[Insert Clever Play On The Word 'Taxes' Here]
Every year there are countless articles on this travesty, and every year the tax code gets even more ridiculously incoherent. So I propose that we all just stop writing articles about how screwed up the tax laws are and go about our buisness. If we’re quiet enough, I think the problem may just go away.
Articles like this one are obviously the cause of the annual re-jiggering of the tax code… which we are told will help average people, but never does. I shouldn’t even be quoting parts of these dangerous articles like this, but just for the sake of an example of what NOT to do, I will.
Just how burdensome is the current U.S. tax system? Consider the facts: the Office of Management and Budget estimates Americans will spend 6.4 billion hours and $265 billion this year alone complying with the obligations of a tax code that now contains more than 66,000 pages of rules and regulations. More than 6 in 10 Americans now hire someone to help prepare their returns every year.
You’ll notice there are no statistics mentioned about how many hours are wasted bitching about the tax code. Please people, wake up!! The blogging phenomenon is just making things worse as everyone wails and complains! I implore you to pretend like the tax code is that bully from high school gym class, or the bum standing our front of the Circle K, or that customer that knows they can do your job better than you. Ignore it!! Sooner or later it just won’t be fun to beat up on middle income tax payers anymore and it’ll just fade away. In it’s place will be a tax form the size of a postcard that even a Florida voter can understand and fill out in all of 3 minutes.
I’m sure the people receiving those $265 billion to fill out your taxes will be on board with it.
April 6, 2006 at 11:58 AM
Wait a minute, what makes you think the tax code will simplify by itself?
April 6, 2006 at 12:34 PM
Magic tax gremlins.
April 6, 2006 at 1:37 PM
Is this something to do with IBM “Server Pixie Dust”
“What is it?”
“It’s magic pixie dust.”
“What’s it do?”
“A server crashes. Sprinkle on the Pixie Dust. The server runs again! Springled it on regularly servers solve their problems alone.”
“Is it biodegradable?”
“Sure. Its Soybased!”
April 6, 2006 at 3:27 PM
Saying it will fix itself if you ignore it is like saying “If you don’t pay your taxes, they will fix the problem”. One of Jeremy’s great grandfathers refused to pay his taxes because he didn’t like how the money was spent. That didn’t work either.
April 6, 2006 at 5:15 PM
So your postcard theory agrees with the Steve Forbes philosophy (The Flat Tax Revolution)
However, there have been arguments for and against the Flat Tax (one is that a flat tax will not pay the current Federal Budget: Which I do not believe.)
April 6, 2006 at 6:38 PM
Pennsylvania and its townships have a flat tax that works and tax preparation is simple. Here is what you made and here is what you owe without a form A and its administration cost is many times less than that of the sales tax.
I’m bothered when politicians talk about a VAT. The administrative cost is overwhelming and every teenager behind the counter becomes a federal tax collector. I estimate that most states could cut the sales tax in half (at least) by incorporating it into the income tax. I’ve been told by PA legislators that suggesting that would be political suicide due to all the lost jobs.
April 12, 2006 at 4:34 PM
You know, now that I’m not thinking about it; the tax code is getting simpler.
Oh, wait; I ruined it.
April 12, 2006 at 5:46 PM
Dad: I’m curious about your assesment of VAT. My understanding was that VAT is basically just price inclusive of tax instead of added on at the register. Why the extra over head? Why are teenagers federal tax collectors (and why is that significantly different than them collecting sales tax currently)?
I think it also sometimes means that tax is collected and paid by every step of the supply chain instead of the end retailer only. But I don’t think all countries that use VAT do this.
April 12, 2006 at 7:15 PM
Bradley, I agree the sales tax makes clerks and business owners tax collectors but at the state level and I don’t like that either. Did you ever wonder why dinners use hand written paper slips for the bill? The VAT raises it to the federal level. In my estimation, abolishing the sales tax and raising the income tax less than sales tax would provide additional revenues for both the state legislatures and the tax payers.
If the VAT is assessed during the life cycle rather than at the cash register (both alternatives have been raised in Congress), the clerk is not the tax collector but now the tax administrative job gets even stickier. The bureaucracy needed to track, confirm, oversee, and audit becomes monumental. As my proof, just visit your state’s sales tax administrative offices, it’s an all day tour. I speak from experience. PA has an entire campus devoted to sales tax only and that doesn’t include district offices.
If ALL other federal taxes were abolished in favor of the VAT, my argument wouldn’t be as strong but when we already have an income tax bureaucracy in place and modifying the tax rate doesn’t add overhead, why add another bureaucracy in an attempt to raise revenues?
Another issue with the VAT is the burden it puts on the very poor.
My final concern with VAT is I believe it would put us closer to socialism. I say this only because any change in tax structure is sure to mean higher revenues for congress and higher revenues for congress means higher spending and the more congress spends, the closer we are to socialism.
April 12, 2006 at 9:08 PM
Alright so looks like I was at least partially wrong also about my definition of VAT. Wikipedia says:
And I agree with you that any change in tax will likely necessarily come with an increase or unfavorable (for most) shift in tax collection. Damn politicians!
So by definition if you are collecting tax at every stage it will increase the administration. Also not good.
But I don’t think it is necessarily a Federal tax (though maybe that is the context it is being brought up in here)… And I don’t see how keeping paper receipts would cause more fraud that say people taking income under the table currently or using the endless loopholes that exist in the current code. And last I don’t think it necessarily burdens the very poor because most if not all plans I’ve heard for tax changes include significant if not total exemptions for the very poor. I assume food stamps would still be in effect for example.
All that said, I still prefer the flat income tax to VAT. I don’t see VAT solving anything frankly, it just shifts the burden from wage earners to businesses. Also it seems like it would just encourage people to spend their money outside the US (assuming it would replace the income tax).
April 13, 2006 at 3:45 AM
I totally agree Bradley and going back to comment 6 “I’m bothered when politicians talk about a VAT”.
April 13, 2006 at 10:29 PM
got it now… sorry, lost your point in my confusion over VAT. Thanks for the help.
April 25, 2007 at 7:03 AM
Thank You