
Everyone’s Income Taxes Should Be Public - pseudolus
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/13/opinion/sunday/taxes-public.html
======
throwawaygogo
If you make a lot, it is important to keep it private.

1\. People kidnap your child, knowing you can pay ransom.

2\. People jump in front of your car, knowing you can pay when sued.

3\. People break into your house, knowing you have things worth stealing.

4\. People hack into your private photos, knowing you can pay blackmail.

Anonymity is the most important defense against the evils of man. They don't
hurt you now, because they don't _know_ to hurt you.

The government provides no bodyguards. The police investigates only after the
crime. Anonymity is the most important defense. Don't take it away.

~~~
ShorsHammer
I can tell all these things just by casually visiting a mall car park. I get
to vote on the CEO's wages for the stocks I hold. Every public company
executive in the country is a google search away.

Hell, I could probably locate a large list of rich people to go
kidnap/rob/extort within 15 km of you just from online sources from the other
side of the planet.

These problems you posit already exist for people with wealth and they
(hopefully) take appropriate steps to protect themselves.

~~~
tuesday20
This is true only for those that flash their wealth. I might be worth
millions, but if I am driving a 10 year old Toyota, you wouldn’t know.
Obviously this doesn’t apply to high profile jobs like the CEOs etc

~~~
rubyfan
Many people that flash their wealth aren’t in fact wealthy.

------
bko
NYT: Government should protect the privacy of its citizens

Also NYT: Everyone's income taxes should be public

What a bizarre half-baked (obviously political) response to something in the
news. It's really sad that the bar for what gets published in a major
newspaper is so low.

~~~
maxerickson
They intentionally seek to publish a range of opinions in the opinion section.

That some of them are contradictory is consistent with that goal.

~~~
bko
Not all opinions are equal. Much like a newspaper doesn't (and shouldn't) give
an equal platform to an anti-vaccine advocate as they do a scientist, I think
these kinds of opinions are so vile that they do not deserve publication, at
least not in NYT. The bar should be higher.

It's essentially a piece promoting a policy that would be probably the single
largest attack on the right to privacy in the history of the US. Why? Because
a president the author doesn't like refused to release his tax returns. Very
measured response. I'm sure there would be no unintended consequences.

~~~
distances
> I think these kinds of opinions are so vile that they do not deserve
> publication, at least not in NYT.

This is ridiculous. I'm from a country with public tax records, and
wholeheartedly support it. It definitely needs to be part of discussion when
deciding how to tackle tax avoidance, corruption, and wealth disparity.

I've never checked my friends' or colleagues' taxes, even if I could. It's
quite important that the tax records of the notable figures are public though.

~~~
akimball
And people get killed by extortionists, or live in cages, as a result of
destroying privacy rights. You can't have freedom without privacy

------
yostrovs
If the true goal of this article would be something other than getting a hold
of one specific individual's tax returns, it would be taken slightly more
seriously.

The problem with the NYT is that every sentence within it now has to be
processed with this perspective in mind.

~~~
threeseed
So because of a single opinion writer the entire corpus of the New York Times
should now be seen as a ruse for getting Trump's tax return.

Wow. I really will never understand how some people can make such bizarre
leaps of logic like this.

~~~
commandlinefan
It seems awfully coincidental that this is the first time in the paper’s going
on to 200-year history this has ever been suggested.

~~~
pseudalopex
One of the related articles[1] hedges more but seems designed to persuade the
reader. It was published in 2010.

[1]
[https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/business/yourtaxes/14disc...](https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/business/yourtaxes/14disclose.html)

------
Spooky23
It’s an interesting idea as it would make compensation transparent and
eliminate a lot of unfairness.

In public sector, your salary is posted on a website. Everyone knows what you
make, and thing like women and minorities getting paid less don’t happen.
Outliers are known.

~~~
jmartinpetersen
For real life experience with this, see reports about Norway, Finland and
Sweden. For instance [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-panama-tax-nordics-
idUSKC...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-panama-tax-nordics-
idUSKCN0X91QE) (random Google hit)

~~~
metafunctor
In Finland, tax records are public, but only top lists are published. To see
records not on the top lists, you have to visit a tax office and view records
on their terminal—no copies can be made, but you can take notes.

------
roenxi
One perspective to promote - everyone should have the _option_ of making their
tax records and ranking as a taxpayer made public officially (ie, how many
people paid more actual dollars in tax in a given tax year).

Most of the tax take is from a very small percentage of people. They deserve
more persistent and public recognition of the disproportionate contribution
they make.

There are great arguments for keeping tax records private, but it would be a
nice respectful idea to have a bit more public recognition and thanks directed
towards major taxpayers.

~~~
mikeash
In the US, the top 10% pay about half of all taxes, and also have about half
of all income. How is that disproportionate and why should we be thankful for
people just for pulling their own weight?

~~~
twoodfin
[https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-
tax-...](https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-
data-2018-update/)

Top 10% share of total AGI: 46.56%

Top 10% share of total income taxes paid: 69.47%

I don’t think nearly 70% is “about half”.

~~~
mikeash
I don’t think the federal income tax is the only tax that exists.

Here is a source that looks at all taxes: [https://itep.org/wp-
content/uploads/taxday2017.pdf](https://itep.org/wp-
content/uploads/taxday2017.pdf)

------
amai
Like in Sweden?

"The country grants citizens the ability to request anyone else's tax returns
with just one phone call. The only catch: The person whose returns you request
will know it was you."

[https://www.businessinsider.de/sweden-salaries-freely-
availa...](https://www.businessinsider.de/sweden-salaries-freely-
available-2017-4)

------
lovetocode
This is dumb. This would give potential employers too much leverage in salary
negotiations.

~~~
fxj
Why does it work in Norway? It is among the list of the highest GDP per capita
in the world. Norway rank 6, US rank 10. (IMF)

~~~
bnegreve
Maybe it's this, but there is also a fair amount of oil in Norway.

From wikipedia [1]:

 _The petroleum industry accounts for around a quarter of the country 's gross
domestic product (GDP).On a per-capita basis, Norway is the world's largest
producer of oil and natural gas outside of the Middle East._

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway)

~~~
fxj
Your argument does not apply that this would give potential employers too much
leverage in salary negotiations or can you explain?

~~~
bnegreve
Ah, I though you were suggesting that the GDP per capita in Norway was high
_because_ of tax transparency.

Now I realize that you were probably just saying that Norway and US are
comparable in terms of GDP per capita. Am I correct?

------
logicchains
I wonder what effect this would have on wages. It might create upward
pressure, in that people could see when they were paid less for a similar
position as a colleague and seek an increase, but it might also create
downwards pressure as management were more reluctant to give anybody a raise
given that it might cause other employees to demand one too. Seems like it
would be good for small startups, as most employees would have different
titles and hence no reason to expect similar compensation.

~~~
ebg13
> _but it might also create downwards pressure as management were more
> reluctant to give anybody a raise given that it might cause other employees
> to demand one too_

Maybe. Unless, of course, management's income is absurdly high compared to
that of their hires and then the hires decide to unionize in retaliation
leading to again upward pressure. And if management's income isn't absurdly
higher, then there's no real problem with the scenario because now everyone's
being compensated fairly.

------
aeturnum
I think this would be good. The upside is that society becomes more
transparent - you could see how your peers or neighbors are "keeping up with
the joneses." You could know exactly how much the people at firms you
interview with make. Situations where there is even transparency tend to be
more fair.

The downside, of course, is that this makes it even more difficult to
participate in the informal (unreported) economy. To some people that would be
an advantage, but I think it's a downside. Surveillance pushes people towards
appearing normal and normal, in this case, would be keeping all your money on
the books. However, this seems like the lesser of two evils compared to the
rampant inequality we face.

~~~
fibers
...not if you don't report misc income at all!

~~~
aeturnum
Oh sure, you can always not report - but it also means that, if you have
noticeably nicer things than your peers or neighbors but have no official
source of income, you stick out.

------
lettergram
I’m sorry, but I disagree that Income Taxes should be a thing already. The
idea that how much I make should be public sounds ludicrous.

What possible value will that add to me? What possible value will knowing how
much your neighbor make help you?

The only thing I see it helps with is attempting to bring down people above
yourself. Which IMO is not the point of a society. It should provide safety,
to everyone, and be as unobtrusive as possible, in doing so.

You can already FOIA request and get all the anonymized data you want on this.
So I don’t understand.

~~~
RockIslandLine
As a state employee, my salary is published for all to see.

[https://illinoiscomptroller.gov/financial-data/state-
expendi...](https://illinoiscomptroller.gov/financial-data/state-
expenditures/employee-salary-database/)

~~~
lobotryas
Yes, because tour state salary is unambiguous: everyone same grade as you gets
the same amount. I don’t want a coworker to be upset with me because they
accepted a low-ball offer while I negotiated 5k on top of base.

Also does that info include your income from other sources like dividends or a
hobby? If not, then it’s nowhere bear comparable to what’s being proposed.

------
zettadam
I imagine there'd be web apps with "realtime" maps of your neighborhoods...
imagine the consequences.

~~~
ecocentrik
Zillow already exists. This information might incentivize individuals making
much higher than the average reported income in an area to relocate or
increase their security in the short term but burglaries usually go down with
income inequality.

------
paulpauper
_Disclosure of tax payments would make it easier to hold politicians
accountable. It also would help to reduce fraud and economic inequality._

I can see a case being made for full-disclosure for politicians, but the case
for private individuals is harder. If the goal is to hold politicians
accountable, why should i other who who are not politicians disclose?

~~~
tonyedgecombe
Why should you be any different from politicians? Did you think it’s only
politicians who fiddle their taxes?

~~~
paulpauper
they are public servants who have a lot more influence than average
individuals.

 _fiddle their taxes_

Isn't that the job of the IRS to determine

------
siruncledrew
First, what is the goal of making all income taxes public? If the goal is
really about having the ability to scrutinize _selective_ individuals with
money or power, then an across the board demand like this may be over-solving
the problem. If the goal is about something else, then there should be more
investigation and evidence to support the reasoning.

Why is it important that _everyone’s_ income taxes are public?

For the average American, what benefit or detriment does having their income
taxes publicly accessible serve?

There’s many ways it could make life worse for those that are not: rich,
politicians, or executives. It’s also a great way for the “ultra rich” to pit
the “lower classes” against each other. If people knew their friends’,
coworkers’, and family’s income taxes, then it’s an invitation for drama,
jealousy, and fighting. Everyone would be comparing themselves against
everyone else - like what happens on social media, except with more important
monetary figures instead of imaginary internet points. In my opinion, that
would further divide people rather than unify them.

If someone is a politician, a civil servant representative of the people, then
their income taxes should be public as a gesture of government transparency.
If people voted someone into office, they have a right to know about who is
going to be representing them (at least in my opinion). Many government
workers’ salaries are already public information, but it’s easier to be
getting much more money from non-salary places the higher up (or the more high
profile) someone in the government is. That’s what the real value of seeing
their income tax is.

The same income tax transparency should, potentially, also be the case for
anyone paid using the public’s tax dollars to deter corruption, kickbacks, and
behavior not fitting the public interest.

For the non-wealthy or non-government individuals, what is gained by knowing
the income taxes of some random person reporting $50k/yr? Even if someone
reported $100+k/yr income, depending on where they live and what their
expenses are it doesn’t guarantee they have a lot of cash on hand or valuable
convertible assets. If anything, it gives scammers and thieves more ability to
assess people’s refunds and try to steal them (as currently happens). In that
sense, there isn’t much public benefit being gained for most individuals.

------
gdhbcc
The government should keep no secrets beyond those absolutely necessary to
ensure national security. Knowing how much each person pays in taxes is not a
national security concern, so it stands to reason it should be public.

~~~
toasterlovin
Interesting. Do you think the government should disclose the names of rape
victims?

~~~
rightbyte
Yes? Unless the victim is living under a new identity or similair, the
victim's name should be in the court records which should be available to the
public.

------
TheCondor
I don’t know that I want all my stuff public, it potentially changes
relationships with coworkers, neighbors and friends. On the other hand, if
things were kind of anonymized you could look at the tax strategies others
use. I don’t know about you all, but we save, we give to our church and other
charities, we invest, we are both frugal and comfortable and then we do our
taxes and its demoralizing. I can’t help but think there is some big trick we
and our accountant don’t know or are too honest to use or something.

------
donatj
The way I see it this would give employees too little room in pay difference.
_On paper_ there is often very little difference between a good employee and a
toxic employee. Some of the worst people are technically the most productive
but hurt others productivity in ways that are hard to document and aren't
directly punishable. Their managers certainly feel it, and know they are not
worth as much to the company as the employee who produces less but is
generally a positive to the office environment.

~~~
ikeyany
You fire the toxic employee and promote/give the other employee a bonus. What
is the issue here?

------
ankit84
In India, all politicians have to make their income sources, cash in hand,
investments, Income Tax ID, un-movable assets, etc in a public affidavit to
Election Commission of India.

------
RickJWagner
If a certain US politician were hiding university grades (instead of income
tax returns), then this article would be calling for the public disclosure of
university grades.

If you stop to think-- really think-- about all the ideas that are springing
out of the ground in opposition to one political candidate, you would see how
crazy things have become. The electoral college, the number of seats on
SCOTUS, etc. etc. It's wild.

Luckily, sanity will prevail.

------
akimball
I do not want extortionists and theives targeting me any more than they do

------
geddy
In the age of “we need to get our privacy back” someone is suggesting that an
extremely personal thing that includes money is made public? Are you kidding
me?

------
DickingAround
Did basic ethics just get lost along the way somewhere? Income is an
interaction between me and another person. I'd bad enough the government wants
a share. They do not have a right to publicize the details of every
interaction/contract I make. I get you want Trump to give up his details, then
make a law that the pres has to. Leave the rest of us, who are just trying to
live our live and progress the world, out of it.

------
dec0dedab0de
No thank you, I think it's bad enough that the government knows where I work
and how much I make.

------
maccio92
Absolutely not.

------
gopher2
No, they shouldn't.

------
sys_64738
What I pay in taxes in nobody's business except mine, my employer and Uncle
Sam.

~~~
achenatx
Not your employers business. Your employer only knows how much they paid you
and how much they withheld for you.

------
rubyfan
If you want to ensure everyone pays what they owe then tax law should be sound
(probably more simple than tax calculations are currently) and without
loopholes.

The problem with the hypothesis here is that it suggests that public opinion
be the arbiter of what is fair for a very individual level. In our age of
social media indignation how could any individual get a fair shake? An angry
populist sentiment can selectively cherry pick unpopular or polarizing figures
to whatever ends they choose.

No thanks.

------
mmjaa
Has nobody any real understanding of the nature and depth of organised crime?
No, I do not want to have the IRS do all the work of promoting the juiciest
targets to the top of the mafia's hit lists. This idea is nonsense.

Want to solve the tax-avoidance problem? Stop taxing income - tax spending.
Jealousy over other peoples incomes, fairly or unfairly gained, will never
result in a fair system for all, and this is the basis of income tax - whereas
taxing people for spending will result in us all contributing taxes to society
fairly.

~~~
kartan
> This idea is nonsense.

You have a valid point. But, this system works in other countries. People is
able to ask for other citizens taxes. But, the person "investigated" gets a
notification of whom asked fir its tax returns.

> Stop taxing income - tax spending.

This makes very easy to accumulate wealth and it is difficult to apply
progressive taxing.

> Jealousy over other peoples incomes, fairly or unfairly gained, will never
> result in a fair system for all

Capitalism is based in information. Without information citizens cannot take
good decisions. And that is why there is people earning very low salaries for
the same jobs that others are getting a good pay.

I personally do not think that jealousy plays a role here. I know that my boss
makes more money that me. That may cause jealousy. If my college does the same
job that me (or worse) and I get paid less I can leave for another company. If
another company pays more than mine, I can leave. If I am very good paid, I
will appreciate it more as I know the market.

To hide salaries is as reasonable as to hide product prices. It will break the
system.

~~~
fritzball
People like to think they’re equal in ability even when they’re not. In theory
explaining to someone that their performance is lower may open the door to
help them improve so they too can make more money in the ‘same’ job. This
presupposes that they’re are rational, intelligent, and can handle bad news.
If this were the case then they probably wouldn’t have been a poor performer
to begin with.

~~~
kartan
> This presupposes that they’re are rational, intelligent, and can handle bad
> news.

Yes. People makes mistakes. But this is the same rationality to forbid
democracy. And even in its imperfection it is a good system. Let people know
and as a society we will learn how to use that information.

So, yes. Some people will want more money. But, the company still can say no
to them if the rise they ask for is unreasonable.

