Warning: Tax geek post with no attempt to explain references for non-international tax readers. There was once a law firm at the forefront of partnership tax shelters. The actual statutory law was ambiguous to say the least and the partners at this law firm believed, in their hearts, that they were the ones who actually defined what the law and tax policy was in this area. Eventually the politicians change the law and the firm no longer exists.

I’m trying to stay away from taxes on this blog, but I was just asked again whether Biden’s tax plan would bring back manufacturing jobs to the US. I’m always a little disappointed when someone asks this question and particularly disappointed if that person is in the Federal government. It indicates that the person asking the question is so fixated on “taxes” that they have not stopped to think about all the other aspects and will be spectacularly unsuccessful.

The problem is not just that the law is overly complex. The problem is also that we change it all the time. We [Judges of the U.S. Tax Court] have from time-to time complained about the complexity of our revenue laws and the almost impossible challenge they present to taxpayers or their representatives who have not been initiated into the mysteries of the convoluted, complex provisions affecting the particular corner of the law