplify their own tax rules I can't see that happening. Tax policy is used by most governments as a fine grained tool for all forms of signalling. Not just economic either: alcohol, tobacco, fuel, renewables etc. all use the tax systems to promote social change. It's also quite handy for deflection i.e. if your economy's not doing as well as you'd want in an election cycle, blame the elites. Hell of a lot easier than actually making any real change as that's too hard to do without pissing off voters.

jarym 9y ago
Tax policy needs to be recognised as a social issue. If politicians are using the complexity as a tool then it stands to reason that the only ones that can efficiently navigate the resulting convoluting mess is the wealthy. It puts the less wealthy at a disadvantage and if the masses start calling for change then the only reasonable solution is to simplify legislation.
- lucozade 9y ago
  > If politicians are using the complexity as a tool I've no reason to believe that's the case. They are using the tax system as a tool for other purposes that , as a consequence, means it's complex. The act of applying rules that would simplify things, on the assumption that it's not just a one off, would have the effect of taking the tool away. > if the masses start calling for change then the only reasonable solution is to simplify legislation As a general rule, the masses don't call for simplification of the tax system. They call for a) paying less tax or b) other people paying more tax. Anyway, the whole premise requires a "all other things being equal" mentality. Take consumption taxes in the UK, for example. Eminently sensible that we have one rate. Much simpler. Obviously there'd be no repercussions on the increase on tax for children's clothes or newspapers (yeah, right). Or the huge reduction in tax for tobacco, alcohol or fuel that would, presumably be covered by the increases in food and safety goods. Sure there are parts of the tax code that are less politically suicidal. There's definitely scope for tinkering. But wholesale changes? Just can't see anyone, or at least anyone elected, having the guts.

jarym 9y ago

Tax policy needs to be recognised as a social issue. If politicians are using the complexity as a tool then it stands to reason that the only ones that can efficiently navigate the resulting convoluting mess is the wealthy. It puts the less wealthy at a disadvantage and if the masses start calling for change then the only reasonable solution is to simplify legislation.

lucozade 9y ago
> If politicians are using the complexity as a tool I've no reason to believe that's the case. They are using the tax system as a tool for other purposes that , as a consequence, means it's complex. The act of applying rules that would simplify things, on the assumption that it's not just a one off, would have the effect of taking the tool away. > if the masses start calling for change then the only reasonable solution is to simplify legislation As a general rule, the masses don't call for simplification of the tax system. They call for a) paying less tax or b) other people paying more tax. Anyway, the whole premise requires a "all other things being equal" mentality. Take consumption taxes in the UK, for example. Eminently sensible that we have one rate. Much simpler. Obviously there'd be no repercussions on the increase on tax for children's clothes or newspapers (yeah, right). Or the huge reduction in tax for tobacco, alcohol or fuel that would, presumably be covered by the increases in food and safety goods. Sure there are parts of the tax code that are less politically suicidal. There's definitely scope for tinkering. But wholesale changes? Just can't see anyone, or at least anyone elected, having the guts.