Remix.run Logo
dheera 4 hours ago

[flagged]

AdamH12113 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Get rid of sales tax, property tax, exemptions, IRAs, 401ks, short capital gains, long capital gains, medicare, state, all of that bullcrap. Annualized, non-annualized, credits for having an EV on the 4th day of the second Tuesday while being a fisherman, married and single filing differences, end all of that.

I agree with your overall point of simplifying taxes by merging more things into income tax, but some of the taxes you mentioned are levied by local governments to fund themselves. The United States has a federal system; it would be a much bigger change to centralize all of the funding.

NooneAtAll3 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I... don't understand how that excuses complexity?

what stops "local governments" from applying same type of tax as higher levels? why would they need taxes specific for them?

AdamH12113 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Well, local governments (cities and towns) also have expenses -- police, fire departments, trash collection, water and sewage, roads, public works. Schools are partially funded locally. That has to be paid for.

It's theoretically possible for a local government to levy an income tax, but a lot would need to change -- much more than just changing tax rates. Employers and banks report income to the federal government (and states, I suppose, but I live and work in Texas so I don't know much about that). They would have to report that information to towns and cities too. There's also the problem of granularity -- how does an employer or bank know where someone actually lives? If you have a P.O. box in a town, do you have to pay taxes in that town? If you work in a different municipality (not uncommon!), do you have to pay taxes there too? If you have a home in one town, work in another, but spend most of your free time hanging out in a third, are you completely off the hook for supporting the third town?

You could have the federal government collect all the money and then allocate it to state and local governments, but that's a massive change in how American society works, and I'm not sure it's any less complex in the end. Some of the complexity in the tax code (e.g. different levels of capital gains tax) is a policy choice, but some of it reflects the complexity of the real world.

dragonwriter 9 minutes ago | parent [-]

> It's theoretically possible for a local government to levy an income tax,

“Theoretically possible” in that thousands of local jurisdictions, among about 1/3 of US states, already do either income or payroll taxes or both.

conductr an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I tend to agree with this. The logic should be the same with different rate tables for each taxing body. What I don't want though is the Fed govt being the collector and distributor of all the funds. They already weld too much power with their various funding influences for transportation, healthcare, etc. The states and local govts shouldn't need to pander so heavily to the federal govt for funds.

dheera 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The United States has a federal system

That doesn't prevent there being a single point of collection and distribution.

conductr an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It seems efficient and simple that way. But you don't want federal politics playing that much of a part of your local life. And you don't want your local politicians to have to pander to the federal levels just to get what they need or what is theirs. I think this would result in disaster as the federal politicians are too out of touch with local needs.

If we had a single formula for taxes, then each taxing body could have their own rate table to apply to it, but still collect it directly - then I think that would be a better approach.

For simplicity sake, take income tax at flat rates. Federal may be 20%, your state might be 10%, city might be 5%. Maybe my state rate is only 5% and you might want to move here, but nationally we all pay the Federal 20% rate.

KK7NIL 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It literally does, this is one of defining differences of a federal system, that the states have a right to set and collect taxes.

rmah 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It sorta does, that's one of the primary points of a federal system.

xnyan 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

By definition, a federal system does prevent a single point of collection and distribution. If states could not or did not collect taxes on their own authority, it would not be a federal system. States would just be adjuncts of a national government.

PieTime 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You’re absolutely correct. For income taxes many states and the federal government offset each others debts.

In Canada provinces can choose to harmonize taxes or collect independently.

bcrosby95 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Which misses the point. If the point is to reduce the number of taxes, having the federal government collect 10 different types of taxes instead of state governments collecting 7 types of taxes won't change all the different taxes we have.

There is no singular place we can change how many different taxes you pay. There's... thousands? Tens of thousands? Once you factor in city, county, state, federal, special districts, etc.

lazyasciiart 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Didn’t they just get rid of the IRS automated filing app? You’ll have to kill off TurboTax and siblings to simplify the tax code.

munk-a an hour ago | parent [-]

Yes, it was completed and operational and the new administration pulled it from public use.

munk-a an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I wholly support drastically simplifying the tax code - I disagree with the extent to which you'd simplify it since there is a very good reason to have property taxes and some of the sin taxes have notable social benefits. Additionally, using tax rebates as an incentive to install home solar is an excellent initiative for the environment. Our tax code should be pretty simple - it shouldn't be a single line (or even multiple graduated lines).

Until we simplify the tax code, though, can we properly fund the IRS to actually audit it? I think my thing (funding the IRS) is a lot easier to do quickly than your thing (completely rewriting how the government garners revenue) and I don't want perfection to be the enemy of the good.

yibg 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Taxes aren't just there to provide an income stream to the government. It's also a mechanism to guide behavior via incentives (or punishment). Right or wrong there we're providing an incentive to hold assets longer, or use less fuel or buy from domestic producers etc.

claytongulick 2 hours ago | parent [-]

IIRC, this was one of the main arguments for the Articles of Confederacy, the states were pretty nervous about this exact situation.

This was reaffirmed by Marshall [1] with the famous “the power to tax involves the power to destroy."

[1] https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/mcculloch-v-mar...

rtkwe 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Ok what about for the people that mainly earn their living not from an income paid by a job; ie the richest people in the country?

munk-a an hour ago | parent [-]

That's an excellent criticism of the parent and why we really do want a somewhat complex tax code even if it should be far simpler than what we have today.

We also want to balance regressive and progressive taxes, we do want to influence some behaviors through taxes that provide positive social outcomes - there are several really good complexities to have in our tax code. Just not as many as we do today.

rtkwe 8 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yeah so much of the complexity is around incentivizing or disincentivizing certain things; there's the mortgage interest exception because it's classified as a Good Thing (tm) to be encouraged/made easier and we have liqour/cigarette taxes because it's a Bad Thing we (societally) want less of.

So much of that complexity doesn't even really matter to most people anyways, there are a handful of credits most people may qualify for and then the standard deduction is more than something like 40% of people's itemized deductions. And those credits are usually one time events around particular events/purchases that are relatively well advertised. The most annoying one I've had is when the EV credit required me and my wife to file separately to qualify for.

It's so silly to think the entirety of the tax problem can be solved with one simple straight forward fix like the one proposed here. It's imo one of the peak examples of "broken tech brain" where people think the whole complexity of a situation can be solved with "one neat trick" kind of solutions. Far from exclusive to the tech world but I do see a lot of it from tech.

KPGv2 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Get rid of sales tax, property tax

The very first things you list aren't related to the IRS at all. They're local and state taxes, and to get rid of those would require a radical rewriting of the Constitution itself. Not to mention it would destroy all fire department, county hospital, school, city park, state park, etc. funding.

izacus 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course they're not, but this is how you smell someone that doesn't really want to enforce paying taxes, but just wants to evade them as much as possible.

How quickly people show their colors.

anigbrowl 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't think that's fair. The US has so many administrative layers with taxing powers - federal, state, county, and municipal, and in many cases administrative bodies also charge massive filing fees, and courts charge large fees to finance themselves because they're consistently under-funded by legislatures.

So Americans get taxed a lot at many different levels of activity. The cognitive load of having so many different points of taxation is annoying and exhausting to a lot of people. It makes household budgeting a lot more work than it really needs to be.

But it is this way because of the Constitution

They maybe we should change that and have a simpler system with much less complexity. Dismissing people who object to the painful complexity of the US tax regime as 'evaders' is npt insightful or helpful.

claytongulick 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> maybe we should change that and have a simpler system with much less complexity

Wholeheartedly agree, but I see the root cause of the issue being income tax itself. As soon as you tax income, you'll go down and endless rabbit hole of what's fair to tax, how much, what kind of income, investment income vs wage income, percentage vs flat rate, etc...

That gave us the mess we have.

I like the idea of consumption tax exclusively (would require an amendment). You're taxed on your purchases.

It's easy to drive behavior (more tax on some things... tax on cigarettes, yachts and private jets) and easy to make more fair (exclude grocery staples).

munk-a an hour ago | parent [-]

Consumption taxes are almost always regressive and improperly place the majority of the tax burden on the poor - they're good to have (especially the sin taxes and tax discounts on specific encouraged behaviors) but they should be coupled with taxes on wealth (aka property) and income. And these taxes should be somewhat complex - just not to the extent we have today.

rkeene2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This misses the point that tax exemptions are the way politicians campaign for voter blocks. Having different kinds of taxes makes it easier to target a voter blocks more precisely.

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
onlyrealcuzzo 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why would you simplify the tax code if the whole point of the tax code is to create loopholes so you can pay way less taxes than the public would vote for?

The tax code exists for Welfare Queen Billionaires like Elon Musk.

DSMan195276 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Well see, you actually missed the catch that by eliminating everything except income tax people like Elon wouldn't have to pay any tax, it's even better for them. He's not getting a W-2, virtually all of his income is actually capital gains or similar.