Title 26 is rather complicated. It is very long. It’s extremely diverse and, most importantly, it is moving closer to reform. We had a discussion together on taxes here on IVN and by hearing what everyone had to say, I believe I have a general idea of what we should look for when it comes to reforming the tax code: comprehension, confidence and creativity.
Clarity is King
The primary priority when it comes to re-writing the tax code is clarity. These tax laws affect us on a daily basis no matter who we are. Joe Schmoe working at Frosty King is affected by sales tax just as Mr. Money is. Yes, they may purchase different items and use their wealth accumulations for different needs, but they still have to pay taxes at the end of the day.
Other examples of common confrontations and taxation are the income tax and sin taxes — income affecting the working class, sin taxes hitting the consumer and, on occasion, producers. All of these and more cause some sort of cost for many different people. This translates to a need of comprehensibility inside and out of reformative actions.
Confidence, A Catalyst
I, for one, will not throw any support to a plan I’m not one hundred and fifty-nine percent confident in. It is modernly monotonous for individuals to not feel that much trust in their tax system due to the many past [and literally current] complaints, counter-points and misrepresentation.
These rebuttals and distastes for the system only further express the importance of a strong, reliable code. One so stupendous and so widely supported that it may just be the catalyst for all future plans approaching the floors and desks of D.C.
A Creative Remedy
Creativity: the new remedy to bad policy.
Why creativity? Because the fact stands that old ideas are no longer working for the people. We need something fresh, something novel to grasp in the coming years; acts that hold real weight on their own and are comprehensible, corroded with confidence and creative to the corner pages.
Whether what makes it different is a new form of taxation or an interesting and efficient way to use a tax, we need to hear it. It is distinctive that this creativity bubbles up past the partisanship-driven arguments and shines through the chaotic complexities that are offered nowadays.
Upon these three characteristics, it should be noted that efficiency, simplicity and fairness were very much mentioned as pillars of reform by other concerned individuals. All of these are true as well and should be inside any Title 26 proposal aimed at being effective for the people. On a closing note, remember that it is better to despise an idea in detail than to love it in jest.