> A complicated tax system is perfectly fine if its control logic is algorithmic and its parameters are easily found by the taxpayer.
Expecting a normal human being to navigate anything complex in unreasonable. Complex is a relative term. By definition, if something is complex, it is difficult for an average person to navigate.
I know where you're going with this, if something is consistently coherent we can use computers to manage the task and to some extent, things like Turbo Tax help.
But ... there's no reason we can't have a simple tax system. None at all.
> But ... there's no reason we can't have a simple tax system. None at all.
Most quirks and exceptions in our current system have their own constituencies who are willing to send lobbyists to defend the status quo. Those constituencies represent the thousands of reasons why we can't have a simple system. There is no comparably powerful constituency for making taxes simpler. Most people just don't care that much.
And thus, death by a thousand cuts. If an entity is getting 20k in tax breaks or "handouts" it's in their best interest to defend that. To the taxpayer however, the $1.78 you're paying (or whatever the minuscule number is) to cover that annually is nothing to you, and certainly not worth your time to fight against.
Expecting a normal human being to navigate anything complex in unreasonable. Complex is a relative term. By definition, if something is complex, it is difficult for an average person to navigate.
I know where you're going with this, if something is consistently coherent we can use computers to manage the task and to some extent, things like Turbo Tax help.
But ... there's no reason we can't have a simple tax system. None at all.