I think, perceived math issues aside, that some feats have an air of "tax" about them because they're so good that even though you don't need them, and the game plays fine without them, they're hard to ignore. You want to take them.
It becomes a tax, real or imagined, at that point, because then stuff like Linguist (or insert your favourite flavourful but mechanically subpar feat here), which maybe really character appropriate, just can't compete with +1-per-tier-to-hit-and-some-nice-side-benefits.
I like to focus on character, story, and background when I make a character, but I have a hard time justifying *not* taking some of the juicier combat feats. This varies based on the rest of the group and the campaign, obviously, but that is what I see as the crux of the issue.
I've got a couple ideas for dealing with it that I will be experimenting with in upcoming campaigns, but at the rate I'm going, 5th edition will be out by the time I have an answer that I like, and that works for the rest of my group.
So far, my answer to this is to eliminate the competition between combat feats and fluffy feats. Rather than give out freebie combat feats, I'm going to give out freebie fluff feats (at a rate yet to be determined). The fluff feats that are given out must only relate to non-combat elements of your character. No hit or damage bonuses, no skill powers, no multiclassing. Linguist? Sure. Envoy to the Fey? No problem. Heck, even Ritual Caster or Wild Talent might work.
As I said, I'm still experimenting with it, but that's my idea. I just need to figure out how many of those is 'enough.' I'm thinking one freebie at 1st level, and one at midpoint through each tier? Or that, plus another at 11 and 21? We'll see how it goes.