I was annoyed. That’s where this starts.
At a texture, specifically. The texture of a feed full of people saying soft, true-sounding things about worth and value and love and being, all of it wrapped in just enough performed smallness to stay acceptable. The “I almost didn’t post this.” The gratitude header. The humble qualifier arriving precisely on schedule, like a customs declaration before crossing a border.
I read it the way I read something that irritates me without quite knowing why. Scrolling. Frowning slightly. Moving on. Coming back.
I told myself I was learning. Observing the landscape. Staying curious.
I was also procrastinating on something else entirely.
There is a tax on self-belief. It is informal. Unannounced. The rate is consistent and the collection is reliable.
Confidence is allowed as a private trait. A felt thing. A quiet engine. The aesthetic distance of a song makes it safe too. What draws the toll is embodied confidence. Operational. Visible. Out in the open without the softening layer.
I catch myself translating the rule into self-instructions:
Charge what I charge. Just make the charge feel gentle.
Know what my work is worth. Just let the room feel like it arrived at the number independently.
The tax is paid in performance. A small ritual of minimizing, qualifying, arriving with the hat slightly in hand. The audience sees the ritual. That is the point. The transparency is built in. They relax when they see it, and the room says what it always says:
“I still get to decide.”
“The hierarchy is intact.”
“She knows the script.”
And I get to stay in the room.
I wonder sometimes if I have been paying it in ways I have decided to call something else.
I sat with the frustration for a while. Let it run without chasing it.
Then I started writing. Through it, more than about it. Four short notes—The Veto—each one doing something slightly different: naming the mechanism, showing the evidence, tracing the transaction, then—quietly, without announcement—placing a woman in the scene who priced her work accurately and watched the room respond.
She priced her work accurately. The silence afterward had a specific texture.
I priced it at zero. I am still sitting with that.
I posted the notes and noticed something.
I was smiling.
The annoyance was gone. Metabolized. Converted into something the body could actually use.
The frustration was always a signal: the feeling that arrives when I see something clearly and the shape to hold it is still forming. That gap has an irritable quality. It presses. Most writing advice calls this a block. It is closer to an appetite.
The writing is where I find out what the feeling was actually for.
I am still figuring out what the procrastination is for.
The audacity tax is real and collected consistently. The rates vary. It is the same mechanism with different thresholds depending on who is standing at the border. That variation is its own essay.
The mechanism is consistent enough: self-belief is welcome as aspiration, as song, as private fuel. The moment it becomes action—a price, a claim, a number delivered with no apology attached—it crosses into taxable territory.
And the border has a toll.
What I keep turning over: some people pay it strategically, eyes open. The performance is a cost of access and the room is worth it to them.
Some people pay it with full belief that the script is simply the truth about how things should go.
And some people forget their line entirely.
I know which one I am. That is a different kind of problem.
I notice I am smiling again.
Part 2: The Audacity Tax — Pricing, Confidence, and Permission
I’ll leave it here for now. What do you think?
— Makari
Filed under: The Audacity Tax
Explore more:
Home • Archive • Guide • Rights
Makari • Stomari • Mabst • Panoma
Video • Audio • Gallery • Catalog
Creative practice. Art lives here.
