[spwa4]

This is easily defeated by fake companies. This only works if companies always work in the best interest of the economy. If someone were to create a company that sells doohickeys for profit AND to make sure one particular family is comfortable (ie. directly providing housing for them, servants, an "expense account", ...) that would defeat such a tax scheme.

Systems are built on human behavior. Humans who spend entire lives looking for ways to exploit system. The above system was tried, and indeed got exploited for luxury in a big way.

To some extent I agree to the income tax idea. But you're far too extreme. Income tax makes jobs possible or impossible. The lower it is, the more occupations are realistic to have. So we should have a rule for governments: if unemployment is above, say, 4%, income tax must go down until unemployment drops below that 4%. If unemployment is below 2%, income tax should rise, and the state should be forced to deal with the lost income. This probably isn't a good rule as stated, but something along these lines would be good.

[ieatcandlewax]

This is something that happens right now and is currently known as "embezzlement". This will generally get you in trouble right now, so I can conceive of a world where it would get you in trouble.

I can imagine that some people would get away with it—but that's also kind of how the world works, some people will always game the system to their benefit like they do in every political system.

I think we're pretty far from devising a perfect system that is ungameable, so I don't see the point in devising scenarios where they are gamed.

A better metric imo for a tax system is seeing how much of the tax burden rests with people who work for wages vs people who own capital and comparing that to their proportion of the total wealth.