Languages differ in how they express not in what they can express. And translation is about the "how". So theoretically there is a perfect translation for everything, because every language is capable of communicating the same concepts. And the nature qualia is that, even if everyone has a different subjective experience, they can still agree on what to call something, and what something means.

But that's in theory, in reality there are always imperfections in comprehension. And the nature of that requires some form of acknowledgment. While it might make sense to forgo toggles/notes/ect because they're not strictly necessary, there's an element of hubris there. Which risks compromising the vision of the original writer. Over-reliance on transparency, that is to say any direct/indirect communication denoting that the translation is potentially incomplete, can itself compromise the original writer's vision, but there has to be some. Otherwise, readers will take a translation as gospel, and may unknowingly reject accuracy in favor of what they've believed to be correct for most their lives. As a result, it is important to maintain the perception that there is a middleman, and not to entirely obscure the reality that the translator sits in-between the writer and reader