Why does no one ever consider removing tax that doesn't make that much revenue? When I look at the tax code in the US half of it only applies to 0.0001% of people and the ones that affect the uber-rich have loopholes to avoid it. Why not just look at which tax is the most 'profitable' and remove the rest?
But one of the issues with the tax system is that it’s not just a revenue generation mechanism. It is also used to encourage ‚good’ behaviours (e.g. saving for pensions) and discourage ‚bad’ (e.g. gambling).
So, whenever you make a change to the tax system, you are not just changing revenue generation, you are also adopting a political position. Are you „hurting frugal savers” by removing their benefits, or „supporting gamblers” by removing their taxes.