Welcome, one and all, to the second edition of Newsvine Next Level.
With April 15 upon us, many Americans have already submitted their income taxes, and many others are feverishly preparing for last-minute trips to the post office. But a concerning report was recently issued by a Washington research center, claiming that nearly half of Americans escape income tax altogether. The research found that 47% of Americans are exempt, either based on low income, or on credits, deductions and exemptions outweighing their amount owed.
We've seen many solutions proposed to making taxes more palatable and affordable, ideally assuring that every American chips in a fair share to offset government spending. One suggested solution is a flat tax rate, which comes with passionate arguments on both sides of the aisle.
Proponents of the flat tax argue that our current tax model puts an unfair burden on those who are paying taxes, to compensate for those who escape taxation by low income or exemptions. A flat tax is fair by its very nature, they claim, since it puts the same percentage of taxable burden on all citizens equally. More so, by simplifying tax law and assuring a higher percentage of citizens pay taxes, it would allow for lower -- or at least stabilized -- tax rates for most Americans. It would also remove loopholes in tax law that see the richest Americans and corporations paying far less than their fair share.
Meanwhile, those who oppose the model point out that data on a flat tax rate is difficult to extrapolate. Little data supports the idea that it would bolster our economy, they say, and other countries that have used a flat tax have not benefitted from it. The highest benefit would be only to the richest Americans, while the majority of citizens would see their taxes raised. A sliding tax rate is problematic, opponents admit, but a flat tax is not the solution.
For this week's debate, our champions have been chosen. economics101 will support the Anti Flat Tax side.
Only progressive taxation can met these needs of a civil society. The so called simplicity of a flat tax is only attractive because our current tax code is so complicated - the basic premise of a progressive tax code need not be any more complicated beyond having proportional bands.
While cityguy1 will support the Pro Flat Tax Side.
The people that argue against a flat tax simply do not understand math. 17% of $10,000 is no less restricting than 17% on $100,000. It is EQUAL. That means everyone pays the same share. Unfortunately, today's economic climate and rhetoric from the Left suggests that being 'successful' means that you are mean, evil, greedy etc... and because of that you should pay MORE than your 'share'.
I've e-mailed basic rules of engagement to the participants, including word count and the order of their comments. Please refrain from interacting within the debate thread itself, as those replies will be summarily deleted. Responses in the comments below the main thread are more than welcome. Feel free to read the formal arguments from our chosen debaters in the thread, and reply below with your own thoughts on tax rate solutions.