The tax code needs an overhaul! Good article

[Rstanley0312 1]

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/11/news/economy/us-tax-reform/index.htm?iid=HP_LN

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[quade 4]

Agreed. People complain about the complexity of the tax code, but the vast majority of it is intentionally convoluted for the benefit of tax breaks. If people actually knew what was going on, their heads would burst into flames. It is intentionally fucked up so that only the people and corporations who lobbied for some specific tax break can take advantage of it and most people won't be any the wiser.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

There are problems with any effort to change the Tax Code. It was last simplified wholesale back in 1986. It was a bipartisan effort and it took time to work things out. It took visionaries looking to the country as a whole versus their campaign donors.

There is no political will to do it. Hell, the President's own debt commission recommended changes to the tax code that were swept under the rug by both parties. It wasn't liked by the democrats because they wanted to lower the marginal tax rates of the wealthy/corporations/etc., and cap the tax receipts as a percentage of GDP. The GOP didn't like it because it also got rid of tax breaks. Turns out the Democrats don't like that either.

There's no vision, is there? Not by either side.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

I wasn't assigning blame. I was recapping the state of affairs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,119]

>People complain about the complexity of the tax code, but the vast majority of it is
>intentionally convoluted for the benefit of tax breaks.

I don't believe that, any more than I believe that the FCC is set up to intentionally stifle innovation, or that the FAA is set up to bust pilot's balls. Governmental agencies start out with clear directions and simple implementations. But every time someone tries to "fix" it they add another caveat, another exception, another loophole, another obscure benefit or restriction. Taken separately they make sense - but taken as a whole they become a complex morass of often-conflicting rules and regulations that often don't even have the effect intended.

I'd say at this point it doesn't need to be "overhauled" because an overhaul would add yet another layer of complexity.

===============
BEFORE PROCEEDING - Please full out form 1087/22b to see if you qualify for the simplified Overhaul Tax Procedures. If so enter 0 in this line and proceed to line 17 of the form 1280, where you will enter the SIMPLIFIED TAX BREAKPOINT to determine your eligibility for the simplified tax percentage rebate.
===============

And the person who wrote that would really mean well; they'd really be trying to simplify things.

At this point I think you'd have to start from scratch.

[quade 4]

Quote

At this point I think you'd have to start from scratch.

I think we can agree on that point, although I don't know why I have to do it when we have Congress. Isn't it supposed to be their job?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I'd say at this point it doesn't need to be "overhauled" because an overhaul would add yet another layer of complexity.
...

At this point I think you'd have to start from scratch.

Starting from scratch is one (perhaps the most common) form of an overhaul.

as the article asserts (but should be confirmed - is it total take or just income taxes) the revenues at a low as a percentage of GDP. So pick a value deemed more normal and construct a tax structure on today's numbers to achieve it. In a boom we would be taking in more, but that could actually pay off debt then.

All deductions would be off the table initially, then Congress can fight for their favorites so long as they hit the target.

It does call for leadership, suddenly we haven't seen a lot of on a bipartisan basis since Clinton took office.

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

I'd say at this point it doesn't need to be "overhauled" because an overhaul would add yet another layer of complexity.
...

At this point I think you'd have to start from scratch.

Starting from scratch is one (perhaps the most common) form of an overhaul.

as the article asserts (but should be confirmed - is it total take or just income taxes) the revenues at a low as a percentage of GDP. So pick a value deemed more normal and construct a tax structure on today's numbers to achieve it. In a boom we would be taking in more, but that could actually pay off debt then.

All deductions would be off the table initially, then Congress can fight for their favorites so long as they hit the target.

It does call for leadership, suddenly we haven't seen a lot of on a bipartisan basis since Clinton took office.

At the very least the AMT tax should be nixed! It is hitting people that make 60k now and is out of control. I say start from scratch.

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Taken separately they make sense - but taken as a whole they become a complex morass of often-conflicting rules and regulations that often don't even have the effect intended.

Sounds like a description of chaos theory.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[davjohns 1]

David's Tax Return form:

It is a post card with the standard address, return address and postage on one side. Maybe we can add a bar code that has the tax ID numbers of those covered on this form. A machine can scan the code, but you can't get the tax ID number from looking at it.

On the other side:

1. How much did you gain this year?
2. Multiply line 1 by 10%. This is your tax obligation.
3. How much did you pay in taxes this year?
4. Subtract line 3 from line 2. If you somehow overpaid this year, please provide a separate explanation of how you messed up 10%. Otherwise, enter the amount you owe on this line.

5. Attach a check or go online to pay your obligation at IRS.gov.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I wasn't assigning blame. I was recapping the state of affairs.

Nor was I. I was recapping the state of affairs.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

David's Tax Return form:

It is a post card with the standard address, return address and postage on one side. Maybe we can add a bar code that has the tax ID numbers of those covered on this form. A machine can scan the code, but you can't get the tax ID number from looking at it.

On the other side:

1. How much did you gain this year?
2. Multiply line 1 by 10%. This is your tax obligation.
3. How much did you pay in taxes this year?
4. Subtract line 3 from line 2. If you somehow overpaid this year, please provide a separate explanation of how you messed up 10%. Otherwise, enter the amount you owe on this line.

5. Attach a check or go online to pay your obligation at IRS.gov.

Add:

6. Enter your BMI

7. Subtract 29 from line 6. If less than zero, enter zero

8. Multiply line 7 by $1,000

9. Make out a supplemental check to cover the additional burden you place on society.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[quade 4]

Poor are more likely to eat cheap food.
Cheap food is made to taste acceptable by adding cheap sweeteners such as high fructose corn syrup.

Your plan would unfairly burden the poor while encouraging corporations to make the American populace fatter.

On the other hand, not much different than the current state of affairs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Add:

6. Enter your BMI

7. Subtract 29 from line 6. If less than zero, enter zero

8. Multiply line 7 by $1,000

9. Make out a supplemental check to cover the additional burden you place on society.

and the population of LA collectively files for bankruptcy. All surrounding states convert from takers to contributors to the federal budget. Deficit is eliminated.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Add:

6. Enter your BMI

7. Subtract 29 from line 6. If less than zero, enter zero

8. Multiply line 7 by $1,000

9. Make out a supplemental check to cover the additional burden you place on society.

I'm still so interested in this whole "cost to society" angle. If we weren't socialist there would be no "cost to society."

The problem you are pointing to isn't health. The problem is socialism.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

There is a cost to society in every transaction, whether it's recognized, funded and paid for . . . that's something else.

No man is an island.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 3,119]

>If we weren't socialist there would be no "cost to society."

Hmm. Do wars result in a cost to society? If yes, does that mean that wars are socialist?

Does air pollution that sickens and/or kills people result in a cost to society? How about water pollution that results in people not being able to drink the water in their area? If yes, does that mean that pollution is socialist?

Do veteran's programs incur a cost to society? If yes, does that mean that veteran's benefits are socialist?