The government can’t spend a dollar until it takes a dollar away from somebody.

And, really, the government can’t spend a dollar until it takes more than a dollar away from somebody. The bureaucracy has to be fed, too.

That’s a point I enjoy making as often as I can. And lo, Arthur Laffer has a slightly different take in the Wall Street Journal today:

There is a lot more to taxes than simply paying the bill. Taxpayers must spend significantly more than $1 in order to provide $1 of income-tax revenue to the federal government.

To start with, individuals and businesses must pay the government the $1 in revenue plus the costs of their own time spent filing and complying with the tax code; plus the tax collection costs of the IRS; plus the tax compliance outlays that individuals and businesses pay to help them file their taxes.

In a study published last week by the Laffer Center, my colleagues Wayne Winegarden, John Childs and I estimate that these costs alone are a staggering $431 billion annually. This is a cost markup of 30 cents on every dollar paid in taxes. And this is not even a complete accounting of the costs of tax complexity.

So if it costs us 30 cents per dollar to comply with the law, and then the government also skims off the top before those dollars get pooped out the other end, how much does it really cost us?

How much does it really cost to give somebody a dollar’s worth of food stamps?

Like the bumper sticker says: Imagine Whirled Peas, and by “whirled peas,” I mean a flat tax. No loopholes, which ought to please the Left. Lower rates, which ought to please the Right. And far, far lower costs of compliance. It’s win-win-win, with the sole exception of tax accountants. They get hosed.

Via Memeorandum.

Picture credit: David Klein, Wall Street Journal.