Observations on the Question of Morality of Taxation

Abstract

The concept of tax contains the often unaddressed concept suggested above: at what point does the actual amount of tax demanded become unfair? If we examine the concept of fairness a little closer, we should concede that it is a statement that contemplates a right or wrong answer, however ill-defined it may be at the margin. Such a term is therefore decidedly moral. The question, then, can be put more directly: at what point does the amount claimed by a taxing government become immoral? I propose that there are three basic models from which one's perspective on taxation may be viewed: the Ownership Model, the Individual Right Model, and the Covenant Community Model. By Ownership Model, I mean that the taxing government is presumed to own, in some sense, all property taxed. The Individual Right Model assumes an individual's total right to own possessions justly obtained. The Covenant Community Model similarly recognizes an individual right to possess property, but also understands that there is an externally imposed claim upon all members of the community. Current tax policy literature reflects points of view stemming from the Ownership model (e.g. Murphy and Nagel's Myth of Ownership) and the Individual Rights Model (e.g. Robert Nozick and others). Perspective from the Covenant Community Model is rare. However, the political history of the United States indicates that something like this model was the framework in which the founders discussed and contemplated the structure of government. It can be fairly stated that some version of the Covenant Community Model prevailed in Western Civilization and continued in the early years of the United States (although the influence of Enlightenment thinking was heavily present). The concept of justice protecting private property was pervasive and set out as early as St. Augustine of Hippo's City of God. The concept, however, has been diluted and even supplanted by the mixed forces of the Enlightenment, including empiricism, utilitarianism, and Kantianism. Examples of the uneasiness that current tax commenatators have with objective standards of morality are explored.