Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History
The Issue of Tax Reform
The issue of tax reform is not a new one. It has been debated since the founding of the very first modern government. At the heart of the debate is what the role of government should be in its citizen’s lives. In the United States the controversy over taxes has been central since the nation’s founding in 1776. To analyze the issue of tax reform one must first look at taxes and what they represent to the United States. According to the encyclopedia Britannica almost all of the Untied States government’s revenue comes from taxes. The most important of all the levied taxes is the personal income tax, which brings in by far the most revenue for the government. This tax was first developed during the civil war, with a rate of approximately 3%. As time progressed, the rate increased, and in 1913 the ratification of the 16th amendment established the basis for our current tax code. The rates became increasingly graduated until shortly after World War II, when the minimum rate was 23% and the maximum 94%. Graduated rates, meaning the rate increases as income increases, have become a world standard for tax policy. The progressive income tax has come to be viewed not only as a vital source of revenue for the government, but also as a vehicle of social reform, helping to redistribute wealth. The problem with the current tax system arises in the fact that income taxes are mandatory, and are not paid in exchange for some specific thing. And while they are supposed to be collected for the benefit of the taxpayers as a whole, the obligation of the individual citizen to pay the tax is independent of any benefit received. Even taxes on wages, called payroll taxes, commonly used for retirement funds and medical payments, have a very weak connection to the benefits received by the individual. Also, any taxpayer knows the time and effort required to file their taxes due to the complexity of the personal income tax is enormous. This is why there is opposition to the current tax system, and why major reforms are being proposed. Tax cuts and changes to tax policy are in fact key programs of the two presidential candidates, Al Gore and George W. Bush. Three main views exist about tax reform. The two major proposals at this time are a flat-rate income tax without deductions or exemptions, and a national sales or value-added tax. In addition to t...
... middle of paper ...
.... Also, no marriage tax would help eliminate the double taxation of individuals under the current system.
The three major sides currently heading controversy over tax reform: the flat-rate income tax, the national sales tax, and the idea that government should focus on reform in other areas are complicated and very difficult to assess. It is easy to see however that the flat rate income tax would not accomplish its goal of increasing savings and simplifying the tax code, and that those who say that tax reform is not necessary are in error. The tax system has many flaws and does not help to further the economy. It certainly has not helped to bridge the gap between rich and poor, even in this time of economic boom. It is certain that the national sales tax is the best plan for our country and would benefit all taxpayers now subject to the unfair personal income tax. It will shape the argument over tax reforms in the following years and, if enacted, will have a great liberating effect on the United States. Americans can be assured that if the national sales tax is replaces the current tax system, it will have a profound effect on the future of our economy and our nation.
Taxes. We hate to love them and love to hate them. The mere mention of the word can stir heated debates and has done so for centuries. None was more prevalent than during colony times. During this time, on one side was the British Parliament while on the other side were the colonists, both arguing, either verbally or in written text, about which side did or did not have the right to tax the colonies. Soame Jenyns was one of these men who sided with the mother country in the tax debate.
Sixteenth Amendment- Authorization of an Income Tax – Progressives thought this would slow down the rising wealth of the richest Americans by using a sliding or progressive scale where the wealthier would pay more into the system. In 1907, Roosevelt supported the tax but it took two years until his Successor, Taft endorsed the constitutional amendment for the tax. The Sixteenth Amendment was finally ratified by the states in 1913. The origin of the income tax came William J Bryan in 1894 to help redistribute wealth and then from Roosevelt and his dedication to reform of corporations. I agree with an income tax to pay for all of our government systems and departments, but I believe there was a misfire with “redistributing wealth.” The redistribution is seen in welfare systems whereby individuals receive money to live. This is meant to be a temporary assistance, but sadly, most that are in the system are stuck due to lack of assistance in learning how to escape poverty. There are a lot of government funded programs, but there is no general help system to help lift people up and stay up, so there continues a cycle of
Whether or not to keep or discard the Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy, give tax breaks to the lowest tax bracket, and even throwing out the entire current tax code and replacing it with a simpler version, tax code and tax law has been a very controversial topic for the past few years. As it stands, the current tax code has over seventy two thousand pages, compared to the four hundred pages it had in 1913. There are many different stakeholders in this debate including taxpayers, corporations, businesses, etc. Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) is an organization that was “founded in 1985 by Grover Norquist at the request of President Reagan”(.N.p.). Their goal is to create and advocate for a simple flat tax,“...on the belief that they will provide a strong stimulus to investment, employment, and output” (Stokey 1). They promote their organization and represent taxpayers in all fifty states. Along with tax reform, ATR also advocates for individual health care, free trade, and spending transparency (.N.p.). Using very simple and easy to understand images, ATR is able to convey their goals and get information across to the general audience that visits their website.
There have been numerous debates within the last decade over what needs to be done about welfare and what is the best welfare reform plan. In the mid-1990s the TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Act was proposed under the Clinton administration. This plan was not received well since it had put a five year lifetime limit on receiving welfare and did not supply the necessary accommodations to help people in poverty follow this guideline. Under the impression that people could easily have found a job and worked their way out of poverty in five years, the plan was passed in 1996 and people in poverty were immediately forced to start looking for jobs. When the TANF Act was up for renewal earlier this year, the Bush administration carefully looked at what the TANF Act had done for the poverty stricken. Bush realized that, in his opinion, the plan had been successful and should stay in effect with some minor tweaking. Bush proposed a similar plan which kept the five year welfare restriction in place but did raise the budgeted amount of money to be placed towards childcare and food stamps. Both the TANF Act and Bush's revised bill have caused a huge controversy between liberal and conservative activists. The liberals feel that it is cruel to put people in a situation where they can no longer receive help from the government since so many people can not simply go out and get a job and work their way out of poverty. They feel if finding a job was that easy, most people would have already worked their way out of poverty. The conservatives feel that the plans, such as the TANF Act, are a surefire way to lower poverty levels and unemployment rates as well as decrease the amount o...
In the summer of 1996, Congress finally passed and the President signed the "Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996", transforming the nation's welfare system. The passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act sets the stage for ongoing reconstruction of welfare systems on a state-by-state basis. The combined programs will increase from nearly $100 billion this year to $130 billion per year in 6 years. Programs included are for food stamps, SSI, child nutrition, foster care, the bloss grant program for child- care, and the new block grant to take the place of AFDC. All of those programs will seek $700 billion over the next 6 years, from the taxpayers of America. This program in its reformed mode will cost $55 billion less than it was assumed to cost if there were no changes and the entitlements were left alone. The current welfare system has failed the very families it was intended to serve. If the present welfare system was working so well we would not be here today.
There are millions of Americans affected by social security. These Americans rely on social security to provide them with financial security. Recently President Bush agreed to proposing a method of privatizing the social security program so that in the future the vast reserves of the social security system would not run out nearly as fast. With the always increasing rise in inflation, and the baby boomer generation reaching ages of retirement fairly soon, this is an issue that needs to be dealt with correctly and rapidly. The way the president is handling the situation is definitely the right way to do it. There are many things and ways in which to do it wrong, but the president seems to be pointing the plans of social security in the right direction. The president’s plans of reforming social security are right because the privatization is the best way to go, changing the rules for those who would apply for it increases the savings and makes the money go farther, and working with the distribution of different tax percentages would really make the money go a lot farther.
Many debates have been waged over the decades on what will be taxed, on who shall be taxed and how taxes are collected. Since the 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913, the debate has intensified, centering on how high to make the income tax rate. Most Americans were not concerned since the Amendment was sold to them as something that would only affect corporations and the rich. With ever increasing fervor these corporations created lobbyists to convince Congress to exempt them from some or all of the income tax. The big breakthrough in this was taxing the worker directly with payroll taxes during World War II. This method of collecting income tax was sold to Americans as temporary, but Congress has extended it indefinitely and the public has become used to it. The next few decades saw the debate revolve around creating tax breaks for individuals in an attempt to modify behavior or spending. This has resulted in over 67,000 pages of tax code and an entire industry devoted to tax compliance and evasion, with the unintended behavioral change of corporations and the rich parking their money outside of the United States in small island nations to avoid taxation. These offshore accounts are estimated to hold $10 trillion dollars, a number approximate to the national debt. The FairTax Act should be enacted because it eliminates all federal income taxes for individuals and corporations, eliminates all federal payroll withholding taxes, abolishes estate and capital gains taxes and repeals the 16th Amendment; thus eliminating the need for offshore accounts.
Our current system of taxation is a varied rate percentage based on different income brackets. Many say that it violates our constitutional rights through unequal taxation. Multiple deductions, loopholes, special rates, and a complex system of regulations all characterize our Federal Income Tax System, prompting many to question why it is still being used (Peters, 2013). The current system although bringing in over $3 trillion, taxes income multiple times, and includes the taxing of estate, labor, savings, and investments (National Priorities Project, 2013). The system itself is complex with over 20,000 pages of regulations, requiring a massive filing system, which is set up and maintained by an even larger IRS, requiring over $225 billion in compliance costs (Hall, 2001). One can be hard pressed to find an advantage in the current system, other than the fact that it provides the government with an enormous amount of funds, and it has...
The tax policy in the United States is very confusing. When the tax policy was originally written in 1913 it was four hundred pages. Now, over the past ninety one years, that tax policy has evolved to over 72,000 pages. Since the tax code has become so lengthy and nearly impossible to understand, the topic of tax reform has been in the minds of many. Although, most barely think about tax reform until tax season. It is a controversial subject due to the impact a change in tax code would have on the American people. The two most popular and widely known stakeholders in this debate are the two major political parties in the United States, the Democrats and the Republicans. The two parties share absolutely no common ground on the subject of tax reform, other than thinking the other parties solution is wrong. The Democrats, in general, want to raise taxes on the wealthy, while Republicans, generally, want to cut taxes for everyone (Democratic Party) (GOP). Unfortunately, with the United States economy currently doing so poorly, the parties can no longer afford to remain at a standstill, some sort of compromise is going to have to be made. The implementation of a flat tax, and discarding the current tax system would be a compromise that both parties can agree on and will simplify the tax code, overall benefiting all Americans.
I. You might have heard politicians in the news, talk about overhauling our tax system with a new fix-all idea, the flat-tax. This would simplify our overly complicated tax system and might seem appealing at first glance, however there are serious problems with it.
Since the Welfare reform law was introduced in 1996 it has impacted American society greatly. The new welfare policy, named the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), replaced the Aid to Family and Dependent Children (AFDC) program; they have five known differences that only affect the ones who need the assistance. Critics argue that the TANF has negatively impacted the society while some argue that it has not. Linda Burnham, author of “Welfare Reform, Family Hardship & Woman of Color,” asserts that “welfare reform has increased the hardship faced by many women leaving welfare for work and their movement into low-wage jobs, exposes them to higher level of housing insecurities, homelessness, food insecurity, and hunger.” She also argues that women of color “are especially vulnerable to the negative impact of welfare reform” (38).
If everyone paid the same percentage rate on their income, the poor would wind up paying a greater total amount of their income than the rich.
...s. While this will not please all, I believe it would please majority and that would result in a more peaceful and harmonious structure to unions of marriage.
...government should make a mandatory law that should require all aspiring new couples to take a mandatory class before they are granted a marriage approval. This type of mandatory education alone will reduce the 29% divorce rate cited in the beginning of this research paper.
Taxation has always been a major controversy. Just like any major corporation, the government is constantly looking to raise revenue. The easiest and fairest way to do this is by taxing the people. However, how the people will be taxed is always an issue.