Tax

==Views==

===Support===
{{Main|Social contract}}
{{quote box
| quote = Every tax, however, is, to the person who pays it, a badge, not of slavery, but of [[liberty]].
– [[Adam Smith]] (1776), ''[[Wealth of Nations]]''<ref name="Smith">{{Cite web|last=Smith |first=Adam |year=1776 |url=http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/Wealth-Nations.pdf |title=An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth of Nations |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131020042323/http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/adam-smith/Wealth-Nations.pdf |archive-date=20 October 2013 |url-status=dead |website=Penn State Electronic Classics Series |publication-date=2005 |page=704}}</ref>
| width = 25%
| align = right}}

According to most [[Political philosophy|political philosophies]]<!-- whose? -->, taxes are justified as they fund activities that are necessary and beneficial to [[society]]. Additionally, [[progressive tax]]ation can be used to reduce [[economic inequality]] in a society. According to this view, taxation in modern nation-states benefit the majority of the population and [[Social change|social development]].<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20040701064132/http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/publications/theme2002/chap5.asp Population and Social Integration Section (PSIS)], United Nations Social and Economic Commission for Asia and the Pacific</ref> A common presentation of this view, paraphrasing various statements by [[Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.]] is "Taxes are the price of civilization".<ref>{{cite book|author=Eugene C. Gerhart|title=Quote it Completely!: World Reference Guide to More Than 5,500 Memorable Quotations from Law and Literature|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kjwVASsTUm0C&pg=PA1045|year=1998|publisher=W.S. Hein|isbn=978-1-57588-400-4|page=1045}}</ref>

It can also be argued that in a [[democracy]], because the government is the party performing the act of imposing taxes, society as a whole decides how the tax system should be organized.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Logue |first1=Danielle |year=2009 |title=Moving policy forward: 'brain drain' as a wicked problem |journal=Globalisation, Societies & Education |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=41–50 |doi=10.1080/14767720802677366|s2cid=145794119 }}</ref> The [[American Revolution]]'s "[[No taxation without representation]]" slogan implied this view. For traditional [[conservatives]], the payment of taxation is justified as part of the general obligations of citizens to obey the law and support established institutions. The conservative position is encapsulated in perhaps the most famous [[adage]] of [[public finance]], "An old tax is a good tax".<ref name="urlTax History Project: The Depression and Reform: FDRs Search for Tax Revision in N.Y. (Copyright, 2003, Tax Analysts)">{{Cite web|url=http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/44DC64199FBB0ED885256DFE005981FE?OpenDocument|title=Tax History Project – The Depression and Reform – FDR's Search for Tax Revision in N.Y.|website=www.taxhistory.org}}</ref> Conservatives advocate the "fundamental conservative premise that no one should be excused from paying for government, lest they come to believe that government is costless to them with the certain consequence that they will demand more government 'services'."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/HL349.cfm |title=Do Conservatives Have a Conservative Tax Agenda? |publisher=Heritage.org |access-date=22 January 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090522061204/http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/HL349.cfm |archive-date=22 May 2009 }}</ref> [[Social democrats]] generally favor higher levels of taxation to fund public provision of a wide range of services such as universal [[health care]] and education, as well as the provision of a range of [[Welfare state|welfare benefits]].<ref>Ruiz del Portal, X. 2009. "A general principal–agent setting with non-differentiable mechanisms: Some examples." Mathematical Social Sciences 57, no. 2: 262–78. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost.</ref> As argued by [[Anthony Crosland]] and others, the capacity to tax income from capital is a central element of the social democratic case for a [[mixed economy]] as against [[Marxist]] arguments for comprehensive public ownership of capital.<ref>{{cite book|last=Chaturvedi|first=Skand|title=Financial Management: Entailing Planning for the Future|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AcykUkuRD2IC&pg=PA77|year=2009|publisher=Global India Publications|isbn=978-93-80228-56-3|page=77}}</ref> American [[Libertarianism in the United States|libertarians]] recommend a minimal level of taxation in order to maximize the protection of [[liberty]].{{Citation needed|date=March 2011}}

Compulsory taxation of individuals, such as [[income tax]], is often justified on grounds including territorial [[sovereignty]], and the [[social contract]]. Defenders of business taxation argue that it is an efficient method of taxing income that ultimately flows to individuals, or that separate taxation of [[business]] is justified on the grounds that commercial activity necessarily involves the use of publicly established and maintained economic infrastructure, and that businesses are in effect charged for this use.<ref>Van Der Graaf, Rieke, and Johannes J. M. Van Delden. 2009. ''Clarifying appeals to dignity in medical ethics from a historical perspective.'' Bioethics 23, no. 3: 151–60. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost.</ref> [[Georgist]] economists argue that all of the [[economic rent]] collected from natural resources (land, mineral extraction, fishing quotas, etc.) is unearned income, and belongs to the community rather than any individual. They advocate a high tax (the "Single Tax") on land and other natural resources to return this unearned income to the state, but no other taxes.

===Against===
{{Main|Tax noncompliance|Taxation as slavery|Taxation as theft}}
Because payment of tax is compulsory and enforced by the legal system, rather than voluntary like [[crowdfunding]], some political philosophies view taxation as theft, extortion, slavery, as a violation of [[property rights]], or tyranny, accusing the government of levying taxes via [[force (law)|force]] and [[coercive]] means.<ref>For an overview of the classical liberal perspective on taxation see [http://www.irefeurope.org/en/content/tax-and-justice www.irefeurope.org] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091205185557/http://www.irefeurope.org/en/content/tax-and-justice |date=5 December 2009 }}</ref> [[Objectivists]], [[anarcho-capitalists]], and [[right-wing libertarian]]s see taxation as government aggression through the lens of the [[non-aggression principle]]. The view that democracy legitimizes taxation is rejected by those who argue that all forms of government, including laws chosen by democratic means, are fundamentally oppressive. According to [[Ludwig von Mises]], "society as a whole" should not make such decisions, due to [[methodological individualism]].<ref>''[[Human Action]]'' [https://www.mises.org/humanaction/chap2sec4.asp Chapter II. Sec. 4. The Principle of Methodological Individualism] by Ludwig von Mises</ref> Libertarian opponents of taxation claim that governmental protection, such as police and defense forces might be replaced by [[Market (economics)|market]] alternatives such as [[Private defense agency|private defense agencies]], [[arbitration]] agencies or [[Voluntary taxation|voluntary contributions]].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.mises.org/story/2701 |title=The Rule of Law Without the State |author=Spencer Heath MacCallum |publisher=[[Ludwig Von Mises Institute]] |date=12 September 2007 |access-date=16 August 2008}}</ref>

[[Murray Rothbard]] argued in ''[[The Ethics of Liberty]]'' in 1982 that taxation is theft and that [[tax resistance]] is therefore legitimate: "Just as no one is morally required to answer a robber truthfully when he asks if there are any valuables in one's house, so no one can be morally required to answer truthfully similar questions asked by the state, e.g., when filling out income tax returns."<ref>{{cite book |url=http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twentyfour.asp |title="The Moral Status of Relations to the State", chapter 24 of ''The Ethics of Liberty'' |isbn= 978-0-8147-7506-6 |publisher=[[Humanities Press]] 1982, [[New York University Press]] 1998 |author=Murray N. Rothbard |access-date=2 September 2012 |date=May 1998 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics/twentyfour.asp |title="The State versus Liberty", excerpt from chapters 22–25 of ''The Ethics of Liberty'' (LewRockwell.com, 2007) |author=Murray N. Rothbard |access-date=2 September 2012 }}</ref>

Many view government spending as an inefficient use of capital, and that the same projects that the government seeks to develop can be developed by private companies at much lower costs. This line of argument holds that government workers are not as personally invested in the efficiency of the projects, so the overspending happens at every step of the way. In the same regard, many public officials are not elected for their project management skills, so the projects can be mishandled. In the United States, President [[George W. Bush]] proposed in his 2009 budget "to terminate or reduce 151 discretionary programs" which were inefficient or ineffective.<ref>{{Cite web|date=February 2008|title=Major Savings and Reforms in the President's 2009 Budget|url=https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2009-SAVINGS/pdf/BUDGET-2009-SAVINGS.pdf|access-date=21 November 2021|website=govinfo}}</ref>

Additionally, critics of taxation note that the process of taxation, not only unjustly takes money of citizens, it also unjustly takes considerable time away from citizens. For example, it is estimated by the American Action Forum that Americans spend 6.5 billion hours annually preparing their taxes.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.americanactionforum.org/insight/tracker-the-cost-of-tax-paperwork/|title=Tracker: The Cost of Tax Paperwork| date=14 April 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://reason.com/2022/04/15/americans-will-spend-6-5-billion-hours-on-income-taxes-this-year/|title=Americans Will Spend 6.5 Billion Hours on Income Taxes This Year| date=15 April 2022}}</ref> This is equivalent of roughly 741,501 years of life lost every year to complete tax forms and other related paperwork.

===Socialism===
[[Karl Marx]] assumed that taxation would be unnecessary after the advent of communism and looked forward to the "[[withering away of the state]]". In socialist economies such as that of China, taxation played a minor role, since most government income was derived from the ownership of enterprises, and it was argued by some that monetary taxation was not necessary.<ref name="isbn0-275-93688-0">{{cite book |author=Li, Jinyan |title=Taxation in the People's Republic of China |publisher=Praeger |location=New York |year=1991 |isbn=978-0-275-93688-4 |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/taxatio_lij_1991_00_5240 }}</ref> While the morality of taxation is sometimes questioned, most arguments about taxation revolve around the degree and method of taxation and associated [[government spending]], not taxation itself.

===Choice===
{{undue weight|section|date=November 2012}}
{{Main|Tax choice}}
Tax choice is the theory that taxpayers should have more control with how their individual taxes are allocated. If taxpayers could choose which government organizations received their taxes, [[opportunity cost]] decisions would integrate their [[dispersed knowledge|partial knowledge]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Tax morale and conditional cooperation |url=http://www.bsfrey.ch/articles/453_07.pdf |doi=10.1016/j.jce.2006.10.006 |access-date=3 January 2013 |volume=35 |journal=Journal of Comparative Economics |pages=136–59 |year=2007 |last1=Frey |first1=Bruno S. |last2=Torgler |first2=Benno |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130120090643/http://www.bsfrey.ch/articles/453_07.pdf |archive-date=20 January 2013 }}</ref> For example, a taxpayer who allocated more of his taxes on [[public education]] would have less to allocate on [[public healthcare]]. Supporters argue that allowing taxpayers to [[demonstrated preference|demonstrate their preferences]] would help ensure that the [[government success|government succeeds]] at efficiently producing the [[public goods]] that taxpayers truly value.<ref>{{cite web |title=Do Earmarks Increase Giving to Government? |url=http://cbees.utdallas.edu/papers/gtg2.pdf |publisher=Cbees.utdallas.edu |access-date=3 January 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130303125214/http://cbees.utdallas.edu/papers/gtg2.pdf |archive-date=3 March 2013 }}</ref> This would end [[real estate speculation]], [[business cycle]]s, [[unemployment]] and distribute wealth much more evenly. [[Joseph Stiglitz]]'s [[Henry George Theorem]] predicts its sufficiency because—as George also noted—public spending raises land value.

===Geoism===
{{Main|Georgism|Geolibertarianism|Land value tax}}
[[Geoists]] (Georgists and [[geolibertarians]]) state that taxation should primarily collect [[economic rent]], in particular the [[land value taxation|value of land]], for both reasons of economic efficiency as well as morality. The efficiency of using [[economic rent]] for taxation is (as economists agree<ref>[[Adam Smith]], [[The Wealth of Nations]] [[s:The Wealth of Nations/Book V/Chapter 2|Book V, Chapter 2]], Part 2, Article I: Taxes upon the Rent of Houses</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last1=McCluskey |first1=William J. |last2=Franzsen |first2=Riël C. D. |title=Land Value Taxation: An Applied Analysis |page=4 |publisher=Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. |year=2005 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jkogP2U4k0AC&pg=PA73|isbn=978-0-7546-1490-6}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/friedman-milton_interview-1978.html |title=Milton Friedman Interviewed -- 1978 |access-date=29 March 2015 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150329223758/http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/friedman-milton_interview-1978.html |archive-date=29 March 2015 }}</ref>) due to the fact that such taxation cannot be passed on and does not create any [[dead-weight loss]], and that it removes the incentive to speculate on land.<ref name="McCluskey and Franzsen">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jkogP2U4k0AC&pg=PA73|title=Land Value Taxation: An Applied Analysis |author1=William J. McCluskey |author2=Riël C. D. Franzsen |publisher=Ashgate|isbn=978-0-7546-1490-6|page=73|year=2005 }}</ref> Its morality is based on the [[Geoist]] premise that [[private property]] is justified for products of labor but not for [[land (economics)|land]] and [[natural resources]].<ref name=pnp>{{cite book |last=George |first=Henry |title=Progress and Poverty: An Inquiry into the Cause of Industrial Depressions and of Increase of Want with Increase of Wealth |year=1879}}</ref>

Economist and social reformer [[Henry George]] opposed [[sales taxes]] and [[protective tariffs]] for their negative impact on trade.<ref>{{cite book |last=George |first=Henry |title=Protection or Free Trade |url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.514177 |year=1886}}</ref> He also believed in the right of each person to the fruits of their own labor and productive investment. Therefore, income from [[Wage labour|paid labor]] and proper [[capital (economics)|capital]] should remain untaxed. For this reason many Geoists—in particular those that call themselves [[geolibertarian]]—share the view with [[libertarians]] that these types of taxation (but not all) are immoral and [[Taxation as theft|even theft]]. George stated there should be one [[single tax]]: the [[Land Value Tax]], which is considered both efficient and moral.<ref name=pnp /> Demand for specific land is dependent on nature, but even more so on the presence of communities, trade, and government infrastructure, particularly in [[urban area|urban]] environments. Therefore, the [[economic rent]] of land is not the product of one particular individual and it may be claimed for public expenses. According to George, this would end [[real estate bubble]]s, [[business cycles]], [[unemployment]] and distribute wealth much more evenly.<ref name=pnp /> [[Joseph Stiglitz]]'s [[Henry George Theorem]] predicts its sufficiency for financing public goods because those raise land value.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Arnott |first=Richard J. |author2=Joseph E. Stiglitz |title=Aggregate Land Rents, Expenditure on Public Goods, and Optimal City Size |journal=Quarterly Journal of Economics |date=Nov 1979 |volume=93 |issue=4 |pages=471–500 |jstor=1884466 |doi=10.2307/1884466|s2cid=53374401 |url=http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/download/fedora_content/download/ac:160390/CONTENT/4624867.pdf }}</ref>

[[John Locke]] stated that whenever labor is mixed with natural resources, such as is the case with improved land, private property is justified under the [[Lockean proviso|proviso]] that there must be enough other natural resources of the same quality available to others.<ref>{{cite book |last=Locke |first=John |title=Second Treatise of Government |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/secondtreatiseof07370gut |chapter=5}}</ref> [[Geoists]] state that the Lockean proviso is violated wherever [[land value]] is greater than zero. Therefore, under the assumed principle of equal rights of all people to natural resources, the occupier of any such land must compensate the rest of society to the amount of that value. For this reason, [[geoists]] generally believe that such payment cannot be regarded as a true 'tax', but rather a compensation or [[fee]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.landvaluetax.org/what-is-lvt/ |title=What is LVT? |work=landvaluetax.org |access-date=29 March 2015 |archive-date=26 March 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150326001550/http://www.landvaluetax.org/what-is-lvt/ |url-status=dead }}</ref> This means that while Geoists also regard [[taxation]] as an instrument of [[social justice]], contrary to [[social democrats]] and [[social liberals]] they do not regard it as an instrument of [[redistribution (economics)|redistribution]] but rather a 'predistribution' or simply a correct distribution of [[the commons]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Kerr |first=Gavin |title='Predistribution', property-owning democracy and land value taxation' |date=10 March 2015 |journal=Politics, Philosophy and Economics}}</ref>

Modern [[geoists]] note that [[land (economics)|land]] in the [[classical economic]] meaning of the word referred to all [[natural resources]], and thus also includes resources such as [[mineral deposits]], [[water bodies]] and the [[electromagnetic spectrum]], to which privileged access also generates [[economic rent]] that must be compensated. Under the same reasoning most of them also consider [[pigouvian taxes]] as compensation for environmental damage or privilege as acceptable and even necessary.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Davies |first1=Lindy |title=The Science of Political Economy: What George "Left Out" |url=http://www.politicaleconomy.org/leftout.htm |website=politicaleconomy.org |access-date=16 June 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Batt |first1=H. William |title=The Compatibility of Georgist Economics and Ecological Economics |url=http://www.wealthandwant.com/docs/Batt_GEE.html |access-date=9 June 2014}}</ref>