4 ms·

Disregarding the broader debate, I think most would agree that the filing process for Americans who willingly comply is itself egregious. You can be making les

by percept 12y ago

Disregarding the broader debate, I think most would agree that the filing process for Americans who willingly comply is itself egregious. You can be making less than the exempted amount, and still be obligated to pay thousands simply to file a return.

sologoub 12y ago
There has been a good amount of discussion here about the merits of having an automated return generated by the government and have people simply either agree to it or update with additional deductions as appropriate. Unfortunately, because of heavy lobbying, such a thing won't materialize any time soon. [1] Personally, I'm in favor of a simpler, flatter tax with fewer deductions. Right now the system rewards those who game it more aggressively, rather than rewarding those who behave in financial responsible ways. For example, having a house that one can barely afford with a huge mortgage is better tax-wise than having a modest home and saving/investing more. That seems entirely backwards to me. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/intuit-opposes-free-tax-filing-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/intuit-opposes-free-tax-filin...
- arbuge 12y ago
  Automated returns would work in simple cases, but not for expats. Expats have to navigate a complicated maze of tax exemptions, tax credits, and foreign currencies, systems and deadlines which are hard to reconcile with their US counterparts.
  - jessaustin 12y ago
    Except in most cases the "complicated maze" is on the USA side.
    - sologoub 12y ago
      Especially for those who are under the exemption amount anyways.
    - arbuge 12y ago
      That was my point...
- superuser2 12y ago
  Being "financially responsible" is the last thing a government wants to promote. From a moral standpoint we like it when people save, but for the prosperity and growth of the economy at large, everyone should be spending every cent they make.
  - superuser2 12y ago
    The purpose of many tax cut/rebate programs is to encourage you to spend money and bolster the economy. If you disagree, want to maybe argue the point instead of just downvoting?
    - sologoub 12y ago
      Not sure who down voted, as directionally you are correct. That said, there is such a thing as a health propensity to save in economics. You want the growth, etc., but you also want demand to be somewhat resistant to short-term ups/downs. That can only be achieved if the consumers save enough in order to keep spending, even if the income is fluctuating. In practice, this is very very difficulty and has to do with social norms/attitudes as much as with actual economics. Personally though, the amount of pull back we had in spending in the 2008 crash was not fun. I'd rather forego a bit of growth in exchange for a more consistent demand and a financially more sound neighbors who will not drag me down with them if/when economy sputters.
  - SapphireSun 12y ago
    That's not actually true. If everyone spends at once, the economy can overheat, creating bubbles and uncontrolled inflation. If everyone saves, the economy can contract and we fall into a depression. The federal reserve uses interest rates and other tricks to try to find the (moving) sweet spot where the economy grows without a significant risk of a recession. The performance of the fed and economic policies are debatable, but the principle is sound.
VLM 12y ago
This makes an interesting startup idea. I'm sure those tens of millions would be thrilled to only pay hundreds to a specialty USA startup instead of thousands to local tax accountants. A theoretical annual market revenue of a billion bucks is not bad. A bit over three million customers is not totally unreasonable, and a third of a thousand dollars is disruptively cheaper but still multiplies out to a lot of revenue.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

by percept 12y ago

sologoub 12y ago

There has been a good amount of discussion here about the merits of having an automated return generated by the government and have people simply either agree to it or update with additional deductions as appropriate. Unfortunately, because of heavy lobbying, such a thing won't materialize any time soon. [1] Personally, I'm in favor of a simpler, flatter tax with fewer deductions. Right now the system rewards those who game it more aggressively, rather than rewarding those who behave in financial responsible ways. For example, having a house that one can barely afford with a huge mortgage is better tax-wise than having a modest home and saving/investing more. That seems entirely backwards to me. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/intuit-opposes-free-tax-filing-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/intuit-opposes-free-tax-filin...

arbuge 12y ago
Automated returns would work in simple cases, but not for expats. Expats have to navigate a complicated maze of tax exemptions, tax credits, and foreign currencies, systems and deadlines which are hard to reconcile with their US counterparts.
- jessaustin 12y ago
  Except in most cases the "complicated maze" is on the USA side.
  - sologoub 12y ago
    Especially for those who are under the exemption amount anyways.
  - arbuge 12y ago
    That was my point...
superuser2 12y ago
Being "financially responsible" is the last thing a government wants to promote. From a moral standpoint we like it when people save, but for the prosperity and growth of the economy at large, everyone should be spending every cent they make.
- superuser2 12y ago
  The purpose of many tax cut/rebate programs is to encourage you to spend money and bolster the economy. If you disagree, want to maybe argue the point instead of just downvoting?
  - sologoub 12y ago
    Not sure who down voted, as directionally you are correct. That said, there is such a thing as a health propensity to save in economics. You want the growth, etc., but you also want demand to be somewhat resistant to short-term ups/downs. That can only be achieved if the consumers save enough in order to keep spending, even if the income is fluctuating. In practice, this is very very difficulty and has to do with social norms/attitudes as much as with actual economics. Personally though, the amount of pull back we had in spending in the 2008 crash was not fun. I'd rather forego a bit of growth in exchange for a more consistent demand and a financially more sound neighbors who will not drag me down with them if/when economy sputters.
- SapphireSun 12y ago
  That's not actually true. If everyone spends at once, the economy can overheat, creating bubbles and uncontrolled inflation. If everyone saves, the economy can contract and we fall into a depression. The federal reserve uses interest rates and other tricks to try to find the (moving) sweet spot where the economy grows without a significant risk of a recession. The performance of the fed and economic policies are debatable, but the principle is sound.

VLM 12y ago

This makes an interesting startup idea. I'm sure those tens of millions would be thrilled to only pay hundreds to a specialty USA startup instead of thousands to local tax accountants. A theoretical annual market revenue of a billion bucks is not bad. A bit over three million customers is not totally unreasonable, and a third of a thousand dollars is disruptively cheaper but still multiplies out to a lot of revenue.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]