[ArnoVW]

You're not wrong in saying that tax codes in general are complex. The problem is, they're complex for a reason.

Tax codes are a tool of policy makers. They allow wealth and income distribution. They allow compensation. And they allow policy makers to promote or penalize specific behaviors or activities.

Look at the legal system as a code base (in French, 'law' translates to 'code'). And imagine having 538 product owners, each asking for 'just one feature' that is both 'critical and urgent'. Is it any wonder that we are in this situation?

Perhaps we should implement more sunset provisions? I don't know. But 'we need a simpler system' is sort of like 'we have too many LoC'. It's true, but not easily actionable.

[furyg3]

Yes, but we all know that business rules and logic can be very complex, but you can still simplify the interface for the vast majority of users.

The IRS collects tax information from most businesses with employees, banks and investment firms, so it's is comically easy to pre-load that information in a tax return. Ask a few simple questions (did you buy a house, did you start a business, do you have a new dependent). Pre-fill what you can. Generate a report which you can directly file or share with your tax expert. Many developed countries do this.

While this (correctly) tanks an entire industry of tax preparation software, it actually makes it easier for politicians to do their thing. Right now a tax break for X is buried under form 92921X2 which you learn about after reading the instructions for line 48 on schedule 8812 which you are filling in after being told to in the supplementary instructions for line 21 on your 1099. If you elected to use the alternative streamlined maximum option, of course, if you chose for the default minimum compensation model, well, those are different forms.

With a properly made simple official tax filing process, you just see you got an extra $400 back this year because of the tax break for X.

[Dracophoenix]

>Tax codes are a tool of policy makers.

Therein the problem lies.

>They allow wealth and income distribution. They allow compensation. And they allow policy makers to promote or penalize specific behaviors or activities.

Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not a good reason to tax. Taxation should be decided by the whims of a crab bucket.

>Look at the legal system as a code base (in French, 'law' translates to 'code'). And imagine having 538 product owners, each asking for 'just one feature' that is both 'critical and urgent'. Is it any wonder that we are in this situation?

We're in this situation because most of congressmen believe they have the right to impose their morals on and the expense of thst individual men and women by way of legislative fiat.

>Perhaps we should implement more sunset provisions? I don't know. But 'we need a simpler system' is sort of like 'we have too many LoC'. It's true, but not easily actionable.

It is actionable. Politicians, however, are usually ignorant of tax law until there comes a point where the "wrong" people "win" too much. That is the issue in what should mostly be an administrative affair, if it should at all occur. The people who complicate the tax do not code lack the wherewithal to simplify it. Their feigned weakness and indifference is a choice.