Live data from Hacker News

Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

npr.org

31–40 of 405 posts

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#31
post #21
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone earns money via income. You have to define what "income" is exactly, then it starts getting complicated...... Example: I route my investment earning via a company, that company can claim expenses such as paying my utility bills and buying my groceries, anything leftover they give me. They work it out so my net income is zero, oops. It's easier actually to tax purchases.

Taxing consumption would rapidly explode into a vast array of categories and rates for different types of consumption, luxury taxes, etc. Food, maybe no tax. But maybe there's some tax if it's ready-to-eat. Or based on sugar content. Automobiles maybe taxed rather heavily, but the first $5000 is exempt so poor people can buy cheap cars, etc. It would become just as complicated as the current code.

Flat rate tax. Across the board rebate on a set level of spending. Mischief managed.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#32
post #6

I've always wondered, why can't we just pay one tax? Say make income tax 1.5x what it's now and cancel all other taxes. That way it'll be even easier!

Most of the tax code addresses what is defined as income. The part that figures out what the rate is, is very simple. The deductions and loopholes in the tax code exist to incentivize many activities, and it would be politically difficult to change that

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#33
post #7
post #6

I've always wondered, why can't we just pay one tax? Say make income tax 1.5x what it's now and cancel all other taxes. That way it'll be even easier!

Wealthy people are against that. They prefer regressive taxes, like sales tax, that will be shift much more of the burden to the poor. In fact, there's a whole batshit-crazy tax plan called FairTax that proposes changing all taxes to a simple sales tax.

Honest question, why is it batshit-crazy?

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#34
post #23
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree on one point. Block and Intuit are also lobbyists against all sorts of code simplification programs. Anything that makes the filing process easier, and having fewer deductions and penalties available makes it easer, they are against.

The business of H&R Block and Intuit came about in response to tax code complexity, they did not create it.

In other words they rely on tax code being complex or their reason to exist ceases.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#35
post #23
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree on one point. Block and Intuit are also lobbyists against all sorts of code simplification programs. Anything that makes the filing process easier, and having fewer deductions and penalties available makes it easer, they are against.

The business of H&R Block and Intuit came about in response to tax code complexity, they did not create it.

They didn't need to create it too perpetuate it for their own self interest.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#36

I'm going to say this until I'm blue in the face: fix money in politics, and half of these issues will no longer be intractable.

Seems like fixing the tax system would go a long way towards fixing money in politics. What are lobbyists buying from politicians? Tax breaks and tax subsidies.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#37

Correction: this proposal would not have simplified taxes (i.e., the California tax code). It would merely have simplified the filing of tax returns for the most common case, salaried workers receiving all of their income from a single source. Very big difference. HRBlock and Intuit are heavily vested in maintaining the current tax filing system. They are not, however, meaningful players in the attempts to rewrite th…

The entire tax-prep industry generates about the same revenues as Dunkin Donuts. The idea that it is a significant causal factor in keeping taxes complicated is preposterous.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#38

Correction: this proposal would not have simplified taxes (i.e., the California tax code). It would merely have simplified the filing of tax returns for the most common case, salaried workers receiving all of their income from a single source. Very big difference. HRBlock and Intuit are heavily vested in maintaining the current tax filing system. They are not, however, meaningful players in the attempts to rewrite th…

I am not sure I see what you mean with "merely" it's quite a big thing not to have to deal with it every year.

In Denmark and many other countries this is a non-issue. The US should be too but too many interest from the lobbying of people like Intuit.

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#39

Correction: this proposal would not have simplified taxes (i.e., the California tax code). It would merely have simplified the filing of tax returns for the most common case, salaried workers receiving all of their income from a single source. Very big difference. HRBlock and Intuit are heavily vested in maintaining the current tax filing system. They are not, however, meaningful players in the attempts to rewrite th…

How is the proposal different than California's current online filing?

https://www.ftb.ca.gov/online/calfile/index.asp

Re: Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

#40

I'm going to say this until I'm blue in the face: fix money in politics, and half of these issues will no longer be intractable.

How do we "fix money in politics" without chilling free speech?

We put all candidates online, for free. They are not allowed to spend money on getting elected - although they can spend their time (generally speaking, sometimes studying, a particular problem, history, how other countries do it, etc).

Citizens subscribe to individuals, and groups of individuals, that best reflect their views. Additionally, citizens will be exposed to views that are slightly or significantly different based on an algorithm.

On voting day they can print out their vote and either mail it or bring it to the polling place with their ID.

While I like the idea of short races (1 or 2 months) this system could easily be a constant presence in people's lives; and a constant presence in the elected official's life, as their decisions are recorded and weighed against their stated principles. This would force pols to be explicit about any horse-trading.

Ultimately such a thing is a specialization of social media in the same way the liver is a specialization of muscle. Note that there is no place for "party" in this system, except insofar as it defines a grouping.

Post reply on HN