Reply to Scott Hicko on flat taxation | consa's Blog
Hicko's bottom line critique of flat taxation consists of a 25 question True-False quiz at the end of his chpt. 12, with tendentious model answers. I will now list the quiz questions, and comment on each.
1. The Flat Tax would greatly reduce the length and complexity of the Revenue Code. Answer. Hicko denies this, and I deny his denial. Getting rid of the present personal income tax, estate tax, and corporate income tax will result in a huge simplification. I do grant that many people with limited experience with business arithmetic will find some aspects of the Flat Tax hard to follow. I also grant that the some industries, such as financial services and the nonprofit sector, will require detailed regs. Nontrivial transition rules will be in effect for at least 50 years. The taxation of foreign income could retain a lot of its present-day complexity.
2. The Flat Tax would eliminate lobbying. Answer. Lobbyists would, as now, continue to push for amendments to the Revenue Code that would twist it to the advantage of clients. This is an unavoidable fact of life in any democracy. Moreover, the Flat Tax would in no way reduce the incentive to lobby for govt. expenditures.
3. The Revenue Code is chockers with various incentives. Answer. Of course. But the Flat Tax would greatly simplify those incentives, by reducing income taxation in the USA to two numbers: a flat rate, and a demogrant.
4. Complying with the Flat Tax would have a zero cost. Answer. The marginal cost of tax compliance, given any decent accounting system, would be trivial. Here Hicko says that the reduced compliance cost would have to be weighed against "the loss of economic freedom for the average American." I firmly deny that economic freedom is substantially under the current system than it would be under the Flat Tax.
5. Tax shelters supply real economic benefits. Answer. They may do so, but they come at a disguised cost in terms of lost revenue, and of perceived unfairness. Hicko claims that most abusive tax shelters were abolished in the 1980s. I wonder if present day tax professionals would concur.
6. Tax shelters are bad. Answer. Depends on what we call a shelter. Is the tax deferral built into retirement plans a bad thing?
7. Higher marginal brackets encourage risk taking. Answer. To a first approximation, this is correct. When the corporate income tax is 40% or higher, there is a sense in which the taxpayer is a sleeping partner with every nontrivial firm.
8. Rich people avoid paying income tax via loopholes. Answer. Hicko claims that most loopholes were closed in 1986. For him, the biggest loophole is the lower tax rates for realised capital gains, and these have been true with a vengeance since 2003. Hicko despises the Flat Tax because it does not tax capital gains. He cannot see that the Flat Tax will reduce capital gains on stocks by increasing the taxes take from corporations. The Flat Tax would not tax capital gains on real estate, and this could prove to be a problem.
9. Fair means taxing all persons at the same rate. Answer. Hicko does not appreciate that a flat marginal rate with a demogrant results in a progressive average tax rate. The flat marginal rate applicable to all value added has a signal advantage: it extinguishes all forms of tax arbitrage. Incidentally, I prefer to avoid talking of "fairness" when discussing the Flat Tax.
10. The concept of marginal tax rate is hard to understand. Answer. It is easy for accountants and economists to understand. It is an empirical question whether the median voter finds it, and the many ways the marginal rate influences behaviour, easy or hard to understand. We economists maintain that thinking average when marginal is the way to go is rife in everyday life, and I suspect that the same holds when contemplating taxation. Hicko says that calculations involving a schedule of marginal rates are not hard to undertake. He is correct, but that does not speak to whether small firms and households truly understand that optimal behaviour in the face of taxation is determined at the margin.
11. The Flat Tax would abolish special treatment. Answer. Hicko flatly disagrees, pointing to the large decline in the tax liabilities of the rich under the flat tax systems advocated by Hall, Rabushka and Steve Forbes. I have squelched that ob
12. The Flat Tax will raise the total liabilities of many USA households. Answer. This is true of last century's flat taxes, that did not integrate FICA/Medicare, and that featured flat rates below 20%. I believe that my flat tax will collect more revenue from household earning over, say, 500K/year, and will collect little revenue from households whose taxable income is less than that of the median household.
13. Marginal tax rates are fair. Answer. Hicko's says Yes, then delivers a short and raising populist sermon to the Greatness of America, adding that income tax is modest price to pay for the privilege of living in the USA. I say that fairness has to be articulated mathematically, after which tax proposals can be ranked by fairness. I maintain that a demogrant of $350/month, food stamps and Medicaid would largely extinguish absolute deprivation in the USA. I think it would also materially reduce relative deprivation, defined as having an annual income, gross of benefits and net of taxes, less than 40% of the median per capita income.
14. The Flat Tax is regressive. Answer. The combined effect of 20th century flat taxes with FICA/Medicare taxes was regressive. The flat tax of this Note was carefully designed to counter this major criticism of 20th century flat taxes.
15. It is hard for most Americans to file their tax returns without professional assistance. Answer. Hicko disagree, but I demur. The success of H&RBlock attests to the truth of this. I would say that at least 25% of Americans are sufficiently functionally illiterate or innumerate as to be thoroughly intimidated by an income tax return. New Zealand tax forms and instructions are a lot easier to understand than their US counterparts. A major reason for this is that New Zealand tax is much simpler.
16. The Flat Tax would increase the revenue and power of the Federal govt. Answer. Hicko asserts that this is true. I believe that there is a serious risk that lowering the marginal cost of collecting a dollar of tax, could lead to a rise in the total tax take. If the flat tax leads to a spurt of economic growth, how much of that growth will the Federal govt seize?
17. The Flat tax will reduce the incomes of CPAs and tax attorneys. Answer. Hicko cynically denies this, pointing to American history. I believe that (17) would largely prove true.
18. The Flat Tax would advantage State & Local government. Answer. Hicko says that removing the exemption of state & local govt. bond interest would raise their borrowing costs and leave us all worse off. The exemption of muni bond interest is unique to the USA. Other First World nations get along fine without this feature. Under my flat tax, muni bonds would have the same yield as corporate bonds of the same risk. Hence no arbitrage opportunities. All taxes owed on bond interest would be paid by the borrower, not the investor.
19. A Flat Rate of 17-19% is too low to balance the budget. Answer. Agreed, which is why I advocate a rate of 30% or more.
20. The Flat Tax will end tax evasion. Answer. Wrong. Under the Flat Tax, there is ample incentive to understate sales, overstate costs, and to claim as a cost of goods sold, purchases whose only true purpose is to compensate employees in kind. All these activities would have to be vigorously monitored.
21. Under the Flat Tax, the IRS could be abolished. Answer, Wrong. Every business, every state & local govt. authority, every nonprofit entity would file an annual return that would have to be scrutinised and sometimes audited.
23. The estate tax is an arbitrary tax on the accumulation of wealth. Answer. No, it is an arbitrary tax on the intergenerational transmission of wealth.
24. The Flat Tax is not the driving force behind the flat tax movement. Answer. Few well heeled households would be better off under my flat tax than under the current income tax. Greed among households that would benefit from the demogrants, could have something to do with the political popularity of my flat tax.
25. The wealthy demand more public services than the poor. Answer. This is defensible. And the answer is that the tax system described in this Note does indeed exact more tax from the well heeled.flat
There are no comments on this post yet, be the first to leave one!
Previous PostsMy praise for a thoughtful American mother puzzled by RIC in the USA, posted May 20th, 2015, 1 comment
A Long Comment by me critiquing Brian Morris et al, posted April 1st, 2015
Guest post by a Facebook Intactivist, posted March 20th, 2015
My reply to an older woman's honest curiosity about the history of RIC in the USA, posted March 13th, 2015
The Feminist Counterattack on the two leaders of the men's movement, posted March 5th, 2015, 3 comments
Guest rant by a sexually experienced American woman, posted February 27th, 2015
Long reply to a European male perplexed by the USA cult of the bald penis, posted February 22nd, 2015
A masculinist manifesto found on Facebook, posted February 12th, 2015
Guest Post by a Counselor and Advocate for Boys, posted February 3rd, 2015, 1 comment
A succinct comment I left in another forum, posted February 1st, 2015
A list of quotes that damn Second Wave gender feminism, posted January 23rd, 2015
Response to a blog post by a doctor-mohel on RIC, posted January 17th, 2015
Intactivism in the style of Blazing Saddles, posted January 13th, 2015
Comment left in a science blog, posted January 13th, 2015, 2 comments
Comment left in the blog of TheMadJewess, posted January 5th, 2015
To a gay Jewish intactivist, posted December 24th, 2014
Doris Lessing firmly disagreeing with the misandry of gender feminism, posted December 20th, 2014, 1 comment
Guest Post by Nurse Eyewitness to RIC, posted December 19th, 2014
Rebutting the feminist claim that FMG and RIC are morally incomparable., posted December 4th, 2014, 1 comment
An anti-feminist essay taken from another forum, posted December 4th, 2014
Letter to a blunt Texas woman, posted December 3rd, 2014
EP Censored this Experience not when I wrote it but when I made minor edits to it, posted November 25th, 2014, 1 comment
Marilyn French was a disgraceful American intellectual, posted November 18th, 2014
An AA woman tells it like it is, posted October 29th, 2014
Guest Post: A woman's passionate defence of the intact penis, posted October 28th, 2014
Reply to Hanna Rosin's defence of circumcision, posted October 7th, 2014, 1 comment
More on why I disagree with radical feminism, posted September 9th, 2014, 1 comment
Mallory Millet airs the dirty linen about her tyrannical sister Kate, posted September 9th, 2014, 1 comment
Feminists and non-feminists are poles apart, posted September 6th, 2014
Meet Sabrina Dacos, posted September 1st, 2014, 2 comments
Reply to an American male puzzled by penis shame and conformity, posted August 31st, 2014
Guest Post by an Angry Intactivist American Male, posted August 28th, 2014
Comment I made in the blog of a sex positive British women., posted August 27th, 2014
Guest Post by an Intactivist Mother, posted August 23rd, 2014, 4 comments
Letter to an American woman who got into a bitter verbal fight with several intactivists., posted August 18th, 2014
Reply to an American woman who said she preferred sex with circumcised men, posted August 17th, 2014, 1 comment
Infant circumcision and Chinese footbinding, posted August 11th, 2014
Comment left in an Australian blog, posted August 4th, 2014
My discovery of Herb Goldberg, posted June 28th, 2014, 1 comment
Letter to a middle aged Jewish woman who opposes bris and RIC, posted June 27th, 2014, 1 comment
Letter to an American mother curious about how men feel about RIC, posted May 21st, 2014
Comment left in a Jewish blog, posted May 13th, 2014, 1 comment
Chris Hitchens on circumcision, posted April 27th, 2014, 3 comments
Reflections on the Disintegration of Detroit, posted March 12th, 2014
Anne McDermott wrongly despises intactivism, posted February 10th, 2014, 2 comments
Reply to Michael Schulson in The Daily Beast, posted February 2nd, 2014, 1 comment
My Reply to Scientific American, posted January 23rd, 2014
To Vessa here in EP, posted January 16th, 2014, 1 comment
Comment explaining why the meta-study Morris & Krueger (2013) is simply wrong, posted January 8th, 2014
Letter to a Jewish scientist very angry about his bris, posted January 7th, 2014
BlogrollHere are some friends' blogs...
HelpEmbed Photos Embed Videos