Term papers writing service


An introduction to the defintion of the flat tax in the united states

  1. All projected revenue increases arise out of nominal inflationary changes in measured output. For example, investment tends to move pro-cyclically, i.
  2. Even if the tax is revenue-neutral, a flat tax could mean worsening inequality in the long run if only because high-income earners and the wealthy are generally better able to invest their tax savings and make them grow more quickly than are low-income persons. And this will bring out the industry-funded nonprofits and the various special interest lobbyists in opposition, who will kill it by threatening to reduce or eliminate their substantial contributions to Congressional election campaigns of Congressional members who fail to vote in the way that special interest groups want them to.
  3. What Is a Flat Tax? Again, it must be stressed that the figures in this paper were calculated relative to the base case, namely the tax system modified for changes in the 2000 budget as well as the fall economic statement.
  4. That represents a 7. All things being equal, a flat tax would lead to more investment which should improve productivity and lead to stronger economic growth.
  5. If Republicans and Democrats alike finally agreed on getting rid of it, why is it still there? This analysis illustrates two key points.

What Is a Flat Tax? In theory, a flat tax is an income tax with a fixed tax rate, regardless of income.

Criticisms of the flat tax

In reality, most flat tax proposals aren't quite "flat," and many flat tax proposals include exemptions from taxation on capital gains, dividends and distributions, leaving a single rate tax on wages only. Because a simple flat tax would necessarily raise taxes on the poor, most flat tax proposals also have some progressive tax elements.

Most proponents of flat taxes believe, in general, that taxes should be reduced. The alignment of flat-tax proponents with low-tax proponents has made flat-tax proposals politically difficult and a target for liberals and Democrats. Why Proponents of Flat Taxes Like Them Flat Tax proponents argue that they are "more fair," because everyone's income is taxed at a single rate.

Kelly Phillips Erb, writing in Forbes, notes that flat tax proponents also argue that flat taxes are "simpler," and that they "completely eliminate the need for the Internal Revenue Service.

Advantages of a flat tax

The Political Reality of Flat Tax Proposals Without taking sides in the eternal argument between conservatives and liberals, it's still possible to question the practicality of the U. Recent attempts at changing elements of the tax code illustrate why. There was a substantial revision of the tax code at the end of 2017 named by its Republican sponsors "The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

By intention, its Congressional sponsors, some of whom have periodically called for a flat tax in the past, went farther toward a flat tax than any revision of the code since Franklin Delano Roosevelt's progressive "new deal" in the 1930s. But they ended up with something less. If there was ever a time when a flat tax — or at the least, a flatter tax — could have made its way through Congress, it would have been at the end of 2017, when Republicans had a majority in both houses of Congress and a Republican President with a mandate to reshape and shrink the Federal Government.

In fact, Republicans succeeded in passing the bill without a single Democratic vote and even without the usual reading of the bill in Congress before passage.

Despite this, Republicans were unable to fully carry out many of the reforms they'd promised, among them such flat-tax friendly revisions as the elimination of the home mortgage interest deduction and getting rid of deductions for property taxes and state taxes. Although simplification of the code bracketing to a single bracket for everyone is the aim of all flat tax proposals, the flat-tax friendly senators who saw the bill through the Senate still ended up with 7 progressive tax brackets, the same number as before, although with some shifts in bracketing that favored higher-income taxpayers.

The magazine has run at least seven articles since then, advocating a flat tax. But after the 2017 tax reform bill passed, Forbes published its response, in an article entitled: One promised variant of the flat tax -- called a cash-flow tax -- which would have been a business-based consumption tax, also disappeared during Republican deal-making — with other Republicans!

Although Democrats have gloated over the Republican failure to simplify the tax code and to introduce as many elements of a flat tax as they'd intended, it's likely that if the positions had been reversed — if the Democrats had been wholly in charge of passing a tax bill favored by liberals — that they'd likely have done no better toward achieving their goals. It's the Lobbyists and Special Interests In 2018, Washington is awash with lobbyists and non-profit tax-exempt organizations -- each with particular interests in preserving a section of the tax code favorable to its constituents and blocking changes in the code that could raise their taxes.

One section of the code that's been criticized by liberals and conservatives alike is the home mortgage interest deduction. The liberal argument against it is succinctly stated in The Hill's article that ran the month before the tax reform bill passed: If Republicans and Democrats alike finally agreed on getting rid of it, why is it still there?

Pros & Cons of a Flat Tax

Because homebuilders and all the manufacturers supplying the homebuilding industry hated it, realtors hated it and homeowners hated it.

All their lobby groups went after any Republican Senator brave enough to take the lead in advocating an end to the deduction. What started out as a Republican determination to finally get rid of the deduction entirely, next became an intended compromise to reduce it by half. But the bill that finally passed, cut it by a only a quarter. Since in 2018 the average U.

Not because this tax favors the rich and harms the poor, as progressives argue. The failure to pass a flat tax bill has little to do with its merits. It failed simply because it's a big change in income taxation. Any big change will inevitably favor some taxpayers and will disfavor others. And this will bring out the industry-funded nonprofits and the various special interest lobbyists in opposition, who will kill it by threatening to reduce or eliminate their substantial contributions to Congressional election campaigns of Congressional members who fail to vote in the way that special interest groups want them to.

It seems almost inevitable that any other tax substantial tax changes will face similar opposition. Democrats receive campaign contributions from lobbyists, too.