Income Tax ? Neither Moral Nor Practical | Finance Business ...

One of the major problems one has, in challenging the status quo, is that people are wedded to the way things are, and have great difficulty in seeing past accepted norms to ?what could be?. Taxation is one of these accepted norms.

We were all born into a world where people pay tax. No one challenges the system Fundamentally because that?s the way it has always been. Taxation reform is a popular topic for discussion, but a lot less popular is to question the very nature of taxation itself. Let me first make my own position crystal clear. I consider taxation to be immoral. Taxation is the forced appropriation of another?s rightful property -. As money earned this way is a result of a persons own effort

Taxation can not be likened to payment for goods and services, which is the result of a voluntary transaction . No, taxation is compulsory and you have no say as to how your money is to be used.

To discuss the types of tax is to put the cart before the horse, because the first order of business is inquire into the underlying premises of taxation. Sun I?d like to look at just one of these premises, Which Form the foundation today?s modern tax system, and expose the stupidity of it. . The premise is that I?m talking about taxation of individual effort is a viable way to raise revenue for the state

Consider this: If you work (expend effort) then you will pay tax. The harder you work (more effort), the higher the rate of tax you will pay. This is known as progressive taxation.

The above statements form the basis of all income tax system. In order to make the issue of taxation and its underlying premise more clear, one should examine the idea of ??taxing individual effort and the logical consequences. And to do this, let?s move into a different tax realm ? not work, but sport

Okay, here?s the deal. You?re invited to become a member of a world-class sports team. It does not matter what, take your pick: football, baseball, cricket, rugby or football. You are presented with the contract, Which offers you a Certain amount of money under the following conditions: Each time you win a game a percentage of your winnings will be deducted. The greater the win ? the more will be deducted. If you win the whole season and come out as top team, then each player will have a further lump sum deducted.

So, what would be your response, apart from thinking ?what contract to absurd?? Well, part of you wants to win because that?s the competitive nature of the sport, and the main reason you?re involved. However, because of the financial penalties for winning, you?ll always be mindful of the fact that if you?re too successful, then you?ll only receive a small percentage of your earnings ? after the success tax deducted in vivid p> The natural consequence of trying to play competitive sport under those conditions is that tax you will have a conflict of interest! And, as a result, you?ll be tempted to take the middle road, with not too much success too much and not failure, to satisfy your need for both money and self esteem. Madness you say? Why on earth would anyone tax sporting success? Would not that lead to overall mediocrity in sporting performance? Would not that lead to people consciously undermining sporting their best effort? You bet it would! . Well, this is the very same principle that is applied to the ?sport? we call work

If you put in years of effort in order to get a good job ? which pays a higher than average salary ? then you will be penalized for that effort, by having to pay more to spend your evenings tax. If you planning a business, in order to quit your low-paying job and finally make more money, then the reward for your effort and initiative will . be that you?ll pay more in taxes

So the rules of this game are: The less you work, the less tax you will pay. The more you work, and the more successful you are, the more tax you will pay. If you do not work at all, you will receive bonus payments (negative tax or welfare).

I put it to you that this is the ultimate recipe for economic failure and decline. For who in their right mind wants to work harder or smarter when they know they will be penalized for it? And that is the essence of the current tax system creates a huge barrier to It initiative and effort, the very things that should be encouraged. That is the nature of the society we inhabit -. One where your best effort is penalised

Now this is entirely legal, but is it moral? Of course not! You would not consider it moral sport if applied to, so why consider it moral when applied to work?

No wonder people are always looking out for ways to avoid taxes, by doing cash work, not reporting extra- income, working in the so-called black market, offshore banking and gene rally trying their best to hang on to what is rightfully theirs. And if you have any self respect it?s the obvious, common sense thing to do! Remember, there is a distinction between what is moral and what is legal. They are certainly not always the same thing. Okay, you might be thinking, but what about a flat tax or a sales tax? Effort to increasing the rate of payment of tax for increased ? well, a flat tax would remove one element of a corrupt and abusive system. But it in no way addresses the fundamental issue of the absurdity of taxing individual effort. A flat tax is still the taxing of search effort, but on a level playing field. effort

A sales tax is certainly different and consumption taxes?), Instead of. This would have economic advantages Certain macro, in that it would encourage people to save and be frugal. It would encourage people to stay home and watch TV, instead of going out town for a night on the. A sales or consumption tax is more likely to support a culture of savings and not act as a block to individual effort.

Of course, the naysayers would criticize a consumption tax on the grounds that it would penalize the poor most. And that?s probably true. If a guy earning $ 100,000 a year manages to save $ 25,000 and spend the rest, he is clearly ahead of the person on $ 25,000 a year with no savings and not enough money to even enjoy life. However a flat tax and a consumption / sales tax are both beside the point.

? Yes, either one would be an improvement on the means by Which the state currently finances its operations, but this would hardly impact on the underlying foundation of any immoral tax system. p> You might ask, ?where is a factor in a sales force or consumption tax ? not seeing as my income is being taxed, and I?m not being forced to buy anything?

Well, there?s two answers to that question: first you can not get by in life without buying something. And second, with a sales tax is being applied to force those who collect taxes examined, the businesses that Provide the goods and services. Under a sales tax regime, it?s business people who become the new tax collectors ? proxies for the state. And if they refuse, then they get thrown in jail. All this does is shift the burden of tax collection from you, the income-earner, to those in business.

Whatever its form taxation is taxation and is still the forcible expropriation of someone?s property without their consent. No free society can not exist where such a taxation system exists. The two are incompatible. A free society can only come into being when all transactions are based on mutual agreement and contractual undertakings ? both of Which are entered into voluntarily

The essence of freedom is your right to do business and enter relationships with people. and systems of your choice. In other words, the all-important element of voluntarism. Anything else is just a charade.

id=?article-resource?> on financial, political and freedom of information issues and Operates service that deals with offshore banking , asset protection and investing that is likely of interest to anyone who wants to Maximise their personal and financial freedom. A good starting point is his free e-course The Freedom Shift .

hcm loretta lynn gene kelly zoe saldana zooey deschanel and joseph gordon levitt debra messing ayaan hirsi ali