Live data from Hacker News

Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

danluu.com

101–109 of 109 posts

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#101
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but almost everyone today can use a computer or smartphone. They can type in their income, and the computer can calculate it, providing them an average number of what their percentage of actual taxable income was- I think Turbo Tax and other software might do something like this. They don't have to understand how it works to do their own taxes.

They can, but what would make them think their initial misunderstanding is even wrong? While some might think "surely the system isn't like that..." many would default to "of course they want to steal my money" etc. Not to mention the amount of misinformation that can get passed around

I get that, but let me give you a typical example. Your tax software as a box where it asks you to enter your income. It automatically estimates how much your tax refund as soon as you type in one field, even though it is just the first page. It updates automatically, and changes often whenever you add more deductible things (and non-deductible things).

If they are curious, they can type in three different incomes, even if they aren't planning on submitting the tax form with the wrong amounts. So if their income is $59,000 and their tax bracket is say, 15% for that, instead of say, 24% for 60,000-the next end of that bracket- e.g. $75k or $95k) they might get a much smaller tax return if they type $60,000. But then if they earned a little more, like $61,000, they could type in that and see what their return is, along with the rate.

If it is a gradient with smooth progression for each dollar increase, then they can immediately see how much more they are paying in taxes from 15% to 20%. But in reality, in a smooth/gradient-based progressive tax increase, those amounts would be centered in the middle of those brackets (like 15% would right in the the center between $35,000 and $59,999, or $48,500, and the $59,000 income would be closer to 19.9% and the $61,000 income might be $20.1%.

It wouldn't be considered fraud if they are just determining what they would pay if they earned a little bit more. In fact, if they just discovered an invoice check they received from self-employment, and forgot to report it, they might have to type in different amounts, if they didn't report the right amount the first time. Everyone would pay the same tax rates at each income level (with $1000 intervals, or even $1 intervals.

The system could still be transparent because it can show a chart of the tax rates for each $1,000 increase, even if the tax brackets only provides an estimate for each bracket. I do agree some people can't read charts very well, but if they included 100 thin bars for taxable rates under $100,000, people would be able to see the estimated percentage that they would be paying. It might be 15%, 15.5%, 16%, 16.5%, or 17%, and so on for $48,500. $49,000, $49500, $50,000, and so on, respectively.

The idea with this is that it would disincentivize people from misreporting because if they report earning $500 less, they aren't saving much more money (not to mention illegally)- their tax rate might be 0.1% less, and on a $49500 income that might only be $250 less in taxes over reporting $50000. The risk of getting caught is not to going worth it if this method is in place. (Actually not in any case, but at least they can see it's not going to be a huge decrease in taxable income by reporting a little less, so the only way they can attempt to pay less is by reporting a lot less, and the penalties for that would be larger)

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#102
post #13
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because the gradient is simply too confusing for laypeople to understand. Even for a simple system like US social security that has a gradient. For every $2 you make over the limit, you lose $1 in benefits. I've heard countless times misconceptions of people thinking they'd be losing money (as in literally having less money net) by working.

This does happen in Finnish tax system. Your tax rate (percent with one decimal) is calculated based on your annual gross income. Rates are supposed to be calculated smoothly, and they are certainly calculated for each individual separately. In reality they are step functions. It is surprisingly common to have people refuse promotions because if would put them above an income tax threshold, bump up their rate, and en…

This does NOT happen with Finnish tax rate. Your marginal tax rate can jump but that only for the euros after that bump. Your total tax rate goes up in more slowly. You’re always better off with the extra euro of income.

See graph here: https://www.veronmaksajat.fi/tutkimus-ja-tilastot/tuloverot/...

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#103
> There are a number of ways someone could do this; one commonly suggested scheme was to buy put options that were expected to expire worthless, allowing the buyer to (probably) take a loss.

> That means if an individual buying ACA insurance was going to earn $55k, they'd be better off reducing their income by $6440 and getting under the $48,560 subsidy ceiling than they are earning $55k.

I am told by a CPA: In the US tax system, one is limited to deduct $3,000 of net capital loss against their otherwise taxable income. These put options would generate a capital loss. Therefore, this strategy would not accomplish the goal stated in the article.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#104
post #3

The UK tax system also has a bunch of unfortunate cliffs, and tapers that create >60% marginal tax rates and worse. There's a calculator here that illustrates it well https://tax-cliffs.britishprogress.org/calculator The childcare cliff edge is probably the worst, but the personal allowance taper isn't ideal either as it's compressed over a relatively short income range And of course all the thresholds remain frozen,…

> The UK tax system also has a bunch of unfortunate cliffs, and tapers that create >60% marginal tax rates and worse. Oh I don't doubt it. In my native country of Belgium the tax rate can go to 69% and more: 50% income tax (used to be as high as 52.5% and maybe even 55%, don't remember) and then, on top of that , an addition 19% social wellfare tax. That's not mentioning stuff like, if you manage to buy stocks with w…

It is highly likely the 50k undocumented immigrants aren't "a drag on the economy" but "people increasing margins of business by being exploited in almost slave-like fashion, and doing the work you don't want your kids to do".

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#105
post #32

> A simple fix for the problems mentioned above would be to have slow phase-outs instead of sharp thresholds. How about the even simpler fix of not having phase-outs? This generally works: the cost of a subsidy generally does not increase as the recipient pays more taxes, so the higher total tax paid by a higher-income person will easily pay for the cost of a subsidy. And giving higher-income/wealthier people the sam…

That would require a tax hike to fund though, which is not very palatable.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#106

> someone who was desperately trying to lose money before the end of the year Isn't donating to charity a lot easier than gambling on options? It's both legal and extremely easy to donate 5k to a tax-deductible charity of your choice...

[deleted]

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#107
post #97
post #83

There is a hilarious one in the Indian direct tax (Income tax) code right now: If your (taxable) income is less than 7L (inr), no tax is assessed. If your income is greater than 7L, but upto 12L, tax is assessed, but a tax _rebate_ (a discount on payable tax) is granted for the exact amount of tax owed. This means net tax paid till 12L is zero. But if your income is 12L + 1, this rebate no longer applies, so the enti…

How much relative to 70K is this 12L? Sorry, I am not Indian.

12L is 1.2 million

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After this year's Paris marathon, I ran the same per-minute graphs, and they match perfectly the "overall study" graphs with more than 9 million finishes in the article. I also added graphing by age category and gender. I don't want to deduce too much but I think it showed that young men are the most "competitive" (what I mean by that is targeting a specific time) since there are the clearest "goal time" peaks in the…

IIRC There is also a discontinuity when it comes to the histogram of ages of marathon runners, because runners are binned into age groups and there is a more runners at the youngest ages of each group, I guess because it’s younger runners in each group that are more likely to run if they feel more likely to place well in their group

I think there's also the opposite – there are a number of places in large marathons allocated for "good for age" entrants, which I would guess are more likely to be taken up by people at the younger end of those buckets.

Re: Suspicious Discontinuities (2020)

#109
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think because the gradient is simply too confusing for laypeople to understand. Even for a simple system like US social security that has a gradient. For every $2 you make over the limit, you lose $1 in benefits. I've heard countless times misconceptions of people thinking they'd be losing money (as in literally having less money net) by working.

Assuming that normies cannot understand gradients or feedback loops is IMO the source of a large amount of "tactical-level" problems in society, particularly around healthcare, taxation, and politics. The better alternative would be to assume that normies are, in fact, capable of understanding these tools, and in the process forcing them to understand them by setting an expectation. I mean, this is what people should…

FWIW, I didn't understand tax brackets when I was at university because nobody had bothered to explain them. I absolutely started off with the common misconception that on the margin going from e.g. the 20% bracket to the 40% bracket would double my tax bill.

The UK didn't have civics classes in school; I think this would have been much more useful than my mandatory RE lessons with an exam centred on one of the gospels.

Post reply on HN