The Two-Points Flat Tax System

In my opinion as to whether or not the current federal income tax structure is fair for most Americans is that it is not fair. The following information will provide support for my decision. The main federal tax brackets are for single individuals, married individuals filing separately, married individuals filing as a couple and individuals filing as a head of household. In the financial year 2014, the lowest tax bracket paid a rate of 10% on income up to $9,075 while the highest bracket paid an average rate of 36.4% ($406,751 and above). Most individuals pay taxes across several tax brackets, and as a result, they end up with the progressive tax structure. In the current progressive federal income structure, individuals with a lower

Did you know that an astonishing 43.4 percent of the people in America do not pay any income taxes" (McCullagh 1)? This is roughly 65.6 million people that aren't paying taxes and this is putting our economy and country at its breaking point. Our current tax system penalizes those that work and save money. People that pay no taxes still get to enjoy the benefits. The United States needs to look at which tax is fairer to the people and easier to administer by the government. Although some may disagree, the Flat Tax should replace the income tax to simplify and bring fairness to the system, increase income, and create jobs.

With the next presidential election just around the bend, there have been many heated policy debates on both sides of the caucuses. One of the more intriguing of these has to be the debate on the structure of the current tax system. Many GOP hopefuls are putting forth plans to impose a Flat Tax System. The scope of this paper is not to analyze, per se, the reasons behind their putting forth such ideas. Instead, this paper will attempt to analyze the ethical considerations and ramifications of a flat tax system as opposed to our current progressive system. In order to accomplish this goal the following study will: present a thorough analysis of the background surrounding this issue; the stakeholders and their involvement in the issue as well as the issues effects on each; two ethical theories and test and how they apply; and finally a Biblical interpretation on the ethical issues that will be brought to light and a suggestion to believers on what side they should take given the analysis presented.

In the article, “The US Tax System: Who Really Pays” by Stephen Moore, he justifies his belief that there is little to no correlation between economic mobility and equality. Moore delivers his reasoning by contradicting relatively popular statements where some are virtually untrue and others are merely common opposing viewpoints. However, in the end Moore concludes his argument with the belief that raising the taxes on the wealthy would not help the poor’s income mobility, which I support one hundred percent.

The current federal income tax system in the United States (U.S.) is progressive based on the vertical equity principle. However, the tax code is getting increasingly complex and the wealthy are able to avoid paying taxes through loopholes. Hence, more people are yearning for fairness in taxation. With the looming 2016 presidential election, Senator Rand Paul’s proposal of ‘Fair and Flat Tax’ appears to have the most significant change to the current tax policy and I will now analyze if this proposal will improve the efficiency and equity of the U.S. tax code.

There is an issue that has plagued the United States even prior to the founding of the nation. That issue is fair taxation. While the American Colonists were being taxed unfairly without parliamentary representation, average modern Americans are being taxed unfairly without legal representation. Some hold the belief that the progressive tax code employed by the United States to be fair as the wealthy pay a higher marginal tax rate. The operative word there being marginal. As the upper class typically has a much lower effective tax rate since they are able to afford tax attorneys who are able to find many deductions that average citizens are unaware of. Mitt Romney is a prime example of low effective rates of taxation. According to CNN Money, Mitt Romney made twenty-one million dollars in one year, but only paid an effective rate of fifteen percent, which is much lower than the rate he should be paying. The progressive tax system is one that is littered with loopholes, but those are only known to those with the means to search them out as the federal tax code spans seventy-thousand of pages of convoluted text. Not even the highest paid tax accountants will ever read anywhere near the full volume of tax laws. By the tax code being as long as it is, few are able to reap the full benefits of the tax code. The level of complicated text is not the only major issue with the federal tax code.

Would it be possible to consider placing a flat $.10 FEDERAL TAX on ALL online sales no matter what the cost of the product or service purchased? This is not a percentage of the sale, but a flat tax that would never increase. Most add sales tax to online purchases based on the total sale, but I think there could be significant revenue gained if a SMALL flat Federal Tax was added. If there are approximately 4,000,000,000 online purchases a day, seven days a week, a $.10 (10-cent) Federal Tax added to each transaction could help reduce the deficit without causing a hardship on anyone. The retailer would collect and forwards the Federal Tax to the government at the end of every month, just

A flat income tax rate would make a big difference in the issues that society faces every day. When you receive your paycheck, you see how much is taken out, every payday. All of the money that is being taken out, is money that can’t be used for living. It can’t be used to help pay medical bills, nor can it help pay for food.

Rich households have been paying too much in taxes these past years. “Earners in the top 1% pay about 43% of their incomes in tax. [While] people in the middle quintile pay 25%. [And] the poorest fifth pays 13%” (Barro). And yet some politicians, like Donald Trump, think the solution to resolving our country’s debt is by taxing the top percent more. In reality, the United States should have a flat tax rate due to the fact that it is the fairest plan and the hard work pertained by the top percent should be valued.

The one topic that has continually been a major topic in the United States is the topic of taxes. It has been a key component of political campaigns at all levels since the political scene has been of interest to me. There are two major tax systems that are viable options in the U.S. today. There is the federal individual income tax system and a single rate flat tax system. The U.S. currently uses the federal individual income tax system. This type of tax system got its start in 1864 after the American Civil War (‘The New Income Tax,’ Dunbar). It was the second tax ever used by the U.S. and was the first tax used during a time of peace. The tax system has continually become

Is a flat tax really better than our current progressive tax system? It is currently being contemplated as an alternative solution to the ever-increasing tax debacle in the United States. With such a significant and potentially life-changing event on the rise, it is vital to address the concerns involved. If implemented, the flat tax system would cause a loss of revenue for the government, greatly reduce IRS jobs, and negatively impact the lower income families.

Although this year’s budget gap of $14.6 million was a far cry from the $104 million projected shortfall in July 2017, the state is anticipating another tough budget year in 2018. With tax revenue in such a precarious state, it is unwise to continue using a tax system that is failing the state economy. The legislature should pursue prudent reform on corporate taxes to increase the possibility of recouping lost revenue from past years, or at the very least, prevent another round of budget shortfalls and spending cuts.

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.

Ted Cruz, a republican presidential candidate proposes a 10% flat tax on all individual wages and income. Unlike his competitors, Cruz proposes to eliminate the payroll tax and replace it with a 16% business flat tax (Rubin, 2016, p. 5). It increases the Standard Deduction from $6,300 ($12,600 married filing jointly) to $10,000 ($20,000 married filing jointly) while retaining the personal exemption. Cruz proposes to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax. However, the candidate does not offer any tax reforms on social security as well as Medicare. He expects to maintain them at their current level. Even then, the candidate has unique tax proposals, which are envisaged to ensure

The United States tax system is in complete disarray. Republicans and Democrats agree that the current tax code is complex, unfair, and costly. The income tax system is so complex; the IRS publishes 480 tax forms and 280 forms to explain the 480 forms (Armey 1). The main reason the tax system is so complex is because of the special preferences such as deductions and tax credits. Complexity in the current tax system forces Americans to spend 5.4 billion hours complying with the tax code, which is more time than it takes to manufacture every car, truck and van produced in the United States (Armey 1). Time is not the only thing that is lost with the current tax system; Americans also lose