Simplify the Tax Code Instead of Creating an IRS Rival to TurboTax
Americans collectively spend billions of hours each year preparing their taxes. Rather than adding a government-run website into the mix, politicians should just simplify the tax code.

The Wall Street Journal reported today that "the IRS is working on steps to improve tax administration." Most notably, this would include a free, government-run tax preparation service that would allow taxpayers to file simple returns on the IRS' website. The move is opposed by tax-prep behemoths like H&R Block and Intuit, TurboTax's parent company.
Lawmakers from both parties have promised simple and/or free tax preparation for decades. In May 1985, President Ronald Reagan proposed "a system where more than half of us would not even have to fill out a return," wherein "you would automatically receive your refund or a letter explaining any additional tax you owe." In 2006, Austan Goolsbee, who later served as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Barack Obama, proposed the "Simple Return," a system of return-free filing that "might apply to as many as 40 percent of Americans, for whom it could save up to 225 million hours of time and more than $2 billion a year in tax preparation fees."
The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed with the pledge that taxpayers would be able to file their taxes on "a form the size of a postcard." But in practice, that isn't what we got: Americans still spend billions of hours and hundreds of billions of dollars to file.
Part of the reason, as the Journal article intimates, is industry pressure: Intuit alone has spent nearly $45 million since 1998 lobbying Congress. The company even managed to help kill a 2013 proposal that would allow the IRS to pre-fill tax return information, similar to Reagan's proposition from decades earlier.
Notably, the IRS already offers Free File, as it has since 2002. The program allows taxpayers earning less than a certain amount (currently $73,000) to use major tax-prep firms' software to electronically file their taxes—including, in some cases, state taxes—for free. In recent years, H&R Block and Intuit have each withdrawn from the list of competing companies, known as Free File Alliance.
Free File is also little-used, even by those who could benefit: The Journal article notes that while 100 million Americans are eligible to use Free File, only about 3 percent of them do. In 2019, internal agency emails revealed that in exchange for companies' participation in Free File, the IRS agreed not to develop its own free filing system that could compete. But some Free File Alliance companies intentionally made it more difficult to actually utilize their free services—Intuit, for example, inserted code on its website that would hide the free file page from search engine results.
The problem is not that taxpayers lack filing options; it's that the process is overly complicated from the start. Rather than simply collecting revenue to fund the government, the American tax code also seeks to shape behavior by incentivizing or disincentivizing certain activity. As a result, fully complying with the rules while taking advantage of every credit and deduction one is eligible for tends to require paying an expert.
Instead of building a whole new web portal, lawmakers should work to simplify the tax code and make all that extra work unnecessary.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Two things we know for sure about the federal government: their web sites don't work, and the IRS can't figure taxes.
This will end up with the feds crosschecking voter rolls and screwing up republican returns so they can asses fines and fees and jail time.
" their web sites don’t work, and the IRS can’t figure taxes."
It's not really their website, though. In the case of the Obamacare fiasco, the website was farmed out to private sector consultancies. A lot of the government's covid policies were also coming from private sector consultancies. Possibly the same bunch of self proclaimed experts who are responsible for the website.
"This will end up with the feds crosschecking voter rolls"
More importantly, I suspect this proposed 'simplification' will end up with an expanded bureaucracy or even more work farmed out to the folks who brought you covid and obamacare.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
:"It’s not really their website, though. In the case of the Obamacare fiasco, the website was farmed out to private sector consultancies..."
Look over there!
"...farmed out to the folks who brought you covid and obamacare..."
That would be Fauci and Obo, idiot.
"
"Look over there!"
You missed the point. You don't need to look over there. They're everywhere.
Private consultants have been running key parts of the governmental response to the Covid-19 pandemic. At least 25 states, along with federal agencies and many cities and counties, hired consulting firms. The American vaccination drive came to rely on global behemoths such as McKinsey and Boston Consulting Group (BCG), with downsized state and local health departments and even federal health agencies relying on the private sector to make vaccines available to their citizens.
https://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2021/08/23/Consultants-Are-Cashing-Covid-Millions-Government-Contracts-Report
This is worth noting too:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-01-white-house-accenture-obamacare-website.html
One consultancy firm (a Canadian one) fucks up, only to be replaced by another consultancy (a global one).
Let's note that either trueman is incapable of reading his links or is yet more abysmally stupid than assumed:
"White House, Accenture confirm Obamacare website takeover":
Note we adopt the 'active voice' regarding what is, more accurately, some government agent awarding a contract to a supplier, supposedly vetted by that agent. A "takeover" it ain't and memory says the 1st Woky had some influence and some conflict of interest; trueman has no interest in such matters.
Fuck off and die, shitbag.
" supposedly vetted by that agent."
That's naive. The contract was undoubtedly awarded on the recommendation of yet another consultancy firm. I can't understand why you are so intent on carrying water for these parasites.
That's stupid. It's easy to see why an ignoramus like you will continue to carry water for the state.
You are, truly, a statist piece of shit.
What carrying water from the state? I've been critical of the state from the first comment. I've been critical of the government, I've been critical of the private sector, both are vital arms of the state.
"What carrying water from the state? I’ve been critical of the state from the first comment. I’ve been critical of the government, I’ve been critical of the private sector, both are vital arms of the state"
You seem, as you often do, to be involved in confusion. Can't help you until you admit your idiocy.
"Can’t help you until you admit your idiocy."
Helping yourself to some good drugs is your number one priority. Once that's taken care of, then you can help the rest of us.
"Helping yourself to some good drugs is your number one priority."
Helping yourself to some self-awareness and admitting
your stupidity and assholery will make the world a far better place than any drugs I could take.
"You missed the point. You don’t need to look over there. They’re everywhere..."
No, you (no surprise) missed the point, and as someone who has the distinct stench of the magic world of academia, it is also no great surprise:
Hint; when our customers gripe about the quality of the product, it does us no good whatsoever to point out we hired idiots.
You, OTOH, seem to find that a perfectly valid excuse for government fuck-ups in even so major issues as O-care, you pathetic pile of lefty shit.
Fuck off and die.
"Hint; when our customers gripe about the quality of the product, it does us no good whatsoever to point out we hired idiots."
You still don't get it. Not only did the federal, state and local governments spend millions hiring idiots, they down-sized experienced, capable people out of their jobs, which made the hiring of idiots necessary. You'll never understand what's happened if you are only willing to listen to half the story.
"You still don’t get it. Not only did the federal, state and local governments spend millions hiring idiots, they down-sized experienced, capable people out of their jobs, which made the hiring of idiots necessary. You’ll never understand what’s happened if you are only willing to listen to half the story."
As a statist pile of lefty shit, you are not capable of 'getting it'. You have never provided support for your bullshit claims; we are to take them on the assumption that they are to be taken on face value; what a fucking ignoramus.
Absent other than the admission that government agents failed in awarding contracts, we're to accept your lies that the contractors are at fault?
What is it you do for a living? I have a strong suspicion it has nothing to do with, you know, actual commerce, where your customers demand results.
Again, please make your family proud, your dog happy: Fuck off and die. Oh, and thereby, make the world a better place.
"Again, please make your family proud, your dog happy: Fuck off and die. Oh, and thereby, make the world a better place."
You seem wound up about something. Have you tried drugs? Opioids are especially helpful in unwinding. Swimming is also good if pharmaceuticals aren't your bag.
You seem stooooopid about something. Fuck off and die.
Pretty sure any response from the assholic trueman will be assholic
Still wound up? Drugs are your friend.
Still stupid?
Assoloitry is your friend and fuck off-erfy is your familes's best bet, asshole.
"Still wound up? Drugs are your friend."
Wouldn't know. BTW, steaming pile of lefty shit, do you presume that any one reading here assumes otherwise in your case?
"Wouldn’t know. "
Clearly that's your problem. Drugs will help to calm you. If you take enough, they might make you a more interesting person.
"Clearly that’s your problem..."
I really have no problem.
You clearly do have a problem when someone points out that you are an raging asshole both stupid and smug about it.
You could easily solve that by fucking off and dying.
Start making cash right now... Get more time with your family by doing jobs that only require for you to have a computer and an internet access and you can have that at your home. Start bringing up to $8012 a month. I've started this job and I've never been happier and now I am sharing it with you, so you can try it too.
HERE====)>>> https://www.apprichs.com
es#w
The mechanics of government contracting virtually guarantee bad results. The rules encourage companies to underbid, then award them more money when they inevitably go over budget. That's assuming the project is put out for a bid; some contracts are awarded without competition. Except, you know, the competition to see which contractor is easiest for key congresscritters to shake down. Among other problems, this often means contracts go to suppliers with limited experience in relevant fields. Requirements are often unclear, and may change mid-process, so it shouldn't be surprising if the "finished" product is glitchy and hard to use. Add in poor accountability, and you get a recipe, if not an entire cookbook, for failure.
My last month paycheck was for 11000 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour….
for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot.
https://WWW.NETPAYFAST.COM
You have to keep in mind that, in their mind, it’s all their money anyway, and that you should be grateful that they let you keep some of it. And while I am basically an originalist believer in the Constitution, please note that there is nothing in that document that would prevent a 90% or 95% or 100% income tax rate (we’ve had it at 90% but with a supertanker-sized list of deductions that no longer exist), nor does the Constitution limit at what income level the Congress (with its “plenary” taxing power) could begin the 100% rate. To be honest, though it would not be practical, even a rate of 125% of all income above a certain level would probably be found to be “constitutional”. After all, now, special “surcharges” on income above a certain level are allowed, as are income-based deduction limitations and the legal folly of the alternative minimum tax. And with a pliant Supreme Court willing to “find” that legally, wealth is nothing more than retained income and thereby subject to Congress’s “plenary” taxing power under the 16th Amendment, we could find ourselves with (1) wealth taxes, (2) that are an annual levy against wealth/net worth with no lower threshold.
So I would suggest you selfish haters of your fellow man who resist giving of your substance for the benefit of others – you who think your money should be yours – shut up your bitchin’ and kvetchin’ and just be damn glad that so far – so far – they let you keep some of it.
Edit: I understand that anything that results in a "receipt of value" (even "unearned income") requires that it be declared and tax paid on it, including barter or gifts above a certain size. So I'm curious - you take a babe out for a fancy dinner (say $100 each, plus tip). The restaurant owner and the server owe taxes on the money exchanged. But how about the babe? Is her receipt of value (the steak) not taxable because she'd going to turn it into . . . and push it out the next day? Why should she not have to declare and pay income tax on the value of that steak. And if, after dinner, you go back to your apartment and she rocks your world, or takes your "around the world" and brings your blood pressure down? Have you not received a service of value for your investment in the steak dinner? Should all barter activity not at least have value determined and that value be declared, even if it is considered a "gift" and not taxable (it's unlikely that blissful evening would top $15,000 in "assessed value" or "imputed income", but it would have some monetary value. If this little ballet is repeated weakly might not it have a value that multiplied X 52 would reach a taxable limit? And if she puts out only after being fed, is it really a gift. {Think of your food investment as being a taxidermist - first you stuff the pigeon, then you mount it.}
There are so many ways that our budget crisis could be solved with the right taxing laws in place!
There is only ONE realistic way to simplify the tax code, and that is a national sales tax (or whatever you want to call it). Anything that relies on “income” is going to be fraught with lawyerly interpretations of ‘inbound products of value as derived by the individual’.
https://fairtax.org/
The national sales tax should... should be bipartisan. Both left and right should be able to embrace it-- the only political football in the discussion would be how much and how broadly would it be applied? Big-government lefty: Big and broad. Small government "righty": Small and narrow.
But the state has no business setting up a massive surveillance system on its citizens with the Eye of Sauron directed at what I do during the day, with whom I do it, what and how much compensation I receive for it, and how many and how big my bank transactions might be, and if that non-monetary thing I received might be "construed" as "income"... even if it wasn't cash, but knuckle up, because if the IRS determines it's taxable, then they're going to want cash for that non-cash good sort of... nowish.
So the next time you show up at Antiques Roadshow to get that old watch or vase that you inherited from Grandma appraised, pray an IRS agent isn't hovering in the background.
Sales taxes are regressive and, when large enough, encourage smuggling. I know that for many on the right, the regressive nature of a tax is a feature, not a bug, but do you really want to beef up US customs to prevent smuggling?
Pretty sure the FAIR tax takes that into account with rebates based on income.
So we're still tracking income and taxing based on it anyway? Then what's the point? Now we have the government snooping on what we make *and* what we spend. That doesn't sound like an improvement.
That's incorrect. The rebates are not based on income.
So your primary concern is an unfair tax system. At least you are consistent in leftist policy positions.
It is not "leftist" to think that a horribly regressive tax system, as hugely unfair, is not a good idea. It is anti-plutocracy.
You'll have to forgive Jesse- types way quicker than he/she thinks. If they do the latter at all.
Go to the Fairtax site and read about it. Those problems and others are addressed.
Which is why many jurisdictions don't apply sales tax to certain items. I know a massive spying surveillance state to the left is a feature, not a bug, but do you really want to beef up the Department of Homeland Security to make sure no "terrorists" are moving large amounts of money in their bank accounts?
The democrats have a lot of power over the individual through the ‘progressive’ tax code. They will NEVER give that up. Lancaster’s article is laughable I’m that he and his fellow travelers at Reason supported Joe Biden at one level or another. Many every voting for him. And Biden is putting the IRS on steroids.
Reason is such a joke.
And the fact that you think the Dems are solely and exclusively responsible for every evil is why you're a joke. Even if the GOP occasionally makes encouraging noises, it's not like they've actually done much to make the tax code fairer or simpler. After all, they have lots of "donors" to shake down too.
Sales taxes require just as much auditing and snooping as income taxes, since sales taxes are income taxes with a different name, focused on businesses, but needing to monitor all sales, not just from registered businesses. A carpenter helping a neighbor with a deck is a sales tax cheat. So is a mechanic fixing his daughter's car.
Sales taxes aren't linked to individuals like income tax is.
Makes no difference. Pushing the paperwork off on businesses and claiming "problem solved because it doesn't affect me any more" is no way to eliminate government snooping, especially if the government finds enough tax cheating that they start auditing customers to prevent money laundering and to make sure the receipts aren't artificially low to save taxes.
I don't disagree with almost everything you say.
It's still intrusive, it just pushed the burden elsewhere, etc.
However, the snooping on individuals under the guise of income tax is downright egregious. Remember the whole "gotta report everything for a bank account that does more than $600 in transactions" bit to, you know, keep the billionaires from being tax cheats?
Alas, and I think this might be part of your view also so correct me if I'm wrong, we're technically ALL businesses. Economically, an individual is selling his products or services for some exchange of value in wage or other compensation. Even if I am an employee at a fast food restaurant, I've just sold a certain number of hours performing the service of flipping burgers for a certain amount of money per hour.
That all seems super philosophical, and right now it is. But the instant the only tax becomes a sales tax, you KNOW some enterprising politician trying to find a creative way to increase revenue will start considering every moment money changes hands like a sale, and every human being a sole proprietor, and want to know all of those transactions. Then we're fucked for privacy again.
Exactly. Once sales tax replaces income tax, it becomes much more important to monitor yard sales, flea markets, etsy, ebay, and every one trading work with neighbors.
In the Fairtax proposal, only the first sale is taxable. Buy a new house, you pay a huge tax, but with untaxed income - on the average, it will work out to the same fraction of your income. Sell your house to someone else, it's not taxable. Neither are yard sales, selling used items on E-Bay, etc.
If you run a business selling new products on E-Bay, manufacturing product for sale on Etsy, or mowing lawns for cash or trade, you're in business, and the IRS already wants to know everything for income tax - sales , business expenses, and investments. For a sales tax, the only thing you need to report is your sales.
It makes a HUGE difference. We've already "pushed the paperwork off on businesses". Sales tax isn't a theory, it's a fact. So why would you want to "maintain the paperwork on individual citizens" by refusing to merely up the percentage on an already existing tax system and structure and eliminate the surveillance nature of the income tax?
Any libertarian arguing to "keep" the income tax has essentially admitted they're a whore, but are only negotiating price.
if the government finds enough tax cheating that they start auditing customers to prevent money laundering and to make sure the receipts aren’t artificially low to save taxes.
Again, this isn't some wild, theoretical concept, it exists now, right now, in the real world we live in. Why on earth any self-described libertarian would argue against removing an income tax in favor of a beefed up, but already existing and reasonably well-run system baffles me.
It will not eliminate the surveillance.
I do not advocate maintaining the income tax instead of replacing it with a sales tax.
I advocate property taxes as the closest any tax can be to maintaining privacy and anonymity.
I'm going to nitpick here. My proposal is not to eliminate the income tax and replace it with a nat'l sales tax, my proposal is to eliminate the income tax and expand the existing sales tax into a nat'l sales tax. Likely through a process of continuing allowing the states to collect it using the same mechanisms they have in place now, but forward on a percentage to the federal government. Much like gas taxes. That percentage would presumably increase to make the federal portion. But the mechanisms would remain mostly the same-- including my idea that would make states responsible for its enforcement as well. As they are now.
We already have a well-established, functional and advanced sales-tax system in this country. And it does NOT require as much snooping as income taxes on individual citizens.
A carpenter helping a neighbor with a deck is a sales tax cheat. So is a mechanic fixing his daughter’s car.
A carpenter helping a neighbor with a deck is income to the neighbor. We already HAVE these problems, this streamlines and simplifies the system and eliminates one of the biggest surveillance the state has at its disposal.
Mostly, my concern is that I have zero faith that a VAT wouldn't end up just tacked on top of the income tax.
Of course, that's exactly what would happen. So we'd end up with another layer of national taxes on top of Federal income tax, state income tax, property tax, state and local sales taxes, social security taxes, SDI, unemployment insurance, mandated obamacare, and the bazillion user fees, permit fees, and other things you have to pay for just to legally do business.
Of course it would. I'm just fantasizing about libertopia. Many states also have income taxes which would have to be dismantled as well. Which I haven't even touched upon.
If we're daydreaming about Libertopia why not dream of government funded by user fees paid by the people who actually want the services?
When sales tax increases to the level necessary to replace income tax, those neighborly deals will take on a lot more importance. Same with etsy, ebay, and flea markets. Hold more than one yard sale a year? Some burrocrat is going to pay you a visit.
Sales taxes require just as much auditing and snooping as income taxes
Bullshit.
What a convincing argument! You have swayed me with your brilliance.
VD is correct, even if sans an argument.
We have to areas of snooping and auditing right now:
Sales taxes and income taxes.
One is an area of snooping and auditing leveled at the Shell station on the corner, the other is leveled at you personally.
I believe (strongly) that we would inch towards more liberty if we left in place the snooping and auditing of the Shell station, and eliminated the snooping and auditing of you.
When the National Sales Tax (I won't call it fair) was first proposed, they talked about a 23% tax rate (really 30% if you measure it like sales tax rates are normally measured, as a percentage of the pre-tax price). But federal government spending has gone up much faster than GDP since then. 2023 GDP is forecast at 23.6 trillion, but 6.4 trillion of that will be government spending and not productive commerce to tax. So the real tax rate would have to be 37.2% (6.4T / (23.6T - 6.4T)).
Consumption taxes are also income taxes, but only on businesses. They have all the same auditing problems, and because they have to catch cheaters, they also have to monitor yard sales, flea markets, social media sales, etsy, ebay, and every way people can sell things to each other. Trading deck repair for roof repair? Income.
Real estate tax is much fairer, since there is no hidden real estate, and the government doesn't even have to know who owns the land, only that a parcel's tax has been paid. The biggest problem is assessing the land, and because most parcels have comparables nearby, most assessments are reasonable approximations.
Or people can self-assess their parcel's value, with the proviso that it cannot be sold for more or insured for more, and enforcement left to snitches whose reward is proportional to the cheat. Yes, snitches suck, but there'd be far fewer real estate snitches than income tax snitches, including consumption taxes.
It is fairly easy to exempt resale tax for non business from a fair tax. Just like it is now.
Until the government finds people making a living on etsy or ebay.
Like they do now?
Almost came to an end this year, certainly will be reintroduced next year.
The importance it will have when sales taxes triple or more will make audits all the more important. All those IRS agents won't be fired, just repurposed.
I cannot deny possible known knowns, known unknowns or unknown unknowns in the realm of second order effects from an expanded sales tax regime after the income tax is eliminated.
But to say, "let's leave one of the biggest unconstitutional and deep-state-enabling surveillance mechanisms levered against every individual in the country which can declare "income" out of whole cloth (figuratively AND literally)" for fear that a national sales tax might/could be abused is to just surrender entirely.
For the record, I'm not against your property tax proposal-- I'm willing to entertain the idea as property taxes-- like sales taxes-- is a collection method already in place. My only problem with property taxes vs. a nat'l sales tax is the government is back in the business of estimating values of a patch of dirt and then holding out its palm, telling you to pay up $x when no transaction has taken place. Whereas sales taxes only come into play when transactions are present and if... IF they were to function and be applied just as they are now... but with increased percentages to make up for the absence of an income tax, they catch so-called black market individuals as well when they transact with legitimate businesses.
To be clear on the last part, I'm not talking about black market activity which evades sales AND income taxes now, I'm talking about people engaged in black market activity who will eventually sit down at a restaurant, fill up a tank of gas, buy a car or a house, or grab some stuff at the Home Depot.
I have made $18625 last month by w0rking 0nline from home in my part time only. Everybody can now get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow details here..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com
LOL. The government has the income tax embedded in the constitution. There is no way they are giving that up. but no doubt they'd be more than happy to implement a national sales tax to supplement it.
You know what else is embedded in the constitution?
And the only way we can possibly get it is by calling a constitutional convention. The status quo benefits the political class immensely.
-jcr
Please, please, please use the same guys who developed the Obama care website.
/intuit
I never had any trouble finding the free filing web sites.
And even when I was paying a mortgage and had stock options and all that stuff, doing taxes with pencil and paper never took more than a couple hours.
But then I went to public school in the bad old days when math problems only had one answer.
I've tried doing my taxes on paper, and then going to TurboTax to see what they come up with. They always end up getting me a significantly larger refund than I figured out for myself. The difference more than covers Intuit's fee.
I'd be more impressed if used pen when filling out the IRS crossword puzzle.
I bet a professional would find reasons to refile the last several years. I had the same ego refusing to believe I couldn't beat the system.
Will the IRS free file site do my state income taxes too. Turbo tax handles federal, state and even local (where they exist) income taxes.
Doubling the exemptions last round of tax cuts did that for many people.
I do not qualify for Free File but did try the fillable forms option this year which allowed me to file online and pay directly. The fillable forms were good and did a math check. I would like to see the worksheets also work on-line. In the end the process worked well saved me time printing, copying, writing checks and mailing forms. I did have a few start up problems, but work through them.
I would certainly agree that a better solution would be a simplified tax code. I would just like to see people read more of the code and I think they would be shocked at some of stuff in the code. Some of it may be attempts to incentivizing or disincentivizing certain activity. But some of it is just pandering. I am collecting social security and 85% of it is taxed. Why not just pay me less and not tax any or conversely just tax it all. Instead, I have to do another line of calculation. There are so many things like this in the code and it just makes me nuts when I think about all the unnecessary steps and calculation that are added.
You vote for the wrong party if you ever expect anything to change.
The code is full of things that originated in both parties. Paul Ryan often talked about simplifying the tax code, but he really never followed through. Last real simplification was during the Reagan administration.
Or don’t be a dumbass and get a good accountant.
I get paid more than $100 to $500 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $21k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on the accompanying site…
Here is I started…………..>>> http://www.works75.com
The more you simplify the code - a desirable end, without question - the less money the tax companies make and the fewer loopholes exist.
There is hence far more money spent on lobbying Congress against simplification than there is in favour.
Each adjustment to the tax code is a favor for someone.
Congress is a business. Their product is tax breaks and favorable regulatory treatment. Simplifying taxes would take away their biggest income stream.
There's another approach that also simplifies matters - I think Rand Paul once proposed it. Get rid of Federal taxes altogether and disband the IRS. (I already hear cheers from some of you.) Let the Federal government charge each state an amount per capita, and let each state decide how they wish to raise that amount.
You'd have to factor in the amount that the federal government spends in each state, ie how much what the state pays comes back as federal largess. Without that there'd be issues of fairness. Not that issues of fairness aren't all but inevitable anyway.
We would also need to end unconstitutional federal spending. Which is most of it
Wouldn't that be a straight forward matter of states withholding their payments to the federal government? If they deem the federal government to be spending illegally or just don't approve of how the money is spent, they could just decide to keep their money this year. And maybe next, until the feds get into line.
He'll be here all week, folks; try the veal.
You dont understand what taxes based on apportionment apparently. I'll add it to the list.
What, you can't even read your insulting content free comment to check it makes sense? So anxious you are to spill your angry vitriol. It takes all of two seconds to proofread. You need to get a grip, back away from the computer, and contemplate taking up other hobbies. I can't recommend bird watching strongly enough. It's outside, see some beautiful birds, watch them do their thing, listen to their singing and chatter. Believe me, you'll appreciate what they have to say more than anything I can offer you.
"What, you can’t even read your insulting content free comment to check it makes sense? So anxious you are to spill your angry vitriol. It takes all of two seconds to proofread. You need to get a grip, back away from the computer, and contemplate taking up other hobbies. I can’t recommend bird watching strongly enough. It’s outside, see some beautiful birds, watch them do their thing, listen to their singing and chatter. Believe me, you’ll appreciate what they have to say more than anything I can offer you."
Get a grip, lying pile of shit.
Actually, "Believe me, you’ll appreciate what they have to say more than anything I can offer you." sounds pretty accurate...
Of course, mtrueman can't even count to potato, so, y'know.
Tweet tweet.
stupid, stupid.
Fuck off and die, you self-important pile of lying lefty shit. Your family would be proud.
Oh, and mark your grave so I know where to take a shit.
Caw caw.
No you don't. The Constitution has no such requirement, and revenue now has no such "fairness".
There's legal requirements and political requirements. Which do you think takes precedence when they inevitably clash?
Uh, gee, did you think there was a message there we'd all missed, Mr. Obviousman?
You truly are tiresome; fuck off and die.
"there was a message there we’d all missed"
Missing a message is to be expected. It's worse than that. There was a question you couldn't or wouldn't answer.
There was nothing of the sort; there was a strawman you drug into the discussion, asshole.
Do you assume your idiocy is not noted here?
Which do you think takes precedence when they inevitably clash?
Why are you so afraid to answer? It's not a trap.
Or, get rid of taxes and just print money.
Let the Federal government charge each state an amount per capita, and let each state decide how they wish to raise that amount.
That was the Articles of Confederation model. It didn't work because some states just refused to pay. What does the federal government do then? Kick them out?
My proposal is even simpler, and objectively fair:
Add up all the spending. (say 6 trillion for easier math)
Divide by the number of adults in the country. (say 200 million)
Send everyone their fair tax bill: 30,000 each.
I think it would motivate people to question new spending proposals as well.
Simplify the tax code?
How are politicians going to get campaign contributions if they can’t write exemptions for their donors?
That's exactly why it won't happen.
No . Get rid of income tax.
We can't, we have to hang on to it because if someone puts in this wild, unheard of, never before been tried sales tax, then businesses will be subject to audits! And we wouldn't want to subject businesses to audits. Best to keep the audits focused on grandma and Pedro who may or may not have made income by selling flowers by the 405.
We could try getting rid of the income tax and not replacing it with anything. Because taxation is theft.
No one will want a 37% federal sales tax (enough to balance the budget), or even the 30% proposed, so they will probably start at 10% and keep the income tax. And then we will have both, and the rate will go up.
I'd assume that the IRS tax software would have errors in it, and you'd still be liable for any underpayment.
If they screw up your taxes they'll prosecute you for fraud.
“the American tax code also seeks to shape behavior” Yet another UN-Constitutional tool of the [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] – Empire..
Constitution – Taxing Clause…… “but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; . . .” “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken. ”
If only the Constitution meant something to politicians who swear an oath to it and was actually enforced by the judiciary. The USA wouldn't be in this mess.
I appreciate reason writing articles like this but we all know the tax code is never getting simplified. It's a fucking mess on purpose, they like it that way. If the government were serious about tax reform, they wouldn't do this horseshit song-and-dance with filing taxes. They know what you owe if your employer reports your earnings.
Not necessarily. There are deductions that make sense.
The question is do the deductions really make sense or are, as the article suggests, mostly to incentivize or disincentivize some behavior?
I was thinking specifically of the medical exemptions. You can’t really encourage of discourage medical spending. But if a person spends 80% of their income on life-threatening medical problems, there truly isn’t any way for them to pay 100% of their “normal” income based income taxes.
Likewise, for any sort of business, you need to be able to count expenditures against income, or *everyone* is going out of business.
Which isn’t to say that I don’t agree with the point Stuck in CA makes below. But it absolutely is possible to end up in a situation where you “made” a whole bunch of money, but you also had essentially no choice but to spend most of it or simply give up and die.
Which is why my real solution is to get rid of the income tax and tell the feds to spend less.
While I can appreciate that a person can have large medical expenses, I don't think that the tax code is the place to address this problem. First you can only deduct medical expenses in excess of 7.5% of your income. For most people that is a large amount that comes out of pocket before you can even start deducting expenses. People with large expenses need some sort of direct financial support through Medicaid or Medicare, not a tax deduction.
Think the same for many other deductions and see the tax code as a backdoor to support that should be given directly.
I mean, you may be right, but I pulled in nearly $60k last year, had no insurance, obviously did not qualify for Medicare, and damned near made it to the 7.5% mark. The standard deduction was *barely* more than what I spent on medical, last year, out of pocket. I almost had to take out a loan to pay my taxes.
That's the problem. Some very well might make sense.
But some very popular deductions are nonsensical. Mortgage Interest deduction is my easiest example. This is fundamentally allowing mortgage banks to do their business tax free because they get to take their fees out of pre-tax dollars while the rest of us have to compete for what's leftover after Uncle Sam takes his vig.
This is extra bad in housing as it is the sort of thing where people pay based on means -- how much per month can I afford as a payment. All it does is distort the market so house prices are higher. The only winners here are the banks.
Now, try getting rid of the mortgage interest deduction and then getting reelected in the next election.
If you wipe the slate clean, say "no deductions" you have the theoretically least manipulated market you'll get. But if you try to keep deductions based on whether they make sense you'll never get rid of any of them and the system will remain super complicated.
A lot of the deductions only make sense in our dystopia. Why should we be deducting medical expenses instead of just having an actual healthcare system that works for the citizenry?
You're already paying for everyone, insurance or not, through your insurance premiums, etc. Cut out the middlemen and run with it. So much of that crap is duplicated (through private insurers, medicaid, medicare, VA, etc. etc.) that it's completely inefficient. Even Bernie's lavish healthcare idea is about the same price we're all paying now. We could save money by fixing that and even better- simplify the stupid tax code so we didn't have all these tax carveouts for it.
Free File is also little-used, even by those who could benefit: The Journal article notes that while 100 million Americans are eligible to use Free File, only about 3 percent of them do. In 2019, internal agency emails revealed that in exchange for companies' participation in Free File, the IRS agreed not to develop its own free filing system that could compete. But some Free File Alliance companies intentionally made it more difficult to actually utilize their free services—Intuit, for example, inserted code on its website that would hide the free file page from search engine results.
Geez, you spend a whole paragraph explaining how tax prep companies have essentially banded together to lobby to prevent the IRS from instituting its own portal for electronic filing of simple returns and how they try and hide their own participation in an existing free filing program. But then, nah, the corporate rent seeking and deception of U.S. taxpayers isn't the problem, we just need a simpler tax code!
Only libertarians can think this way.
I've used TurboTax for many years. It takes me 30 minutes or less to complete my return, but at least 5 minutes of that is saying no to all the ways they try and upsell me into paying $40 bucks or more for something that wouldn't give me any benefit over the free file. I'd love to be able to do the same thing directly on an IRS site that wouldn't be looking to sell me something I don't need, redirect me when I finish to some other thing I don't need that is probably just yet another portal to selling my information to marketers.
Oh, OH, the slimy lefty asshole justifying murder as a preventative action:
JasonT20
February.6.2022 at 6:02 pm
“How many officers were there to stop Ashlee Babbitt and the dozens of people behind her from getting into the legislative chamber to do who knows what?...”
Fuck off and die, scumbag.
This is the steaming pile of lefty shit who promotes murder of un-am
BTW, yes you assholic pile of murderous shit, you will get a response every time your asshiolic comment is noted; fuck off and die.
The traitor Ashlee Babbitt?
Got what she deserved. Fuck off snowflake.
It would really be appreciated if Reason hired space on a server competent to handle the ads Reason sells.
It does not and it would not be surprising at all that Welsh has no idea or competence as regards the issue.
The mistake y'all are making is thinking politicians, democrats in particular, represent taxpayers. They don't they represent donors first and then voters.
Dems in particular? Are they the ones who had that TCJA in 2017 that gave a fuck ton of tax breaks to the wealthy? Hmm, I could've sworn it was Republicans who did that and caused the debt to rise by 2 trillion dollars (a full 10% of the value at the time.)
Hmm....
The 87% **DEMOCRAT** Written Cares Act is what grew the debt by $2T; Out-done 5-Times that by the latest Democrat trifecta.
Lefties blatant lies are rarely more obvious than when they try blaming Republicans for the debt/spending while everyday on the news a Democrat is proposing MORE, MORE, MORE spending, theft and debt. Heck the left could practically self-proclaim to be nothing but STEALING and SPENDING.
Why not both?
There should be a dead simple way for Americans to file taxes and a website where it says "you owe/are owed X amount" and you look it over is probably one of the easiest ways. Of course we could simplify the tax code but how else would the rich carve out their loopholes?
Skip the loopholes and go to an Alternative Maximum Tax. If you pay over 20K (or maybe 30K to be your fair share of the 6 trillion dollar budget), your payment is capped, and if you pay the maximum, you don't need to disclose any details of your income or deductions.
The only people needing to file should be those wanting to get out of paying their fair share, due to financial hardship.
The IRS should be calculating your taxes and sending you the bill. The only people who should have to file would be those who find an error in the IRS calculation, or those with undeclared income.
My taxes are probably in the top 5% of complexity, and I've always done them myself. In the rare instances where I made a mistake, the IRS sent me a prompt letter informing me of my mistake and the correct amount to pay, since they already had all the info at their disposal.
I agree. Like you I do my own taxes and do occasionally make errors, which the IRS promptly finds, which tells me they are duplicating my work and it would be easier for them to just bill me.
No worries, mate! There is zero chance that the Congress will simplify the tax code. But we also need not worry about the IRS developing a rival to TurboTax! If the government tries to design one it will take at least ten years, the rollout will make headlines as a disasters, and when they finally fix all the bugs a couple of years later, it will turn out to be technically equivalent to software from 1992. By then no taxpayers will trust it, even if the IRS guarantees that you won't be penalized for any mistakes the program allows.
The US tax code is the #1 target for lobbyist-paid changes in the entire world. So any proposal to simplify it won't stick, if Congress keeps the ability to change it.
So you would have to write the tax code into the Constitution. And even then there will then be attempts by both sides to pack the Supreme Court in order to interpret it in terms that favor one group.
Tilt at smaller windmills.
From the moment I applied for the card, the process was seamless and hassle-free. The experience of using it has been nothing short of exceptional. If you're interested in learning more about the Indigo Card, check out their reviews at https://indigo-card.pissedconsumer.com/review.html . Once I received my card, I was pleasantly surprised by the sleek design and the quality of the card itself. It felt sturdy and durable, which gave me confidence in using it for my everyday purchases. Using the Indigo Card has been a breeze. I appreciate the convenience of being able to manage my account online and the ability to set up automatic payments. The rewards program is also a nice touch, as I am able to earn points for every purchase I make.