News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
The IRS doesn't have the funds to fight the lawyers of billionaires who avoid taxes. That's by design.
It's 100% by design. Republicans love to try and cut funding to the IRS as well as block any increases to their budget:
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/10/house-republicans-have-voted-to-cut-irs-funding-.html
And then they finally got their way this year:
https://thehill.com/business/4395737-republicans-win-faster-irs-cuts-in-funding-deal/
But this isn't anything new, Congress has been suppressing the IRS's funding for years and years: https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/the-need-to-rebuild-the-depleted-irs
The simplest solution to avoid all this bullshit is to abandon our ridiculous gargantuan tax code system and implement a flat tax rate system. The same percentage for everyone with no loopholes or exemptions except for the most extenuous of circumstances.
A flat tax is a terrible idea. 10% of the salary of someone who makes $50,000 a year is a lot bigger hardship than 10% of the salary of someone who makes $500,000 a year.
Look, I'm not a damn policy expert, all I know is our current tax code is completely fucked and benefits the wealthy and screws the middle class as is. Make it a 50% tax on anything above $500k, I don't know. Just make it less garbage than it is now, where I'm getting screwed and have to deal with filing taxes every year. I had friends in Norway that didn't have to deal with tax returns because it was already all accurate and taken out of their pay. What a crazy concept.
That's, uh, not a flat tax, then. You figured out the better approach immediately. And I agree, simplify the tax code while keeping it progressive.
I agree with most of that, but a flat tax would benefit the most wealthy the most.
A simple uncheatable tax doesn't need to be flat.
Years ago I came up with an algorithmic progressive tax that tracks the income distribution curve.
Using the 2011 numbers I could get 1% increments for. With a top tax rate of 40%, the bottom ~85% of people had a tax rate below 5%, and the budget that year would still balance.
And being a fixed algorythm, it's completely closed to manipulation. Unless you lie about your income, but that's already a felony.
But what if you creatively identify your income? And then get a bonus of a bunch of stocks, which you then leverage with a bank loan?..... oh right, that's how a lot of them do it already.
That would be the lying part.
Eventually those shares would be sold, or inherited. That income would be taxed at whatever the algorithm dictates.
So, we're back to playing the "algorithm" with what defines income, and what defines inherence, sale, etc of shares.
Sounds like essentially what we've got, just with the handwaving of "algorithm" instead.
It eliminates the picking and choosing of tax brackets. What you're talking about is making definitions. There is no way to mathematically fix that.