Here's something I need someone to explain to me because I probably don't have enough background on this to speak intelligently...
When I hear Conservatives discussing taxes, they say they don't want increased rates, but they want to limit deductions and simplify the tax code. In theory, I'd rather just know that I'm going to pay X percent of my income at the federal and state level and be done with it. I get my W2, plug a little data into an online form that would take about five minutes, and then I'd get my return pretty quickly. Seems efficient. It would also make me less confused about my own personal finances because I'm always paranoid that making an investment, moving money, etc. is going to trigger some sort of tax or I'm going to miss a deduction. So, overall, I'm on board with this for the most part.
But what I don't get is how this doesn't fall under a "tax increase". I get all kinds of deductions and tax credits for certain types of interest rates, having kids, buying green stuff, etc. But by eliminating deductions, I'm increasing my taxable amount, therefore, I'm paying more in taxes. My rates may not go up at all, but I'm ultimately paying more, right? If I pay off all of the interest on my house, and I can't claim a deduction on it, then my taxable dollars go up, and I pay more in taxes.
I'm sure some brain trust somewhere has estimated the revenue difference in eliminating current deductions and credits vs. raising rates, and I'd be interested to see what the numbers are. But I guess I'm just not understanding how the Grover Norquists of the world are cool with paying more in taxes if the rates are low and deductions and credits are limited/eliminated vs. paying more in taxes via rates but adjusted overall via deductions and credits.