Flat Tax

Flat Tax Argument

Roosevelt A. Wilkerson

Strayer University

Phi 210 Critical Thinking

Professor

March 8, 2012

FLAT TAX ARGUMENT

Albert Einstein said that "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." This is something is good to know and reflect on for those who want to redesign the way we levy taxes in this country. While it's true that there are now 24 countries with a flat tax system, it is worth noting that none of them got there by doing away with an established progressive income tax system. Of those 24 countries, fifteen are formerly Communist countries of Eastern and Central Europe. The others are very small, ranging from Montenegro to Iceland. No other major industrial nation has made that choice and for good reason.

For the fact that is looks very on the surface hides a big change in the way the tax burden is distributed unfairly among the poor, the middle class, and the rich. When think tanks such as the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation support changes that redistribute the tax burden in such a way, they usually warn us of the perils of class warfare. But the proposed flat tax is, in fact, class warfare—which is yet another attempt at reducing the tax obligations of higher-income people in return for the hope or promise that they might use the money to not only invest and create jobs, but just maybe create those very jobs in the United States.

There are two things, I believe, that should tell us to think twice before jumping on the flat-tax bandwagon. The first is the chilling effect of eliminating deductions, credits and exclusions that benefit the middle class as well as the rich and that play important roles in our lives—pension contributions, employer-provided healthcare, and deductions for mortgage interest, property taxes, and charitable contributions that support everything from soup kitchens to education to the arts. Second is the role of our progressive federal income tax in...