I sort of agree with the pain guys. I'm currently self employed (US) and have to separately pay estimated taxes quarterly. Since I've been doing this, I'm a lot more sensitive to politicians who want to raise my taxes.

Similarly, there is a group in the US whose main goal is to change the law so that employers can't pay your taxes on your behalf. Instead, you would get your full salary, and then have to write a check to pay your taxes. The group believes this would raise tax awareness.

I'm just imagining applying this principle more broadly. Perhaps before every meal I could be forced to calculate the number of calories in each item, total them up and submit them. Maybe before every car journey I could fill out an estimate of the wear and tear on the tyres, gearbox and suspension, and record that in a big log book of car events.

Doesn't seem like a particularly useful way to approach life, to me.

The technique is actually used a lot in diets and budgeting. Manually writing down everything you pay for helps you to notice that taxi you take every day or how often you "splurge" for coffee. Same with calories and that afternoon or midnight snack.

But forcing it just wastes everyones time, adds red tape, and additional bureaucracy they purport to rail against.

> Perhaps before every meal I could be forced to calculate the number of calories in each item, total them up and submit them.

That's called Weight Watchers. The general principle was pretty effective for me. Most people don't keep a log of wear and tear on their car, but we definitely operate airplanes that way. That also seems pretty productive to me.

But yeah, it's not the only way to operate. I don't really like the idea of putting more responsibility on people in order to "raise awareness". I take that to really mean someone would like everyone to be more upset about taxes, and would like to make them less convenient to increase upsetness.

I don't understand why the pain of filing is connected to the pain of spending money.

If a politician raises taxes, and all it does is change the value of a annual withdrawal on your account, I think that pain would be the same, regardless of difficulty of filing.

The pain is estimating and filing 4 times a year.

Here in the US there are actually individuals who view their IRS tax refund check that they get back each year from filing their taxes as "getting free money from the government".

They simply do not understand the fact that, no, that check is not "free government money" but is instead money that the government took, held onto for free all year, interest free, and then let you have back after you filed the proper forms.

So the suggestions to have people cut checks to the government (quarterly, monthly, annually) is generally made from trying to overcome that viewpoint that too many folks view their tax return as some form of "gift" from the government, and instead get them to recognize just how much tax money is being consumed.

I am not denying your experience, but I am from the US and this is not my experience at all. It's called a "refund".

Which individuals? How do you know these people?

Also I don't agree with your perspective on tax withholding. If you don't want your employer to withhold taxes, I think they have to stop withholding taxes. It's a convenient default, in my opinion.

Conversely, on my property tax they itemize where the money goes. Presumably showing what I'm getting for my tax money. Or maybe just making me angry how much local schools cost if I don't have kids? (that was the vibe I got when living in FL)

I appreciate transparency like that, but I hate other examples that add additional steps or paperwork to the process.

That sentiment makes sense to me. Investing in real schooling makes a lot more sense, though.

I understand where their coming from, but adding useless paperwork just inhibits business growth. I'm more sympathetic to writing a check, like you say, but people are horrible with budgeting--which is why you pre-pay quarterly instead of just paying a lump sum at the end of the year.

I've often heard (and like) the suggestion that this annual payment be due the week before Election Day.

That'd be interesting!

I suggest we stop taking taxes out of paychecks and have people pay their full taxes once a year. It would help them see the total amount of taxes they pay. It would have a positive effect on government policy.

It used to be that way in France until last year. The income taxes are now substracted directly on your paycheck. I personnaly prefer having a small amout taken each month than an enormous sum as a one-time payment.

Can we do the same with health insurance premiums? The average cost of an employer plan is up to $20,000+/year in premiums alone but most people are oblivious to the true cost.

Your idea is great for people who make good money and are able to set aside money into a savings account.

But it doesn't work for low-income people that are already living paycheck-to-paycheck.

You can set your withholding to nothing and end up with a fat bill every year. Financially, this makes sense. You could be making interest on the money you owe in taxes. However, not everyone is really able to be that disciplined or just financially need every dollar coming in. I think having both options, withholding and no withholding, is the best way.

FYI, if you do this you will incur penalties. The United States requires payment quarterly. You cannot pay it all at the end of the year unless you want to pay penalties.

This is bad advice for many people. Depending on your income you might be subject to penalties if you don't withhold or pay estimated taxes: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

You can already see this on your pay stub (if you look at it, I know I don't bother with mine)

In principle I like your suggestion but in actuality I think many Americans will not like their "yearly tax bill." Just think about people who are already living paycheck to paycheck; not saving much, or just overall spending every penny that comes into their bank account. They would be in trouble come April if they had to pay it at that point.

Perhaps they could do a monthly installment payment for last year's taxes... And the taxpayer would auto pay once or twice a month when they get paid... But then, we're back to where we started.

Tldr in an ideal world where every citizen is disciplined about not spending every penny they get, this suggestion would be great.

...in an ideal world, they wouldn't have to spend every penny, either.

I would argue in an ideal world money wouldn't exist but I think people have different ideals in that sense :)

I know some people _have_ to spend every penny because they need to to survive, but there are also plenty of people who spend every penny because they just have no discipline and buy anything they want without regard to whether or not they could afford it. Ideally the people in the former category would get some sort of welfare. Not sure what, if anything, to do with the people in the latter.

You live paycheck to paycheck and still ineligible for income tax exemptions? Seems like a pretty USA-specific issue.

This. It is a special combination of sadistic and stupid, an American classic.

I'm skeptical. I think more likely its an intentional diversion to create and protect sophisticated loopholes for high income earners and companies. Its a reasonable strategy that obviously works and clearly explains their otherwise contradictory position.

Porqúe no los dos? One thing I've learned about American politics is that if there's a sadistic answer that screws the poor and a greedy answer that advantages the rich, often _both_ are correct.

While sadism and stupidity may be two of the reasons for the US tax code, there are surely others. I also suggest extending special privileges to the rich without making that obvious to the poor, forging a weapon to use against political enemies, creating a huge number of bureaucratic jobs, benefiting a legislator's constituent state at the expense of the others, obfuscating the sources of government revenues, and as a means to launder dirty money into clean. There are almost certainly others.