My solution to the broken American tax system

[jackace]

I think a lot of people in this thread and even the OP are forgetting that taxes serve more than just 1 purpose. Taxes are not just to fund the government. They are used to encourage a single tax payer to participate in things that better the whole economy, the environment, the human race, etc.

 

[guyver01]

The millionaires and the billionaires that want to run this country.... let them help pay for it.

New Rule. If you or your company has a lobbyist... you MUST pay minimum 15% taxes.

You do not get a say in the way this country does 'business' .. and not ante up something.

If i want a say in your company.. i have to buy Voting share stock. You want a say in this country (lobbyist) .. you have to pay something.

 

[wuliheron]

Does that mean anyone who doesn't pay taxes looses the right to free speech?

 

[Anarchist420]

I don't see why we can't reduce spending to ~20% of what we spend now, while going back to low tariffs and high excise taxes (with none on firearms). It's really best to tax consumption (of luxuries/sins), not income.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

I think a lot of people in this thread and even the OP are forgetting that taxes serve more than just 1 purpose. Taxes are not just to fund the government. They are used to encourage a single tax payer to participate in things that better the whole economy, the environment, the human race, etc.

Not everyone agrees that this is the purpose of the tax system.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Microsoft tried the no lobbyist approach and got fucked royally. Once they hired lobbyist much of their anti-trust issues dissipated.

 

[nonlnear]

Not everyone agrees that this is the purpose of the tax system.

All people who have a strong desire for political power believe it, which is why you get such monstrous ideological bias in DC.

 

[jackace]

Not everyone agrees that this is the purpose of the tax system.

Just the act of collecting taxes is a social engineering mechanism. So, if you are going to collect taxes of any kind where are you going to draw the line on how they are collected, how they are spent and who (if anyone) receives any breaks??

 

[ProfJohn]

I think a lot of people in this thread and even the OP are forgetting that taxes serve more than just 1 purpose. Taxes are not just to fund the government. They are used to encourage a single tax payer to participate in things that better the whole economy, the environment, the human race, etc.

You mean taxes are used to control people's behaviors??

 

[jackace]

You mean taxes are used to control people's behaviors??

Yes people's and corporation's behavior. It's been that way since taxes started, and as long as taxes continue to be collected it will continue. It either comes in the form of how they are collected or how they are spent. Either way taxes are used to control behavior.

 

[ProfJohn]

Personally I see no reason why we can't add a couple more tax brackets above to the top of our current system.

Right now the top rate is 35% at $379,150.

Why not at a 37% for incomes above $500,000, 39% for incomes above $750,000 and 41% for incomes above $1,000,000.

The top rate under Clinton was 39.6% so people making less than a million are still better off than under Clinton and the number of people who make over $1,000,000 is rather low and let's be honest, if you make $1 million a year you can afford that extra 2% in taxes.

 

[ProfJohn]

Yes people's and corporation's behavior. It's been that way since taxes started, and as long as taxes continue to be collected it will continue. It either comes in the form of how they are collected or how they are spent. Either way taxes are used to control behavior.

How about we use taxes to raise money and nothing else?

That's the nice thing about a flat tax with no deductions. You can't bribe people into doing certain things.

I have no problem with giving companies tax breaks though, but they should be limited to things like healthcare, education and other broad impact items.

 

[Rock Hydra]

The whiners and apologists of the left claim that a progressive tax structure is the only fair way to make sure that the rich are paying their share while the whiners and apologists of the right claim that a flat tax structure is the only fair way to make sure that the rich are aren't paying their share and for everyone else.

Why not have a hybrid system of a progressive flat tax?

Have a simple, no deductions for anyone, no refund for anyone system? The premise is pretty simple.

$0 - $100,000 pay a 5% flat rate for money earned in that range
$100,001 - $150,000 pay 10% flat rate for moneys earned in that range
$150,001 - $200,000 pay a 15% flat rate for moneys earned in that range
$200,001 - ∞ pay a 20% flat rate for moneys earned in that range

All money earned as a result of capital gains would also be taxed at the 20% flat rate

This would eliminate the need for about 75% of the IRS workforce, eliminate the need for a great majority of the commercial space that is used for IRS offices and greatly simplify the entire tax code.

Gone would be loopholes and refunds for those that are already paying almost nothing to begin with and the rich could no longer claim that they are paying the lions share because their effective tax rate would never be more than 20% (and in actuality, could never even touch 20% b/c they would pay less than that on the first $200k).

The left keep the progressive system so that the poorer section of the population aren't sacrificing the ability to be able to pay for necessities and the right finally get their wet dream of a flat tax.

It would result in more money in the average person's paycheck (instead of loaning the government 25% out of each paycheck and then hoping to get some back at the beginning of the next year) and it would greatly reduce the complexity of determining how much money will be available to generate the next year's budget.

Corporations would also get a "break" by being charged a flat rate of 25% on all profits, no exceptions, no deductions, no credits and no more being able to make $6B dollars in profit and receive a $2B tax refund from the federal government (I'm talking to you GE!).

What say you?

What say I? I say: "What ammount of violence is personally acceptable to you to get me to pay for, or partially pay for say....a road?"

 

[Rock Hydra]

Does that mean anyone who doesn't pay taxes looses the right to free speech?

does everyone who says they have the right to send the mafia after my property lose the right to free speech too?

 

[jackace]

How about we use taxes to raise money and nothing else?

That's the nice thing about a flat tax with no deductions. You can't bribe people into doing certain things.

I have no problem with giving companies tax breaks though, but they should be limited to things like healthcare, education and other broad impact items.

What if giving a tax incentive is a cheaper solution than creating a new government agency or bureaucracy to get a certain desired outcome? You know the saying You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

So why is it OK for corporations to get tax breaks but not individuals?

 

[ProfJohn]

Because companies operate differently than individuals and it is much harder to encourage them to do things with out offering them economic benefit.

But if you told Walmart that they can write off the first $1000 they spend on each employees healthcare then Walmart might offer healthcare to all employees.

But you should keep the write offs limited to things that provide the most benefit to society as a whole.

 

[jackace]

Because companies operate differently than individuals and it is much harder to encourage them to do things with out offering them economic benefit.

But if you told Walmart that they can write off the first $1000 they spend on each employees healthcare then Walmart might offer healthcare to all employees.

But you should keep the write offs limited to things that provide the most benefit to society as a whole.

Basically the only avenue of encouragement the government has is economic. Anything else they do is law. So I'm not really seeing how that is any different for an individual or a corporation.

 

[wuliheron]

does everyone who says they have the right to send the mafia after my property lose the right to free speech too?

You need to do better drugs or stop taking them altogether.

 

[Darwin333]

With all due respect:



One problem with your suggestion is that you aren't addressing the underlying problem, of the political corruption causing the problem in the first place.

It's like the Jews coming up with a plan for fairness to submit to the Nazi government, they don't get it.

Your plan has no advantage over a purely progressive system, including 'social engineering', except that that flexibility is abused by the political corruption.

I don't like the idea of the .gov using the tax code for social engineering. Even if you got all your fantasy land uncorruptible progressives in power tomorrow eventually they will be replaced with corruptible politicians. It is just a fact of life that we must deal with so the idea is to make a system in which as little harm as possible can be done by corrupted politicians.

But that political corruption would also prevent a 'good system' you come up with from being adopted - if it could be, then the progressive system could be fixes.

You lose the benefits of good incentives - I don't have much interest in right-wing radical ideologues who disagree - for no good reason.

Any attempts by the government to incent R&D, to incent green energy technology, to incent businesses to reduce costly and harmful pollution, with tax credits - forget it.

Direct grants can be used instead, the net result is the same.

Another problem, what about the international corporate issue - companies keeping trillions out of the US economy to prevent any US taxation?

25% of zero is zero.

Already happens with the current system.

Charities would see plummeting donations without any deduction.

Good point on this one but I don't know if its a deal breaker.

The 'IRS workforce' cost is a red herring - it's trivial as a cost compared to the size of the budget, and we could use a lot more pursuit of the owed taxes.

Its not just the IRS workforce, it is the entire cost that our society pays just to figure out how much money we owe the .gov and then protect ourselves from the IRS. We spend a massive amount of money in this country due to the extreme complexity of the tax code. That goes away if anyone with a 4th grade math education and a calculator can figure out what they owe.

Basically, we need to fix political corruption to implement tax fixes, and when we do, the progressive tax system is the best.

Can you add a pink unicorn that shits gold nuggets to that list?

ANY fix adopted without fixing the political corruption will be corrupt - i.e., IMO, transfer even more wealth to the most wealthy.

[/quote]

Is that even possible at this point? Taxes are currently the smallest contributor of that transfer. That trillions in taxpayer dollars, fraudulent gains that go unprosecuted, legalized accounting fraud for the uberelite, essentially legalized front running, market manipulation, etc are transferring far more than the 70ishB a year more we could be taxing the rich. Hell, double it and its still nothing compared to the other stuff.

 

[dmcowen674]

My solution to the broken American tax system

The whiners and apologists of the left claim that a progressive tax structure is the only fair way to make sure that the rich are paying their share while the whiners and apologists of the right claim that a flat tax structure is the only fair way to make sure that the rich are aren't paying their share and for everyone else.

He who has the most money always wins so the left have no chance

/thread

 

[RightIsWrong]

He who has the most money always wins so the left have no chance

/thread

In your haste to demonize the right and to plan your pity part for the left....you forgot that some of the richest in the country are lefties and the richest in government are also on that side of the aisle.

Eight of the ten richest Congresspeople are Ds (including 5 of the top 7) and 12 of the top 20 are D's. I guess the left has no chance then....right?

 

[jackace]

I don't like the idea of the .gov using the tax code for social engineering.

Collecting taxes in general is social engineering. The way they are collected or the way they are spent will be used to encourage or enforce certain behaviors.

 

[Matt1970]

Well which is it? Corporations make so much money off their employees. Corporations make so much money without hiring people.

 

[wuliheron]

Well which is it? Corporations make so much money off their employees. Corporations make so much money without hiring people.

Corporations make money any way they can.

 

[Throckmorton]

Its not just the IRS workforce, it is the entire cost that our society pays just to figure out how much money we owe the .gov and then protect ourselves from the IRS. We spend a massive amount of money in this country due to the extreme complexity of the tax code. That goes away if anyone with a 4th grade math education and a calculator can figure out what they owe.

I don't get any anyone other than small business owners has to file taxes. Our income is reported so why do WE have to send the IRS W2 forms? Why can't I just go on a website, submit my moving expenses, confirm numbers of dependents, etc?