If you want to say what you think is important about an article, that's fine, but do it by adding a comment to the thread. Then your view will be on a level playing field with everyone else's: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
The part about monitoring bank accounts appears on page 88 (the 94th page of the PDF document):
> This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner. This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial
institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600. ...
> Similar reporting requirements would apply to crypto asset exchanges and custodians. Separately, reporting requirements would apply in cases in which taxpayers buy crypto assets from one broker and then transfer the crypto assets to another broker, and businesses that receive crypto assets in transactions with a fair market value of more than $10,000 would have to report such transactions. ...
> The proposal would be effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2022.
Lots of people are making a buck on disfunction and overly complicated tax laws. Those same people know how to lobby lawmakers. Who’s lobbying for a simpler tax system?
We've legalized bribery in America, we just call it something else.
All I see is a potential "tax bill" system that would simplify the process for the vast majority of Americans, and the percentage of Americans who file non-standard taxes can continue to do so no different than they do already.
If you wanted a truly hands off tax return you’d need to revamp a ton of the tax law.
This should also result in a significant decrease in federal revenue, which is an important part of the plan as well. I would cut the federal budget about about 90%.
I totally get the philosophical attraction but I just do not see how you pull trillions of dollars out of that without some crazy outcomes. Land with a financial skyscraper handling the GDP of a small nation could have a lower 'unimproved' value than an acre with really nice soil, for example.
More affluent people spend more, so they will go beyond the minimum.