Graduated Tax or Gradually Taxed
Twenty years ago when the writer had a public tax practice in
Once at Tomasita’s near the old train depot, my brother and I had finished one of their great meals. As we were exiting through a very crowded lobby of people waiting to be seated, I hollered at my brother: ‘Sure was worth the 2 hour wait!’
Canyon Road climbs toward the
As a public accountant in that city of 60,000 inhabitants, I could count many clients from the small business and art community. Referrals were not unusual. So when this shopkeeper called, I soon learned that he had not filed any tax returns for a number of years. And so IRS was on the prowl, insisting he file the last three years. After a few moments of conversation in which he disclosed using one checking account for all his business activity, I advised: ‘Put together for me three years of bank statements. We will first have to create year-end financial statements from those statements for each of the three years, and then from those statements prepare the tax returns.’
We met the following week. He had dutifully put together the statements. I discovered that he made and sold attractive decorator pillows. He rented a small space in a larger gallery to display his works.
In the coming week, the financial statements and tax returns were prepared. For each year, the shopkeeper had had a net profit of approximately $10,000. His tax liability for each year, though, was over $2,500. In 1988, the Social Security Administration published that the poverty level of a single person in
The idea behind a graduated tax system is that everyone should contribute his or her fair share to the tax treasury regardless of living circumstances. But should contributions be enforced when the income is at or near the poverty level? It would perhaps be fairer if a tax structure were something like the following. Suppose a person’s average income is $5,000 and his necessary expenses amount to the same sum, then no taxes should be collected from him. If another person’s income is $10,000 and his necessary expenses are $5,000, then he could be assessed 10% since there will be no decline in his standard of living. If a third person has an income of $20,000 and his costs of living are determined to be $10,000, he should be assessed twice the amount or 20% of the person earning $10,000. And if still another person earns $50,000 and his expenses are $20,000, then he should pay 30% of his income in taxes. But if an indigent person has an income of $4,000 where the poverty level is determined to be $5,000 and he sacrifices to make his living but the fruit of his labor is inadequate, he should be helped from the treasury so as not to live in want.
So a fair graduated tax system would not impose taxes on the lower income earners. It would help those whose incomes are below the poverty level. And it would not impose excessive tax rates on middle income levels so as to encourage their productivity and contributing to economic growth.
As to high income earners,