Argumentative Essay On Flat Tax

There is nothing worse than working hard all year, having taxes withheld from your paycheck, and then finding out you still owe Uncle Sam come April. Taxes seem to be one of the most politically charged issues, with candidates from both parties making the topic an integral part of their campaign. Whether any real movement takes place is something that remains to be seen, as the Nation gears up for the next Presidential election.

The current tax policy in the United States is very confusing and it is very costly for our government to administer it. It is in the best interest of our country and its citizens to revise or replace our current tax policy.

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 tax policy in the United States is very confusing. When the tax policy was originally written in 1913 it was four hundred pages. Now, over the past ninety one years, that tax policy has evolved to over 72,000 pages. Since the tax code has become so lengthy and nearly impossible to understand, the topic of tax reform has been in the minds of many. Although, most barely think about tax reform until tax season. It is a controversial subject due to the impact a change in tax code would have on the American people. The two most popular and widely known stakeholders in this debate are the two major political parties in the United States, the Democrats and the Republicans. The two parties share absolutely no common ground on the subject of

A flat tax system in the United States by definition refers to taxing household incomes at the same rate regardless of income levels. Advocates of a flat tax system argue that it will simplify U.S. tax codes and eliminate other taxes. Opponents of a flat tax system argue that it only benefits wealthy individuals and would eliminate the IRS causing wide-spread unemployment. Here are some of the pros and cons of a flat tax system.

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,

Stanford Professors Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka initially established the concept of the flat tax system in December of 1981, under what they called a “postcard” tax in an article for The Wall Street Journal. In 1985, both Hall and Rabushka wrote The Flat Tax that was regarded as “The Flat-Tax Bible” by billionaire Steve Forbes. According to Andrei Grecu, “the proposal achieves simplicity, economic efficiency, and fairness- the traditional measures of effective taxation- while also collecting the revenues required to finance the government” (Grecu, 2004, pg. 10). The support for the flat-tax rate system grew amongst Republican lawmakers throughout the 1980s under the office of President Ronald Reagan, and continues to be supported by Republicans as an alternative to the current progressive tax system in place today. In addition, multiple Eastern European countries began adapting the concept in the late 20th/early 21st century.

Nothing will be taxed twice, eliminating some confusion from citizens. An overall flat tax based system will have more upsides than downsides. “With a flat tax, politicians would no longer be able to reward their cronies and contributors with loopholes and tax breaks” (“The Flat” 6). Corporate tax rates will be low, luring in business. With a severely reduced corporate tax rate, more and more companies will start coming to America, instead of American corporations and big businesses leaving the States to receive a low tax benefit.

Our current income tax system today is very complex, unfair, inhibits saving, investment and job creation, imposes a heavy burden on families, and weakens the integrity of the democratic process. It can't be fixed and must be replaced. The U.S. income tax code is a long and complex system. The income tax system is so complex; the IRS publishes 480 tax forms and 280 forms to explain the 480 forms. The IRS sends out eight billion pages of forms and instructions each year. The administrative costs of the tax system far exceed those borne directly by the IRS. Each year Americans devote 5.4 billion hours complying with the tax code, which is more time than it takes to build every car, truck, and van produced in the U.S.

"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.

A successful tax reform plan is not easy to come by, and there has not been a successful plan developed since 1986 under the Reagan administration. The tax reform bill that was passed then has been slowly unraveling due to a different political

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.

Many people believe that a course of action that would make sense is reform, a platform especially popular amongst Republicans. This is especially endorsed by presidential candidate Rand Paul. It is one of Dr. Paul’s main concerns as president to reform the tax code. Like many, Dr. Paul believes that the tax code is out of control, and is ineffective. The plan proposed by him entails what he calls “The Fair and Flat Tax”. He has proposed a flat tax of 14.5% for all Americans. Payroll, estate, gift, and telephone taxes would all be immediately eliminated. This plan would cut taxes by 2 trillion immediately. His code calls for an equal tax applied to personal income, wages, salaries, dividends, capital gains, rents and interest. 14.5% applied across the board would bring equality to American citizens. Dr. Paul believes that within 10 years this plan will increase the GDP substantially, and it will put 1.4 more million Americans to work. Some argue that this plan would cut revenue too much, and the government wouldn’t have enough money.

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

The loudest clamor against the flat tax would come from homeowners, Realtors, and builders, who would be hammered as the flat tax does away with deductions for mortgage interest payments and local property taxes. If not negotiated with skill, this issue could be the flat tax movement’s Achilles’ heel. An analysis by the economic consulting firm DRI/McGraw-Hill estimates that