4 ms·

I'm in the camp that there should be no incentives for taxes for anything. Similarly there should be no difference in filing married vs separately or with child

I'm in the camp that there should be no incentives for taxes for anything. Similarly there should be no difference in filing married vs separately or with children. To me it just feels wrong to incentivise living a certain lifestyle by getting a discount at just existing. It is great when it incentivises the things you want, such as hybrid cars or something, but what would happen if someone wanted to give you a discount for purchasing gas cars when they become less common because of relations to the oil and gas industry? Or maybe tax incentives for purchasing private telecom service if/when municipal networks ever become commonplace? If you they can lower tax liability for a certain amount why not lower it to the actual level needed across the board instead of keeping some cushion to give away coupons?

jschwartzi 7y ago
It depends on whether you subscribe to the progressive ideology that people should be encouraged to do things that we see as good for them. For the record, I do. But if we decide that we want a society where more people make the uninformed decision to buy a gas-powered car or a diesel generator because it's understood to be a social good then that's fine. That's precisely what that tool is meant to be used for. Whether or not we can imagine a world where buying a gasoline-powered car or private telecom is considered a social good is less of an issue than whether we want to be able to incentivize those things should they become necessary.
- sl1ck731 7y ago
  The point is they aren't all based on societal good. The ones we use as individuals and like might be, but how many corporate tax incentives exist that are bad for everyday people? It shouldn't be the IRS's business to reward people. If there is a reward for doing X then there should be a fund specifically for giving money to people in those scenarios completely independent of taxes. Its much more transparent to say "we have a fund for X, mail us the required proof and we will send you a check", then it is to add layers and layers to the tax code. That also means everyday people are aware of what our representatives are arguing about and the dollar amounts being held responsible for the programs. Then we get simple taxes without all of the itemizing nonsense.
ip26 7y ago
I'm in the camp that there should be no incentives for taxes for anything. Would you argue that potato chips shouldn't be taxed, or that produce should be?
- sl1ck731 7y ago
  I wasn't talking about sales tax, only yearly tax filings. Anything that is on an itemized tax return should be moved elsewhere into programs specifically for giving money for that instead of being given a coupon off of what you owe. If there is some reason you report produce on your tax documents then no, it should not be there.

jschwartzi 7y ago

It depends on whether you subscribe to the progressive ideology that people should be encouraged to do things that we see as good for them. For the record, I do. But if we decide that we want a society where more people make the uninformed decision to buy a gas-powered car or a diesel generator because it's understood to be a social good then that's fine. That's precisely what that tool is meant to be used for. Whether or not we can imagine a world where buying a gasoline-powered car or private telecom is considered a social good is less of an issue than whether we want to be able to incentivize those things should they become necessary.

sl1ck731 7y ago
The point is they aren't all based on societal good. The ones we use as individuals and like might be, but how many corporate tax incentives exist that are bad for everyday people? It shouldn't be the IRS's business to reward people. If there is a reward for doing X then there should be a fund specifically for giving money to people in those scenarios completely independent of taxes. Its much more transparent to say "we have a fund for X, mail us the required proof and we will send you a check", then it is to add layers and layers to the tax code. That also means everyday people are aware of what our representatives are arguing about and the dollar amounts being held responsible for the programs. Then we get simple taxes without all of the itemizing nonsense.

ip26 7y ago

I'm in the camp that there should be no incentives for taxes for anything. Would you argue that potato chips shouldn't be taxed, or that produce should be?

sl1ck731 7y ago
I wasn't talking about sales tax, only yearly tax filings. Anything that is on an itemized tax return should be moved elsewhere into programs specifically for giving money for that instead of being given a coupon off of what you owe. If there is some reason you report produce on your tax documents then no, it should not be there.