Flat tax: The good, the bad and why it won't happen
Wish taxes were so simple you could file them on a postcard? Some say a flat tax could make that possible.
With tax season upon us, you may be wondering why the government has to make things so complex.
According to the CCH Standard Federal Tax Reporter (.pdf file), the tax code clocks in at an astounding 73,954 pages as of 2013. It includes seven tax rates, four standard deductions and at least a dozen tax credits for individuals. Then there are the exemptions, the itemized deductions and the special tax rules.
And when you think you're starting to understand how the system works, the government likes to throw in a few curveballs, like the alternative minimum tax.
Wouldn't it be easier if we eliminated 73,950 pages of hoops and simply taxed everyone using the same percentage?
Well, that depends on who you ask.
Basics of our progressive system
Before delving into the pros and cons of a flat tax, let's go over how the current system works first. The current federal income tax system is progressive, meaning the more you earn, the higher percentage of taxes you pay.
Here are the brackets for your 2013 taxes (those would be the ones you're working on right now):
- 10 percent
- 15 percent
- 25 percent
- 28 percent
- 33 percent
- 35 percent
- 39.6 percent
In addition, it's important to know that the tax rates above are marginal. That means, if you fall into the highest tax bracket, you aren't paying 39.6 percent on all of your income. You only pay that rate on the portion of your income that falls into that tax bracket. For a single filer, that means you would pay 39.6 percent in taxes on any income in excess of $400,000 for 2013.
To help put it into perspective, here's an example published in Forbes last year that assumes you earn $100,000 and are in the 28 percent tax bracket:
You would owe 10 percent of $8,925, 15 percent of $27,325 (the difference between the top and the threshold of the second tax bracket), 25 percent of $51,600, and 28 percent of $12,150 (the difference between your income and the threshold of the third tax bracket). That calculation results in $21,293, or an effective (not marginal) tax rate of 21.2 percent.
Why having a flat tax would be awesome
If that all seems about as clear as mud, then you have stumbled upon one of the key reasons some people advocate for a flat tax: simplicity.
A flat tax would make taxes easy. No matter what you earn, you would pay one rate for all your income. A pure flat tax would also eliminate deductions and credits to further streamline tax filing and payment. In arguing for his flat tax proposal three years ago, Texas Gov. Rick Perry said taxes would become so simple that taxpayers would be able to "complete their returns in minutes and submit them on a postcard."
Proponents of the flat tax also say that beyond being simple, it's also fair. Since everyone would pay the same tax rate, all would be contributing an equal proportion of their income to the maintenance of government services.
Finally, flat tax supporters say a simplified, uniform tax rate would encourage economic growth. They say that many fast-growing economies are found in countries that have flat, rather than progressive, tax systems.
Why having a flat tax would be awful
Opponents of the flat tax say supporters are blowing smoke and are actually intent on creating a system that favors the wealthy.
While flat tax supporters point to former Soviet countries as examples of nations that saw tremendous economic growth after enacting a flat tax, opponents say the success in Eastern Europe has been overblown. In addition, some countries that had enacted a flat tax are now repealing those laws.
What's more, opponents say a flat tax may simplify the tax code, but it would do so at the expense of lower- and middle-class families. Most flat tax proposals set taxes in the range of 17 to 20 percent, meaning low earners could pay more while wealthy families get a break. This may be especially true if a pure flat tax is enacted -- that is, one that includes no deductions or credits.
Not only would a flat tax widen wealth inequality in the country, opponents say it might allow the rich to duck paying taxes on a large portion of their income. Many proposals exempt investment income, which can be a major source of money for some affluent households. Small businesses may also suffer under a flat tax if they are unable to deduct expenses that cut into profits.
And why you may never see a flat tax
While the debate regarding the flat tax can be interesting and heated, it's largely theoretical at this point. Consider how many politicians and economists have advocated for a flat tax during the past 30-plus years. Here's a sampling, compiled by NPR:
- 1981. Hoover Institution economists promoted a 19 percent flat tax that would exempt lower-income households, such as families of four earning less than $25,500 annually.
- 1992. California Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, proposed a 13 percent flat tax with limited exemptions. He also suggested we scrap the Social Security tax.
- 1996. Republican Steve Forbes made a flat tax one of the centerpieces of his presidential bid. His plan would allow standard and dependent deductions while instituting a 17 percent flat tax.
- 2011. Several Republican presidential candidates embraced the flat tax that year. Herman Cain recommended it be set at 9 percent while Rick Perry proposed an optional 20 percent tax.
However, these proposals and others like them have failed to gain traction. It’s not necessarily because people love the current tax system. Even those who oppose the flat tax say our current tax code is broken.
However, when our Congress can't even agree on an annual budget, it seems unlikely it will be able to crack open the tax code and make meaningful changes, whether that would be to simplify the current version or replace it altogether.
So for now, it appears we are stuck with 73,954 pages of tax time fun.
As for the flat tax, what do you think? Do you prefer the simplicity of a flat tax or do you think those with more money should pay more taxes?
More on Money Talks News
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
It won’t happen because it will take away the power of congress.
They get donations and support from corporations, PACS and special interest groups in exchange for favorable tax treatment in the form of tax credits, tax breaks or other favored status.
If we went to a flat tax or national sales tax they would not be able to offer those favors in return for donations and other goodies.
King Obama wont allow flat tax because that makes the gov't smaller.
GET YOUR BILLION BACK!...... That's why we can't get a Flat Tax or The Fair Tax Plan.... we would no longer need to pay for someone to do our taxes or buy expensive software to do it ourselves. We pay more then a billion dollars in that ad to just get our taxes done!
Tax prep outfits, CPA's, accountants etc.... = huge lobby to keep the tax code a big mess so no one can fill out a post card to do their taxes, or just pay a national sales tax on every thing they buy to replace the income tax code.
One of the other biggest problems is that the current tax code makes it far to easy for people to not report income.... I will bet EVERY single person that reads this knows someone that works for money under the table or does not report all their income (waitresses) let alone all the illegal things that some people do to make money.... ie Sell Drugs........ The Fair Tax plan would get everyone of them to pay their share of taxes.
The Department of Health and Human Services and the IRS are 2 of the biggest offenders, but the food stamp program is a success story.
Between 2002 and 2012, federal agencies spent more than half a trillion dollars ($688 billion) on payments that should never have been made.
Every year, according to their own record-keeping, the agencies that administer major federal programs are now paying out more than $100 billion improperly, and even though they're aware of the problem, they recover only a tiny fraction for taxpayers. This adds up to huge losses for the U.S. Treasury.
WE "NEED" TO FIGURE OUT WHY THE IRS IS DONATING BILLIONS TO MEXICAN CITIZENS!!!!
WE "NEED" TO FIND OUT HOW TO STOP CRIMINALS FROM GETTING ELECTED!!!!!
WE "NEED" TO FIGURE OUT WHO SPENT (I MEAN WASTED) 300+ MILLION DOLLARS ON AN OBVIOUS JOKE OF
A COMPUTER SYSTEM THAT DOESN'T EVEN WORK!!!!!
WE "NEED" TO START PUTTING SOME OF THESE GOVERNMENT GENIUSES IN JAIL INSTEAD OF PAYING THEM
THEIR RETIREMENT BENEFITS!!!!!!
WE "NEED" SOME FAIRLY COMMON SENSE CITIZENS (VOTERS) IN THIS COUNTRY INSTEAD OF IMPORTING A
BUNCH OF HALF-**** THIRD WORLD MORONS!!!!
WE "NEED" SOME ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO HAVE A CONSCIENCE!!!!!
WE "NEED" MANY MORE CITIZENS WHO HAVE A CONSCIENCE - AND PAY ATTENTION TO IT!!!!!!
WE "NEED" LAWMAKERS AND A PRESIDENT WHO RESPECT, PRACTICE, AND ENFORCE THE LAWS WE LIVE
OBVIOUSLY - - - WE DON'T NEED A MIDDLE CLASS PARTY - - THEY'RE THE ONES WHO GOT US WHERE
WE ARE!!!!! THEY PUT THE CURRENT PROBLEMS IN PLACE!!!!!
the problem is not how we are taxed.
the problem is how it is all pissed away.
ONLY PROBLEM IS HE AIN'T HALF OF WHAT ROBIN HOOD WAS!!!
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.