Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax Filing Process

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by fnordsensei on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @07:38PM (#13991634)

Right! We can't make the government less awful, because happy people might not show us the support we need for our cause to make the government less awful.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by ksdale on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @08:10PM (#13991817)

While I completely agree that the incentives seem absurd on their face, a counterpoint I have is that while I worked in a CPA office for several years, I came to realize that a lot of people really have no idea how much they pay in taxes. Many people seem genuinely grateful to have received a refund, not realizing that it was money previously removed from their paychecks.

I have no idea what the correct policy would be, but I think a lot of people would feel very differently if they had to write a check for their taxes every time they received a paycheck instead of not thinking about it for 12 months and then getting a refund (which makes them feel like the government is doing them a favor). I'm not sure we can just dismiss out of hand the idea that the way people interact with their government affects their opinions on policy.

I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say we should make filing taxes painful, I'd personally just as soon never have to file a tax return, even if that meant my taxes weren't quite as optimized, but I know a lot about my tax situation. I guess it feels somehow more... honest (I'm not sure if that's the right word) if people viscerally feel how much they're paying in taxes, just like they feel how much they spend on utilities or groceries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by baudehlo on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @09:17PM (#13992126)

Most people in the U.K. (the only other place I have experience with) never file a tax return. It's just assumed that the government is doing the right thing. Taxes are taken at source for all things, and if you have things outside of the norm you can tell your employer about it and they'll take care of it.

Filing taxes was pretty alien to me. I'm used to it now, but it seems there are simpler ways.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by dboreham on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @11:21PM (#13992602)

I'm familiar with the UK system too. It is possible to get closer to it in the US than most people realize. For example you can calculate the correct tax to withhold and instruct your employer's payroll people to do so. Most people seem to not know this or nor care and as a result end up over withholding and the resulting "refund". It is perfectly possible to end up with roughly correct tax withheld although you do of course still need to complete the 1040 form. But software can do that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by bluejekyll on Thursday March 30, 2017 @01:26AM (#13993135)

You need to be careful with this though, if you underpay throughout the year by too much, you will end up both owing and potentially have a tax penalty.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by dboreham on Thursday March 30, 2017 @02:59PM (#13997969)

Of course. To be assessed a penalty you have to screw up pretty badly though, at least on the first try.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by ryanwaggoner on Thursday March 30, 2017 @06:27AM (#13994209)

It's just assumed that the government is doing the right thing.

This strikes me as a recipe for disaster in the long run. For any group of people who have tremendous power, not just the government.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by fjdlwlv on Thursday March 30, 2017 @12:38AM (#13992943)

In the US that's called "nanny state". The US has a stronger tradition of citizens who think and act independently, even when they are working cooperatively.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by vollmond on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @10:38PM (#13992440)

I think that's what has happened with health coverage and with college over the last several decades. Mass ignorance about what people are actually paying, since the costs are removed from our immediate view, via automatic deductions, 3-months-later billing, and student loans.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by quadrangle on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @11:09PM (#13992561)

The goal of those types of politicians isn't to make the government less awful. Their goal is to make "the government" out to be the enemy so that the citizens don't start thinking that they can use government to actually offset the power that corporations have (through plain capital and through regulatory capture).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by kakapupu on Thursday March 30, 2017 @01:59AM (#13993264)

> they can use government to actually offset the power that corporations have (through plain capital and through regulatory capture)

You're saying people can "use" the government to compensate for the government itself preventing competition with their cronies.

Isn't that a bit of a fool's errand, even disregarding the fact that in reality we don't use the government - the government very much uses us.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by lagadu on Thursday March 30, 2017 @08:34AM (#13994792)

>the government very much uses us.

No, we put the government and the rules it has to follow in place to ensure that it has our best interests and nothing else in mind. They are a tool we use to make sure the state is run the way we want it to be.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by quadrangle on Thursday March 30, 2017 @11:53AM (#13996440)

Oh come on, I'm the one defending the idea that government can be positive and serve the people. But we can't honestly suggest that this is what it IS already like it's the plain truth. It's just something it sometimes sorta is (lots of examples that live up to the ideal, lots that don't). It's a premise that is possible. Governments always have been historically run by powerful interests and not actually lived up to democratic ideals.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by angry_octet on Wednesday March 29, 2017 @07:52PM (#13991708)

it is not about the government being objectively awful, it is about the government regulating. A great deal of the tax code is about giving certain groups tax breaks while preventing other people from using those to create loopholes to avoid taxes. The conservative tax lobbyists actually want to reduce the effectiveness of taxation not its complexity.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stanford Professor Loses Political Battle To Simplify Tax... by kakapupu on Thursday March 30, 2017 @02:03AM (#13993278)

> it is not about the government being objectively awful, it is about the government regulating.

Well, the government is no more awful than any other Mafia.

Think about it. If you don't pay protection money / taxes, you get kneecaps busted / imprisoned.

Neither is something you want to happen, so you pay up. Government is essentially just a vehicle for exploiting people on a massive scale.

Your average mafia couldn't possibly pull off extorting 300 million people, but a government can and does, because people believe it's necessary "for the common good".

[ Parent | on HN ]