John Chow dot Com Free WordPress Installation - Start Your Blog Today!
 

The Progressive Income Tax Is Not Progress

written by John Chow on July 29, 2007

Profit from binary options

After my two posts about the minimum wage laws (here and here), I guess I am on a political bent. Today I want to talk about killing off the progressive income tax system and replacing it with a flat income tax.

The current progressive tax setup is grossly unfair and serve as a disincentive to move ahead. The progressive system is based on the principle that taxpayers should pay more income tax as a percentage of their income as they earn more. This has been achieved, traditionally, using progressively higher income-tax rates applied on progressively higher incomes. Canada have four marginal tax rate while the US has six. The top rate kicks in at $120,887 in Canada and $336,551 in the US.

The Government Has It Backwards

The problem with progressive income tax is the government has it backwards. It shouldn’t be the more you make the more they take. It should the be more you make, the less they take! That is how businesses work. Many ad networks will give you a progressively bigger share of income as an incentive to produce more. Imagine how their business would do if they did it backward like the government.

The problems with increasing marginal tax rates are lower rates of economic growth, reduced rates of personal income growth, lower rates of capital formation, aggregate labor supply that is lower than expected, and reduced social welfare. In short, high and increasing marginal tax rates reduce economic growth by creating strong disincentives to hard work, savings, and investment. Why would you want to make that second $100,000 if the government is going to take half of it? A flat income tax would eliminate this disincentive.

Hall-Rabushka flat-tax reform

There are a number of well-known flat-tax proposals but the most discussed is that developed by Robert E. Hall and Alvin Rabushka of the Hoover Institution. It taxes all types of income once and at one rate. In their most recent analysis of the United States, Hall-Rabushka recommended replacing the personal federal rates and the various business tax rates with a 19 percent federal tax rate for both individuals and businesses.

People against a flat tax would say 19% is not enough to fund the operations of the country but they fail to take into account the increased incentive to make more money when people know that the government won’t be taking more when you make more. Would you try to make more if you only pay 19% tax instead of 50%?

I don’t expect to see Canada or the US go to a flat income tax anytime soon. However, if you are a Canadian living in Canada, there is a way to pay a flat 17% tax on your net income – as long as that income doesn’t exceed $400,000 in a year. I’ll talk about that in a future post.

Did you enjoy this post? Get John Chow Dot Com updates via email...

Stay up to date with all of John Chow’s tips for making money online and blog posts by subscribing via email. Your email will be kept private and never shared with anyone.

Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Well,
The problem is that western countries rely on their governments to provide everything. There are people who say that we should have a sales tax to replace the income tax, but, the politicians would end up re-instituting an income tax, which means that we would end up paying more..

By the way, I read in the newspaper today that Bulgaria is going to introduce a flat tax of 10% next year :P.

Hi John,

I'm a little late to this rather big party, but here's my take on why I think you've missed out with this post.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how you manage to pay 17% on your first $400 though. :-)

While your arguments are indeed very interesting to read John, they're ultimately futile in this case. The simple reason is that it would require a Canadian government to come in, slash taxes to the rich by more than half and raise taxes on the poor. The odds of this being accepted by anywhere near a majority of Canadians are infinitesimally small.

Regardless of the future promises, the short term issues would prevent it from passing. That whole trickle-down theory didn't exactly pan out for the lower income families south of the border several administrations ago.

It really doesn't matter if it passes or not. The rich already don't pay the state progress rate and never will. There are so many ways to get around the the progressive tax rules it's not even funny. Like I stated in the post, I pay 17% tax on the first $400,000 of net income.

In the end, it's the middle class that get hit the most. You can't tax the poor because they got no money. You can't tax the rich because they have tax lawyers to help them legally avoid paying tax. That leaves the middle class.

Yep, tricking the middle class to fund vote buying campaigns is one of the biggest con jobs ever pulled.

I just have to shake my head when I see some teacher, cop, nurse, ect. blindly agreeing with these Socialist government programs thinking it's all going to fall on the shoulders of the top 1%.

I consider myself to be middle class and I never feel as though the rich will be shouldering the cost of our social programs. I know that most of them find ways around most of the taxation rules since the rules have planted loopholes to allow them to do it. That way the politicians can say they're increasing taxes on the rich while allowing their friends to bypass the new taxes.

I know that personally feel as though we're all chipping in our fair share. The middle class may be chipping in more than its fair share, but regardless, we know where most of our tax money goes and we know that the top 1% can't and aren't shouldering the load for everyone.

You are a very wise man John.

With this statement I'm completely in agreement

John will the "17% taxes" apply to the US?

If not I suggest you follow up with a post on how to immigrate from the US to Canada because it looks like a Democrat pres is a lock, and myself and a lot of other web based entrepreneurs who aren't tied down to a bricks and mortar business are looking for an exit strategy.

What annoys me more is when the government make it hard for you to get a tax refund.

We pay income tax, the government knows how much we have paid but the onus is on us to get it back.

I did my Australian tax last night, it took 15 minutes to get back over $3000, in the UK it can take 6 months sometimes.

Make sure you havent overpaid tax.

www.taxfix.co.uk

Oh come on.
I walk into walmart. I pay $20 for "tax Cut" or what ever software I want. I follow the "wizard" and then put my bank account #.

I once got my refund in 2 weeks (from the day I clicked on the button on the software.) But that was because I did it early in the year.

You're being talked about by Deborah NG on the radio. Positive talk, of course. Not a major radio, but moms are gonna love you! Listen to the July 30th show if you're interested. http://www.wahmtalkradio.com/

I'll be looking forward to the future post on how to pay a 17% flat tax rate in Canada.

I want to pass that info along to my Canadian friends.

Seriously john.

If these posts against all the poor people in the US and Canada where meant to make people comment, I congratulate you (excellent job)

If if your serious. you're nuts.

It's NOT easy to become rich when you're poor.

Also. Warren Buffet has made a famous $1,000,000 wager to all the other millionaires out there. He'll give you the money if you can prove you're in a higher tax bracket than his secretary. :lol:

http://blog.stanford.edu/unofficial/2007/07/warren...

That's right. You know it. The moment you start making more than $60,000 you start seeing tricks that will lower how much taxes you paid.

I like you live very comfortably, and let me I pay less taxes than people making HALF what I make.

Life's easy for the rich, it's designer for us :cool:

Zune - a passionate response..

But..

Who cares what Warren Buffet thinks? He is worth BILLIONS but advocates higher taxes for nearly everyone else because he feels bad about what taxes his secretary pays?

Warren Buffet is free to a) give his secretary a handsome raise - (it is a travesty that his secretary makes anything less than 150K a year considering who she works for) - and b) Warren Buffet may then donate his entire fortune to the US government upon his death (rather he is putting it all into a charity - nice tax break for his family, huh?).

Save the Buffet example and show me anyone of normal means in Canada or the US who wants to pay higher taxes. In every case, advocates of higher taxes want those taxes paid by "someone else".

This is called FORCED INCOME REDISTRIBUTION.

No thanks.

no on said he wants to pay heigher taxes. You're completely missing the point.

He clearly explained that NO rich person pays "too much taxes"

In that I mean that they (percentage wise) do NOT pay MORE than anyone that works for someone (has a job)

It's wonderful to be rich, and I'm trying to get there, but I guarantee you I'll be paying less taxes then than I am know.

If the government cannot finance legislated activities as prescribed by the Constitution of the land using approved, budgeted revenues, then the government needs to cut spending until it is within its budget.

Second, if high growth (revenue) is desired, then remove the earning caps of individuals. I know this from personal experience in sales. Put a cap on earnings and sales will flat line. Make commissions unlimited based upon sales and growth will soar.

"It is fair that the rich should pay more taxes".

Realize this viewpoint has its foundations in the practice of FORCED WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION rather than sound economic theory or the need for adequate government financing.

If progressive taxation is your bag, feel free to make voluntary, personal contributions to the government at any time.

Great point! Lots of people--especially rich folks--talk about needing to tax the rich more. But, how many of them voluntarily write larger checks to the government? Any of them?

I've yet to meet a rich person who felt they needed to be taxed more. The people asking for this are usually in the lower tax brackets.

Forced wealth distribution is as Canadian as maple syrup though :)

Maybe you should get into politics? This post is quite informative, and better than most of us could have done!

Politicians are poor compared to John. I don't see him willingly taking a big pay cut any time soon.

John, I agree. (I also agreed on the minimum wage law post.)

Your statement that higher earning people (this is not the same as rich people - read the Millionaire Next Door or ask your rich friend how is 'wealth' is financed) should pay a lower rate is plain good business sense. However, I'd be delighted with just the flat rate. Also, get rid of capital gain tax, as capital gains combined with time is the safest way or ordinary people to a million dollars. (PS Belgium has no capital gain tax - just to let you know. It's also far easier to get into Monaco from Belgium than it is from France.)

I also agree with Benjamin Franklin: 10% in taxes is a looooooot of money. Dubai, here I come!

Yes a flat tax would greatly help both Canada and the US. It is what is needed to really help grow the dream!

Slovakia has had flat tax 19% (both for salary tax and profits tax) for several years. Economy is booming and government collects more money ... It works

Hi John,

Another awesome post! :)

There's one point you forgot to mention, a flat tax will increase compliance and reduce people off shoring income.

In Russia when they introduced a 13% flax tax (down from a 26% top rate) the amount of tax revenues collect actually went up! According to the Economist this was due to increased compliance.

This makes sense, let's face it all of us internet marketers who make good money are bending over backwards to avoid paying taxes. There's many ways of doing this including: off shoring your business, setting up a C-corp to upstream income, etc etc.

I support the idea of a fair tax, that is a 23% sales tax, and that's it, no other taxes. This will bring in the same amount of revenue as the current US tax system and explode the economy since taxes on consumption are the least punitive to economic growth.

I think a national sales tax would have a more detrimental effect on lower income families than a flat rate income tax.

Perhaps it could be remedied with exceptions for certain necessities, as many states with sales taxes do. But, getting everyone to agree is not going to be easy. The sales tax exemptions among states vary widely, and it will likely create a mess of loopholes.

Much easier and more fair to have a flat income tax where everybody pays the same rate and you could possibly exempt people below a certain income level from paying at all.

Keeping it simple can make it more fair by eliminating loopholes that people will be bending over backwards to try to utilize.

So john. You are saying people wont make money becuase tey know they will be taxed on it? Maybe if you were right beneath a tax bracket, otherwise that would be dumb. More money is more money no matter regardless of the tax they take out.

Having a flat tax rate is good for you becuase you are well off. If there was a flat tax rate it would have to be decently high to make up for the extra money they arent getting from the rich people. The thing i dont like about flat rate is that while this flat rate tax would be fine for a wealthy person, it could be devistating to a person who isnt as fortunate.

It didnt show my name above.

I didn't say they won't make more, I said it's a disincentive to make more.

A flat tax wouldn't have to be decently high to make up for the extra money they aren't getting from the rich people because they're not getting it from the rich right now. The rich has tax lawyers to shelter all their income. You really think they pay 50% on that million dollar? :twisted:

I plan to do a whole series on how the rich legally avoid tax on their money. You'll be amazed at all the loopholes they have.

That's going to be interesting. I look forward to these posts :twisted:

I've never heard of a person who just stopped making money because they were worried about paying a little more tax. Maybe the loop-holes aren't patched because then it's more fun to make more money...you get to make more then find the loop-hole to fit the income!

I'll challenge you on that disincentive point. I've yet to meet anyone in the highest income bracket who has passed up on making more money because they would have to pay high taxes on it. Maybe I only know greedy people who just can't help wanting more, but I can't see why it would be a disincentive in reality. More money is more money.

I can name many situations where people pass up a chance to make more money because of increasing marginal tax. Many university professors refuse to teach summer school because half the sumer school income goes up in taxes. They rather take the summer off and travel. For many people, free time is just as important as making money. Free time is the end goal after all. :)

Time to read Atlas Shrugged again John!

In a recent Gallup Poll, over 50% of American adults believed the world to be less than 10,000 years old...that means a MAJORITY of voting-age adults believe the Earth to be younger than the invention of braided rope and domesticated dogs. That includes the guy running the country, and most of the ones currently trying for the job.

I'd love to have you on my TV show to discuss your economic views John! http://www.didyousmellthat.com/davetv

Keep poking the bees nest!

David Ledoux
World's Most Dangerous Internet Marketer

How about replacing the income tax with a consumption tax (ie: sales tax). After all, in Canada there was no income tax until the "temporary war income tax" was introduced as a temporary measure only for the duration of world war II.

In the U.S., we can thank Lincoln and the Civil War for our first income tax.

I think that spending of our tax dollars definitely needs to be improved, but there also needs to be some reform for taxing the rich as well. Hell, even warren buffett wants the rich taxed more.

Nothing stopping Warren Buffett from writing a bigger check to the government, is there? But, does he do that???

Most flat tax plans are deceptive in that they act as if a higher effective tax rate on corporations through the elimination of deductions would EVER be adopted. It would so damage the earnings of all corporations, murder the accounting industry, and eliminate a whole niche within the legal profession, that it could never garner political support.

John, if ad networks had a progressive compensation plan, they would still do fine -- as long as all other ad networks also did, it is simply competition for distribution that results in extra incentive for larger earners. So maybe you should consider checking out the competition, income tax wise. Have you thought about moving to Andorra? :)

I have checked out the competition income tax wise. Right now, Canada is the best place because I have it set up so I only pay 17% tax on my income. :twisted:

Nice one joe! I have to admit tax is controversial. I am from a third world country and i definately know of people who who know of people including government officials that have got exiled for tax evasion. My point of view is simple, it kind of makes sense to have a progressive tax system in both an economics and peoples welfare standpoint, so if you work a 9-5 or work for someone absorb what the system got laid out. On the other hand if you are a bigtime blogger like John Chow and I (j/k i am not really) or if you own a business, make sure you register it as a business. Filing your taxes as "other" income v.s filing them under a business is like getting your rebate v.s shopping when prices are high. In capitalist countries businesses are rewarded by being taxed less than otherwise.

There is nothing patriotic about paying a cent more for taxes than you have to.
For those who think it is good for Americans to pay taxes, I wonder what the founders of this country that supported the Boston Tea Party would have to say about that.
Voting to "steal from the rich" is still stealing. We have allow politicians to encourage us to covet our neighbor who may have more than us. So, we get duped into thinking that the politicians will really tax just the rich and not us. The only people they really do not raise taxes on evenly is themselves. That is where the real tax loopholes exist.

Glad I'm not the only one that remembers the Boston Tea Party!

And, remember that Alexis de Tocqueville observed that the U.S. would only remain a democratic republic until the people realized they vote themselves money from the public coffers.

Just a couple of months ago, I stumbled upon a post that summarized some of the main points of those in favor of flat taxes. It also quoted Bjorn Tarras - Walhberg, Secretary General of the World Taxpayers Associations- the man largely responsible for the promotion of flat taxation system of some governments. The post can be found at

Regards,

I believe that these political posts are simply comment bate. Which work really well.