6 ms·

This is why we still have the income tax system that we do. It’s a $14 billion a year industry. I’ve talked to people who work the lobbying system very hard. Th

This is why we still have the income tax system that we do. It’s a $14 billion a year industry. I’ve talked to people who work the lobbying system very hard. There’s lots of wining and dining to make sure no one messes with the complexity of the system. We need more people who are immune to lobbying in government positions. We’ll see how this goes.. depending on the next election cycle this will either get quashed quickly, or, fingers crossed, might fight on against a growing backlash.

jlarocco 3y ago
> We need more people who are immune to lobbying in government positions. What we need to do is stop pretending people like that exist, and come up with a system that works despite people's self-interest, greed and corruption. Maybe what we have is the best we can do.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  More transparency would probably be better. Make them wear NASCAR style jackets and all that.
- godelski 3y ago
  This is always my frustration when people suggest things for governments. You cannot design a government that relies on people being good. You have to design a government that highly discourages bad actors, make it easy to eject them, and operates while they exist. It's a crazy hard optimization problem and isn't going to work if people are just smart or good. And I never understand why people suggest fixing government by giving government more power and nothing else.
calamari4065 3y ago
Maybe spending billions of dollars lobbying should be illegal
- ttyprintk 3y ago
  It’s not that lobbying is a major slice of $14B, it’s that they actually spend only $3m and it’s effective: https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary?cycle=2021&id=D000026667 https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary...
  - kemotep 3y ago
    Notoriously there is also a large contingent of anti-tax politicians and citizens that oppose making paying taxes easier. Their reasoning being the more friction there is the more likely that you will pay attention to how much you are being taxed and support their policies that cut taxes.
    - recursive 3y ago
      Not working. I'd pay more for a convenient tax system.
MenhirMike 3y ago
Which is really the main issue. Offering a more accessible free version to file taxes is great, but the real problem is the need to file taxes at all for a lot of people. The IRS already knows the relevant info: Your employer sends W-2 information, your bank and broker are sending the various 1099 forms for interest, dividends, stock sale gains/losses, etc. Same for your spouse and kids/dependents. Don't even need to itemize in a lot of cases, since the standard deduction is preferable in many years. Unless you're dealing with foreign income, are a business, or do a lot of contract work for cash, I don't see much reason why the IRS can't just handle all the taxes automatically - apart from the fact that some company wants to charge me $150 a year to file my taxes and making sure that my tax situation (which would fit on a beer coaster otherwise) is as complicated as possible.
- Klinky 3y ago
  This is a good first step. Ideally it turns into a "verify this all looks correct & add anything we're missing" kinda thing.
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
    Great way to look at it. It is a significantly smaller jump once the Federal system is in place and already handling returns for millions/years.
  - whakim 3y ago
    The article says that "in one possible scenario included in the agency’s report to Congress, the I.R.S. could fill out tax returns with information it already has." We can only hope :)
- bmoxb 3y ago
  That is how it works in many (most?) countries already - the US is an outlier in requiring every citizen to handle their own taxes.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
LargeTomato 3y ago
I worked at a government "lab" (MITRE) that maintained the IRS system. The system was allegedly so complicated that if the tax code and the software conflicted, the software won. The stack is legacy and intentionally on minimal life support.
- nerdponx 3y ago
  > intentionally on minimal life support Key word: "intentionally".
protomolecule 3y ago
"There’s lots of wining and dining" You mean the congressmen are bribed by free food and alcohol? Asking as a non-American.
- kirubakaran 3y ago
  This should shed some light: Bill Gurley: "2,851 Miles" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM
  - crazydoggers 3y ago
    Just came back to check replies. This is a great talk. He mentions Obamacare and the digitization of records, which is very on point and a similar issue. In the interview he mentions, Obama says: “In some cases, you have economic incentives against making the system better; you have service providers — people make money on keeping people’s medical records — so making it easier for everyone to access medical records means that there’s some folks who could lose business. And that’s turned out to be more complicated than I expected.” I think “more complicated than expected” is a hilarious and sad way to sum up the whole mess that is greed and Washington DC combined.
  - protomolecule 3y ago
    Thanks!
sensanaty 3y ago
I will never in my life comprehend how lobbying isn't just bribery with extra steps. The only distinction between bribing a cop to get out of a speeding ticket and a megacorp lobbying random politicians is that the megacorp has much deeper pockets, absolutely ridiculous
- Qwertious 3y ago
  1. It's like how networking isn't cronyism 2. Politicians need to know how the businesses they're regulating work, and theoretically they gain a lot from being able to talk it over with the businesses themselves (the existing ones, mind you - not the future ones which might be stifled, and currently have $0) 3. Lobbying is another word for talking with your local politician, what megacorps do (and what basically everyone means when they say "lobbying", really) is paid lobbying, i.e. run the "lobbying" errand on your behalf. Banning the former type of lobbying is impossible, and banning the latter is hard to do when it's a legitimate service for people who have more money than time (and also might violate free speech laws, and also is hard to actually stop) 4. Fuck paid lobbying, it does more harm than good

jlarocco 3y ago

> We need more people who are immune to lobbying in government positions. What we need to do is stop pretending people like that exist, and come up with a system that works despite people's self-interest, greed and corruption. Maybe what we have is the best we can do.

bee_rider 3y ago
More transparency would probably be better. Make them wear NASCAR style jackets and all that.
godelski 3y ago
This is always my frustration when people suggest things for governments. You cannot design a government that relies on people being good. You have to design a government that highly discourages bad actors, make it easy to eject them, and operates while they exist. It's a crazy hard optimization problem and isn't going to work if people are just smart or good. And I never understand why people suggest fixing government by giving government more power and nothing else.

calamari4065 3y ago

Maybe spending billions of dollars lobbying should be illegal

ttyprintk 3y ago
It’s not that lobbying is a major slice of $14B, it’s that they actually spend only $3m and it’s effective: https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary?cycle=2021&id=D000026667 https://www.opensecrets.org/federal-lobbying/clients/summary...
- kemotep 3y ago
  Notoriously there is also a large contingent of anti-tax politicians and citizens that oppose making paying taxes easier. Their reasoning being the more friction there is the more likely that you will pay attention to how much you are being taxed and support their policies that cut taxes.
  - recursive 3y ago
    Not working. I'd pay more for a convenient tax system.

MenhirMike 3y ago

Which is really the main issue. Offering a more accessible free version to file taxes is great, but the real problem is the need to file taxes at all for a lot of people. The IRS already knows the relevant info: Your employer sends W-2 information, your bank and broker are sending the various 1099 forms for interest, dividends, stock sale gains/losses, etc. Same for your spouse and kids/dependents. Don't even need to itemize in a lot of cases, since the standard deduction is preferable in many years. Unless you're dealing with foreign income, are a business, or do a lot of contract work for cash, I don't see much reason why the IRS can't just handle all the taxes automatically - apart from the fact that some company wants to charge me $150 a year to file my taxes and making sure that my tax situation (which would fit on a beer coaster otherwise) is as complicated as possible.

Klinky 3y ago
This is a good first step. Ideally it turns into a "verify this all looks correct & add anything we're missing" kinda thing.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
  Great way to look at it. It is a significantly smaller jump once the Federal system is in place and already handling returns for millions/years.
- whakim 3y ago
  The article says that "in one possible scenario included in the agency’s report to Congress, the I.R.S. could fill out tax returns with information it already has." We can only hope :)
bmoxb 3y ago
That is how it works in many (most?) countries already - the US is an outlier in requiring every citizen to handle their own taxes.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago

LargeTomato 3y ago

I worked at a government "lab" (MITRE) that maintained the IRS system. The system was allegedly so complicated that if the tax code and the software conflicted, the software won. The stack is legacy and intentionally on minimal life support.

nerdponx 3y ago
> intentionally on minimal life support Key word: "intentionally".

protomolecule 3y ago

"There’s lots of wining and dining" You mean the congressmen are bribed by free food and alcohol? Asking as a non-American.

kirubakaran 3y ago
This should shed some light: Bill Gurley: "2,851 Miles" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM
- crazydoggers 3y ago
  Just came back to check replies. This is a great talk. He mentions Obamacare and the digitization of records, which is very on point and a similar issue. In the interview he mentions, Obama says: “In some cases, you have economic incentives against making the system better; you have service providers — people make money on keeping people’s medical records — so making it easier for everyone to access medical records means that there’s some folks who could lose business. And that’s turned out to be more complicated than I expected.” I think “more complicated than expected” is a hilarious and sad way to sum up the whole mess that is greed and Washington DC combined.
- protomolecule 3y ago
  Thanks!

sensanaty 3y ago

I will never in my life comprehend how lobbying isn't just bribery with extra steps. The only distinction between bribing a cop to get out of a speeding ticket and a megacorp lobbying random politicians is that the megacorp has much deeper pockets, absolutely ridiculous

Qwertious 3y ago
1. It's like how networking isn't cronyism 2. Politicians need to know how the businesses they're regulating work, and theoretically they gain a lot from being able to talk it over with the businesses themselves (the existing ones, mind you - not the future ones which might be stifled, and currently have $0) 3. Lobbying is another word for talking with your local politician, what megacorps do (and what basically everyone means when they say "lobbying", really) is paid lobbying, i.e. run the "lobbying" errand on your behalf. Banning the former type of lobbying is impossible, and banning the latter is hard to do when it's a legitimate service for people who have more money than time (and also might violate free speech laws, and also is hard to actually stop) 4. Fuck paid lobbying, it does more harm than good