Flat Tax: Let’s Make it Fair
So imagine that you’re working really hard, and the glorious day has finally come. Pay day. Once you finally have that money and you have to pay taxes, you realize that you have to pay a lot more money towards taxes just because you work harder. This is why having a flat tax is necessary. Not only will it make taxing fair, but it will make it better for the economy. A recent poll in 2014 was asking whether Americans thought the government should switch to a flat tax. 62% of the people agreed to having a flat tax instead of a progressive, and only 33% do not want a flat tax (reason.com, 1). This clearly shows that the people want a flat tax because they know it will help the economy, be simpler than a progressive tax, and will be much more fair.
The flat tax simple is much simpler than the progressive tax. All you need to do is get your income amount, multiply it by the tax rate, and you’re done with your taxes (Glen, 3). The current tax system in the U.S. is much too complicated. It inflicts many rules and exceptions that lack fairness of
…show more content…
This will help them want to get a better education and a better job. Not only will this help them personally, but it will also help the economy (Investopedia, 3). The flat tax is smarter, and will lead to more personal saving and provide greater financial security for the people as well (heritage.org, 5).The more people who get a better education mean the more people that can have important, needed jobs, such as doctors, surgeons, and orthodontists. The more people we have working as these will make it much cheaper to pay for one. This will help the people who don’t make much money to be able to afford these necessities. Now they have more money to spend on other things, such as food and clothing. Having a flat tax rate will have a chain reaction to help everyone and the
Flat tax and progressive tax either can be considered fair or well put together for the American people since it has a rational approach towards taxation. However they do vary from each other when it comes to its treatment of the wealthy people, and each of this system is biased and discriminatory, but at least one good aspect of progressive tax is that people of lower income are still paying low and under flat tax they will end up paying same as a wealthy individual who is well. Only because the name of a policy sounds progressive does not mean its action has to be. Furthermore, the current progressive tax policy is only a few steps away from becoming the flat tax and there is no difference among these two. So if the flat tax is being implemented in the United States it will have validity to do more harm to the majority of the Americans then giving them any
One popular method of tax reform that some of the experts in this field think is worth considering is implementing a flat tax also known as a consumption tax. J. D. Foster says that “any tax with a single tax rate could be considered a flat tax.” An article from the website Tax Policy Center defines consumption as being “income less savings” (Gale). The major difference between an income tax and a consumption tax is the way savings are taxed. With an income tax all income is taxed when it is earned and again when interest is earned on any savings. Critics of an income tax say that this is double taxation and
First off, there are many people who do not even know what a flat tax is. By definition, a flat tax is described as, “a very precisely defined and coherent tax structure: a combination of a cash-flow tax on business income and a tax on workers’ income, both levied at the same, single rate” (Keen 4). Now, this just means that every person and every business, no matter the income, would be taxed at the same rate. Realistically speaking, when people talk about taxes, it is a matter of who wins and who loses. If we decided to adopt a flat tax system, people of lower income families would be suffering, “Under the flat tax, low-income households would lose because they now pay no income tax and are eligible for a refundable EITC of up to $3,370” (Gale 155). With this being said, the families of higher income would actually be thriving of a system
The current tax code for the United States is almost 74,000 pages long. Or to put that into a different light: About 116 copies of Herman Melville’s Moby Dick. It is small wonder that a few of the announced candidates for President of the United States, have again begun to kick the tires on the topic of a Flat Tax. But is a flat tax actually a solution to our country’s growing tax complexity? What are the potential economic effects of a flat tax (both positive and negative)? Finally, is a flat tax even a viable solution? In short, will it work? As a concept, a flat tax is spectacular. Simplicity at its finest. As a fiscal policy, I believe that same simplicity must be examined and inspected closely.
Promote Economic Growth- Many advocates of flat taxes argue it will promote economic growth and spur job creation. One argument is that many working Americans would work harder to increase their incomes without fear of entering higher tax brackets.
In conclusion, there are several valid points on both sides of the argument of adopting a flat federal tax. Doing so would undoubtedly make the process of filing taxes much easier, but in my opinion, flat rate taxes should not be an option. I do not find it fair to tax a certain percentage of income which would be a big hit to lower income households and businesses, but a more minimal hit to someone with a higher income. To a wealthy person, that percentage of money could mean sacrificing something relatively unimportant,
The flat tax will restore fairness to the tax law by treating everyone the same. No matter how much
"A revolutionary change in our tax system is fundamental to re-energizing the American economy and restoring the American dream" (Moore 1). Currently, there are two major plans being considered to try and fix the tax system in the United States. These two plans are the Flat Tax and the National Retail Sales Tax. "Both the Flat Tax and a National Sales Tax would replace today's discriminatory tax structure with a single low rate. Either plan would promote the kind of capital formation that America needs to boost workers' incomes and raise long-term economic growth" (Mitchell 1). This means that the flat tax would take away the savings from the government and pass them on to the citizens and businesses. By doing this, there would be a rise in long-term economic growth.
My community decided that the best tax system would be to use the 2-point flat tax across our community. We decided as a group that it would be fair, because each member would be taxed the same regardless of their role. The treasurer, and myself being mayor could also map out how many points we would have for the rest of the semester. This would not have been the same if we had decided a percentage based tax or one that first needed to know the quiz score. I believe that our preparation for potential threats to our community prepared us for when they did occur.
The supporters of the Flat Tax system are quick to point out this system's attributes but not as quickly as the criticisms by those who oppose it. The filing of taxes each year would be much easier because there would be one set rate to pay. This type of system also discourages, and makes it almost impossible, to find and use any existing schemes that are present to avoid paying taxes. However, because there is a set rate at which everyone needs to pay, this system is quite unfair. Those who earn and have a lot of money should not pay the same amount as someone who has only a fraction of their wealth. The wealthier you are, the more you should pay because you can afford it. If there is a set tax rate it would be too high to some people and pocket change to others. A system like this also takes away many, if not all tax deductions. An event like this would cause irreparable injury to the middle class, who often times rely heavily on money they will get back from tax deductions.
We have all heard the famous quote by Benjamin Franklin who stated, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” (“Benjamin Franklin Quotes”) We find this to be true as we begin working and feel the pain of money being taken from our paychecks. Then we face the chore of having to file income taxes yearly. Although there are many taxes we are subject to, most people are referring to federal income tax when they complain about taxes. There has been debate for decades about the current system but there has been no agreement on how to fix it. The United States currently has a progressive tax code which means people pay taxes according to their earnings. This has been in place since the time of Abraham Lincoln. An alternative
Should the flat tax rate system be implemented? No, the flat tax rate system should not be implemented. In this paper, the pro arguments will be presented, which will affirm the thesis. Then the con arguments will be presented. A rebuttal will then follow, and finally, the author’s conclusion will be offered.
Policy makers have introduced a solution to the staggering proportion of taxes that Americans spend. The flat tax, based on an idea developed by Professors Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka of Stanford University to create a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system (Mitchell 1, 11). There are four basic criteria that make up a flat tax. First is a single low rate on taxable income, the baseline for taxable income would be raised to a certain amount dictated by a personal exemption. Second is simplicity, all Americans would fill out the same postcard-sized form to pay their taxes. Third is the reduction or elimination of deductions, credits, and exemptions, depending
A flat tax system is where there is a fixed set tax rate and everyone pays the same tax rate, no matter their income. The main problem with this system is that it assumes that everyone has the ability to pay that tax rate. It disregards individuals and families who are low income or are living on government welfare and can’t afford to pay that much in taxes alone. It benefits the rich and is unfair to the rest of the population. One of the biggest disadvantages of this system is that it cannot replace the current systems revenue.
This type of tax system would eliminate incentives to shift activities from one period to another. If there is no income tax, there is no more consideration for timing or considerations of yearly income. I think that there would still be incentives to shift activities from one type to another, but it would be a different shift. For instance, for corporations, there are many things that are considered tax deductible, but with a flat tax, this would be irrelevant because there would be no itemized deductions allowed. Such a tax system would not eliminate incentives to shift activities from one pocket to another because low-income taxpayers would not have to file tax returns, so other taxpayers would want to shift activities to the low-income tax bracket to avoid having to pay the flat tax.