3 ms·

We'll never get a grapple on tax evasion until our tax codes are as simple as possible. Filing taxes should be an equation simple enough for elementary students

We'll never get a grapple on tax evasion until our tax codes are as simple as possible. Filing taxes should be an equation simple enough for elementary students. If income is really an avenue we wish to tax, keep it simple. Graduate tax rates across a few brackets if that's really important but throw out all write offs, deductions, etc. Just tell us what % we owe based on total income. Done.

kyleee 3y ago
Flat 15% tax federal, 10% state, for those making > 100k (and the 100k amount can adjust slowly upwards over time).
- _heimdall 3y ago
  I have absolutely no idea what the right tax rates would be, or how wed define "right", but in all for something simple enough to be definition in a handful of sentences.
- pseudocomposer 3y ago
  Flat rate 50% federal, 49% state for those making above $1M. (The 1M amount can adjust slowly upwards over time.)
drewcoo 3y ago
I'm pretty sure folks who earn over $400k can find accountants to do their grappling for them. Until "elementary students" can earn that much, it's not the problem they're addressing.
- chriskanan 3y ago
  Many people have an occasional year where they make very high incomes, for exam when selling a house or even fictional paper gains when exercising stock options as a startup employee. So, given that they aren't making huge salaries but just had a windfall (which may not even be real in the case of startup options), they may not have accountants or be well equipped for this situation. I had those issues a couple years ago with options, where the government says I had a huge income due to capital gains (on paper).
- _heimdall 3y ago
  The IRS spends a little under $15B per year. Solving problems for the rich doesn't have to be the only motivator, drastically simplifying our tax code would reduce the deficit and make it much easier to enforce our tax laws.
Eddy_Viscosity2 3y ago
How are you going to outlaw rich people lobbying for special exceptions in these simple rules for their specific circumstances? That's rhetorical of course, you can't and even if you managed to reset everything, the exceptions would be lobbied for and won, and the tax code would slowly become more complex over time until it looks like it does today.
- _heimdall 3y ago
  Laws don't pass themselves, you don't necessarily have to outlaw lobbying. It sounds like you have the assumption that legislators will always eventually give in to bribes and lobbying. If that's the case, what the hell are we doing here at all? We'd be better off with no legislators at all.
  - Eddy_Viscosity2 3y ago
    > assumption that legislators will always eventually give in to bribes and lobbying Yes this is my assumption. Not all legislators and not everytime, but on a long enough scale eventually tenacious lobbying will find ones that will and get what they want. > We'd be better off with no legislators at all. I'm cynical, but also practical. As churchill said, "apart from all the others, democracy is the worst form of government". Its advantage is that sometimes bad laws can be overturned and good ones put into place - at least for a little while. It has happened before and could happen again. Just because I think things are awful now doesn't mean I don't think they could be worse.
    - _heimdall 3y ago
      If were going with a long enough time table, wouldn't we have to assume this inevitably plays out as either a failed state or some form of a fascist state after industry takes over the government? If the expectation is that legislative bodies will always eventually be bought, and that there isn't a structural change in government structure to avoid this, why have the state at all? Every law executive order, etc passed is effectively removing authority and self determination of the individual and giving it to the state, either for the greater good or because we simply think they will use that power better. If we know they'll eventually be bought, why would we possibly want to centralize that power and authority in the first place?
friend_and_foe 3y ago
What if you're a business? You're supposed to pay taxes on your net revenue, not gross revenue. How do you deduct your business expenses from your taxable income? You can't get rid of deductions without having double taxation. The solution here is to remove the income tax entirely. Just get rid of it. We did fine without income taxes for 150 years. Then when it was introduced, 95% of people didn't even have to file anything for a few decades more. Even if you're a business, like a homestead, operating a lemonade stand, a contractor or whatever you shouldn't be having to file paperwork every year period. If they want to tax our income do a VAT or sales tax, which is still a compliance nightmare for businesses but at least for your average person it just magically happens, no reporting or paperwork required.

kyleee 3y ago

Flat 15% tax federal, 10% state, for those making > 100k (and the 100k amount can adjust slowly upwards over time).

_heimdall 3y ago
I have absolutely no idea what the right tax rates would be, or how wed define "right", but in all for something simple enough to be definition in a handful of sentences.
pseudocomposer 3y ago
Flat rate 50% federal, 49% state for those making above $1M. (The 1M amount can adjust slowly upwards over time.)

drewcoo 3y ago

I'm pretty sure folks who earn over $400k can find accountants to do their grappling for them. Until "elementary students" can earn that much, it's not the problem they're addressing.

chriskanan 3y ago
Many people have an occasional year where they make very high incomes, for exam when selling a house or even fictional paper gains when exercising stock options as a startup employee. So, given that they aren't making huge salaries but just had a windfall (which may not even be real in the case of startup options), they may not have accountants or be well equipped for this situation. I had those issues a couple years ago with options, where the government says I had a huge income due to capital gains (on paper).
_heimdall 3y ago
The IRS spends a little under $15B per year. Solving problems for the rich doesn't have to be the only motivator, drastically simplifying our tax code would reduce the deficit and make it much easier to enforce our tax laws.

Eddy_Viscosity2 3y ago

How are you going to outlaw rich people lobbying for special exceptions in these simple rules for their specific circumstances? That's rhetorical of course, you can't and even if you managed to reset everything, the exceptions would be lobbied for and won, and the tax code would slowly become more complex over time until it looks like it does today.

_heimdall 3y ago
Laws don't pass themselves, you don't necessarily have to outlaw lobbying. It sounds like you have the assumption that legislators will always eventually give in to bribes and lobbying. If that's the case, what the hell are we doing here at all? We'd be better off with no legislators at all.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 3y ago
  > assumption that legislators will always eventually give in to bribes and lobbying Yes this is my assumption. Not all legislators and not everytime, but on a long enough scale eventually tenacious lobbying will find ones that will and get what they want. > We'd be better off with no legislators at all. I'm cynical, but also practical. As churchill said, "apart from all the others, democracy is the worst form of government". Its advantage is that sometimes bad laws can be overturned and good ones put into place - at least for a little while. It has happened before and could happen again. Just because I think things are awful now doesn't mean I don't think they could be worse.
  - _heimdall 3y ago
    If were going with a long enough time table, wouldn't we have to assume this inevitably plays out as either a failed state or some form of a fascist state after industry takes over the government? If the expectation is that legislative bodies will always eventually be bought, and that there isn't a structural change in government structure to avoid this, why have the state at all? Every law executive order, etc passed is effectively removing authority and self determination of the individual and giving it to the state, either for the greater good or because we simply think they will use that power better. If we know they'll eventually be bought, why would we possibly want to centralize that power and authority in the first place?

friend_and_foe 3y ago

What if you're a business? You're supposed to pay taxes on your net revenue, not gross revenue. How do you deduct your business expenses from your taxable income? You can't get rid of deductions without having double taxation. The solution here is to remove the income tax entirely. Just get rid of it. We did fine without income taxes for 150 years. Then when it was introduced, 95% of people didn't even have to file anything for a few decades more. Even if you're a business, like a homestead, operating a lemonade stand, a contractor or whatever you shouldn't be having to file paperwork every year period. If they want to tax our income do a VAT or sales tax, which is still a compliance nightmare for businesses but at least for your average person it just magically happens, no reporting or paperwork required.