Flat Tax Definition

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.

In the story “Nineteen Fifty-Seven” Josephine's mother was imprisoned by the authorities after being accused of being a witch thus separating her from her daughter and the rest of her family. Josephine manages to visit her everyday and even sometimes managing to bring to her mother a piece of meat from the market and her religious statue, Madonna. Mamman being put in prison gives us, the reader, an a taste of how women were treated back then in the 1960’s. As i stated before, women in Haiti were viewed as “different”, “feared” people and because of this, the authorities would often execute the women and would seen as justified since people at the time saw them differently. I just think that in the past, men have always seen each other as strong,

Progressive. The more you save the more you earn. The proportional would not be fair because “flat” tax is not fair to people who do not have much money. The regressive in not fair either because you are losing

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,

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

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.

"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.

Furthermore, according to the Carroll, The Internal Revenue Service is aware that business and individual taxpayers spend more than 6 billion hours per year to comply with the tax system. A flat tax would use two forms with simple instructions, one form for business and capital income and another for labor income. There is a whole industry created just to comply with current tax codes of tax lawyers, tax accountants, tax planners, tax filers, tax collectors and tax scholars. A flat tax would be based on two forms, the business income, and wages income. There would be no special interest loopholes, tax shelters and compensation for workers not considered “Wages” that enable the current biased and discriminatory system to operate. As an example, income that is not paid in wages or directly reinvested into the business through maintenance of equipment and facilities, expansion of productivity through new equipment and facilities would be taxed at nineteen percent. The same that wages would be taxed at nineteen percent, no confusing deductions, credits or exemptions, just a flat tax.

Would users be charged a flat tax or a progressive tax? First, we need to be clear on the differences between the two. A progressive tax charges more as the amount to be taxed increases. That is, it progressively charges more. A good example of a progressive tax is income tax in the United States. Higher wage earners pay a higher rate of tax than lower wage earners. Thus, those with a higher ability to pay the tax fit a larger portion of the bill. In contrast, a flat tax simply charges the same rate to all, no matter the ability to pay. If income taxes were a flat tax, all individuals would pay, for example, 15% of their wages for the

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

Historically, the flat-rate tax system has been popular throughout many Eastern European countries, and has recently become a topic of discussion in the United States.

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.

Taxation rate is a very controversial topic in America. Many people like Mark Rosenfelder, Author of Why the Rich Should Pay More Taxes, believe that the more you make the more you should be taxed. They justify this by saying that Upper class, well-to-do individuals take more from the government. They say because wealthy people have more, they have more to lose; thus they require more protection. Many believe that a flat tax, a tax in which all citizens pay equal tax regardless of their income, is unfair. Really? Taxing someone because they work hard and make more money seems to make less sense. Raising the tax rate just because they work hard and have more than other people isn’t right. The wealthy upper-class citizen did not make the lower class poor and shouldn’t be taxed heavily to support them. In his essay Rosenfelder focuses his attention on how to bleed the wealthy for their money through a progressive tax.

Universalism seeks to create a system in which all participants would be willing to see everyone else follow. Furthermore, it seeks to never use humanity as ends but rather as a means. Therefore, wealth redistribution typically would not align with this theory because not all taxpayers agree to such terms. This is the main argument against progressive tax systems from the viewpoint of Universalism. On the other hand, looking at a flat tax system, neither system fully equates to the universal point of view. The argument against a flat tax system is fundamentally the same as that of a progressive system. In that, since a flat tax system also places an unequal burden on taxpayers, not all taxpayers are going to agree to those terms either. Therefore, since we have a difference in opinion, it is necessary to determine which is the lesser of the two evils. As such a typical Universalist would view a progressive tax system as such. However, the only problem with this is that progressive systems, more than flat tax systems, treats humanity as means, not the ends. Even still, most Universalists accept the fact that

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.