3 ms·
I think the key takeaway here is that complexity is a completely different thing than policy. We've had all sorts of politicians make all kinds of great speech
by DanielBMarkham 15y ago
I think the key takeaway here is that complexity is a completely different thing than policy.
We've had all sorts of politicians make all kinds of great speeches about various policies to implement with the tax code.
All that got us was a complex mess. Inside that mess was a lot of corruption paid for by lobbiests. You can hide a lot of cronyism in a tax code. I think no matter what you want the tax system to do, as technologists we can ask you to make it do that in a very simple, understandable way. So I support a flat tax, but not because it's "fair." I care about structure, I don't care about fair. Make it understandable, and then we can all decide whether it's fair or not. We'll vote people in and out of office depending on whether it's fair or not. Make it complex and we're stuck just voting on tax code depending on how emotionally somebody's speech appeals to us. We've found that while this will work for a few decades, it's not scalable over longer periods of time.
- tzs 15y agoA flat tax is completely independent of whether or not the tax system is complicated. There are basically two issues when designing an income tax: 1. For a given taxable income, what is the tax? 2. What is taxable income? To make a flat tax you fiddle with item #1. This involves changing a page of the tax code. To make a less complicated tax, you fiddle with item #2. This involves changing the other 71000 pages of the code.
- ashconnor 15y agoThen make it simple like Estonia did. http://www.slideshare.net/rahamin/estonian-taxes-and-tax-structure-2010 http://www.slideshare.net/rahamin/estonian-taxes-and-tax-str...