Most tax reforms
being considered by the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax
Reform would stimulate economic growth and do a lot of good for all
Americans, including providing more people with the special kind of
freedom that goes with the ability to save, invest, and become a
capitalist (small, medium, or large).
However, some tax
reforms would do far more harm than good. One such tax reform
scheme-the proposed two-track system-is being promoted under the
false flag of tax simplification, and should be rejected outright
by the advisory panel. The proposal is that only high-earning
Americans be required to file annual tax returns and pay income
tax. Everyone else (about 90 percent of all eligible voters in the
United States) would be "free at last"-free from the annual ritual
of filing tax returns and, in their own minds, free from having to
pay tax. They would, of course, not be free from tax at all. The
proponents of this scheme also propose a high-rate value-added tax
(VAT) of the type used in Europe, which is a hidden tax on wages,
dividends, and consumer purchases.
A Hidden Tax
Just because a tax
is hidden does not mean that it does not exist. Under the VAT
scheme, most Americans would pay as much or more tax than they do
now. The difference would be that for the most part they would be
unaware of it. Without filling out an annual tax return, they would
not know how much tax they paid during the year and therefore would
not know the price that they are paying for all the ostensibly
"free" government services.
Filling out a tax
return and paying some amount of tax-even if it is small-is an
important rite of citizenship, and knowing how much government is
actually costing oneself personally is an absolute right of every
American. That right should never be taken away under the guise of
tax reform.
According to
proponents of the two-track scheme, the total amount of tax
collected by the Treasury from all Americans as a group would be
about the same as now and the top tax rates would never be more
than a modest 20 percent or so. It should be obvious that once a
majority of voters have been bamboozled into thinking that
government services are "free," they will demand more of them, and
Congress will gladly oblige. Thus, the two-track system is a
prescription for enormous expansion of government and escalating
tax rates. The increasing taxes will especially burden the minority
of voters subject to income taxes as well as the VAT.
Class Warfare
The proposed
two-track system is repugnant to basic principles on which American
democracy rests. It would intentionally divide Americans into two
classes: those who knowingly pay their taxes as full citizens and
those of a lower status who simply have their pockets picked by the
IRS without knowing when, why, or how much.
From a civics
perspective, categorizing Americans as taxpayers and non-taxpayers
is an open invitation to the kind of "soak the rich" political
demagoguery that has on occasions in the past torn the social
fabric and might do so again.
Discouraging Economic Growth
The two-track
system will also negatively affect the economy. It would place a
surtax on hard work, productivity, and success. Not only would it
penalize Americans who have already climbed the ladder of success,
but it would discourage others from even attempting to succeed. For
example, a person at an income level below the income tax threshold
would face a strong disincentive against working harder and
producing more if the increased personal income would push him over
the threshold at which point he would have to start filing income
tax returns and paying income taxes.
This is especially
true for those near the income tax threshold. If an individual
could dramatically increase his income by working harder and
producing more, he might decide the increased income is worth the
inconvenience of filing returns and financial burden of paying
income tax. However, for most Americans, this will not be the case.
Hard work and increased production are more likely to yield a
substantial, but not enormous increase in income. A reasonable
person would likely decide that the increased income is not worth
losing his exemption from the income tax and, in his view, having
to start "paying taxes" for the first time. The inevitable
phenomenon of people deliberately adjusting their activities to
remain just below the income tax threshold will only retard
economic expansion, to the detriment of all Americans.
For those already
above the threshold, the laws of economics dictate that increased
work and investment would be discouraged as rewards are reduced by
higher taxes. Moreover, this perverse incentive for these
higher-income individuals to reduce their efforts would
disproportionately affect the economy, since such individuals tend
to provide most of the capital and high-value skills that drive
economic growth. As they reduce their own efforts, the ripple
effect would inevitably lead to fewer and lower-paying jobs and
fewer and less profitable investment opportunities for all
Americans. Lower economic growth, or even outright stagnation,
would result.
Conclusion
Given all the
good, simple, and pro-growth tax reform options available, there is
no place in tax reform for a proposal that is both economically
unsound and contrary to basic principles of American democratic
government.
Ernest S.
Christian is the Executive Director of the Center for Strategic Tax
Reform, and Gary Robbins is a Visiting
Fellow at The Heritage Foundation.