The poll tax is, admittedly the most extreme form of the flat tax rate policy. However, I believe that the key problem inherent in it- namely the regressive nature of it, leads me to think that the in the end only the already wealthy individuals or coporations will benefit, which I personally find totally unacceptable
I think a flat tax seems fair only at first blush.
Consider two families, family A makes 30k per year pre-tax and family B makes 300k per year pre-tax. Now assume a flat tax were instituted at 10%. Family A pays 3k in taxes and family B pays 30k...easy and fair, right? Maybe not.
If you consider the difference in effect these two sums of money have on family A and B things start to look considerably less fair. 3k to a family which only makes 30k per year will effect what that family wears, wht it eats and where it lives in a very significant way. 30k to a family making 300k per year will effect that family very little...maybe force a lesser series of BMW is about all. So, while the percentage may be the same the BURDEN is decidedly different.
TheSkipper
Originally posted by wedgehead2🙄 Don't you find it shocking that the tax on breathing is a flat tax?
The poll tax is, admittedly the most extreme form of the flat tax rate policy.
Poll tax and flat tax are two different things. Some systems may use both both but the concepts are separate.
Poll tax = fixed amount of tax per taxable individual.
Flat tax = fixed tax rate applied to the tax base.
So poll tax is a form of the flat tax rate, being applied to a tax base of everyone registered to vote, as opposed to other flat tax rates, which may have a low cut off point, to avoid taxes on the very poor- like I said before. 😲
I just got what you were saying! You know what I meant before- flat tax rate including everyone, not excluding the poorest. 😀
My sincerest apologies for getting fixed amount and fixed rate confused 😕
Originally posted by wedgehead2No. Poll tax is not a form of flat tax. Poll tax is irrespective of the tax base.
So poll tax is a form of the flat tax rate, being applied to a tax base of everyone registered to vote, as opposed to other flat tax rates, which may have a low cut off point, to avoid taxes on the very poor- like I said before. 😲
Originally posted by wedgehead2Just remember that you can have both at the same time! 🙄
i get what you are saying! 🙄
My initial point is that a flat tax can be implemented in many ways. Deductions, tax credits, to what base and to whom it'll be applied, etc.
Over-complicated fiscal models only serve to increase the bureaucratic power of the Treasury (and hike administrative costs) and to allow those with the money to hire accountants to slip through the net nearly unscathed.
A common fallacy is thinking that the complexity comes from a progressive rate system vs a flat one when, in fact, most of it comes from a gigantic number of exemptions, exceptions, deductions, etc. which are what allows the richest to pay so little (proportionally) and to shift most of the burden onto the middle class.
Originally posted by no1marauderNot if it includes a tax exemption.
A flat tax is economically inefficient as it ignores the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility.
For those who don't know what that is or its importance to the shape of the demand curve, here's a link: http://www.amosweb.com/cgi-bin/awb_nav.pl?s=wpd&c=dsp&k=law+of+diminishing+marginal+utility
