Talk:Flat tax

message: "..taxing that last 100 of income the same amount despite vast differences in the marginal value of money is unfair.."
Flat tax is not about taxing the same "amount" as said in the article, but the same _percentage_. 
If the tax rate is 20% a person making 1 000 000 would pay 200 000 and a person making 100 would pay 20. In order for this to be unfair, the marginal value of 20 for someone making 100 would have to be less than the marginal value of 200 000 for someone making 1 000 000.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.145.46.52 (talk) 08:22, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But even so, it's still unfair because in contrast, the price of goods are NOT percentage based. Even in your example, taking $20 from a poor person has more impact because he's suddenly much closer to being unable to purchase a loaf of bread (whose price is independent of income), than taking 200000 from a rich person.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JeramieHicks (talk • contribs) 00:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in the fairness description 

message: The article says 
:A flat tax system and income taxes overall are not border-adjustable; ... Though, it's possible that this argument falls under the Conflating Concepts category since a flat tax system with border adjustments could be implemented as easily as one without.
:There is no way this is right.  Someone please fix.
:24.177.173.231 (talk) 04:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain how it is inconsistent.  Border adjustments may be attempted through a tariff and credit system.  The U.S. proposed one for their income tax titled the Border Tax Equity Act.  I'm not sure how well it would go over with the WTO though.  Morphh  (talk) 13:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence says that flat taxes are not border adjustable.  The second sentence says that flat taxes are border adjustable. Kitplane01 (talk) 17:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, I see what you're saying.  The tariff and credit does not really make the flat tax border adjustable.  It's more of a credit against foreign sales taxes, and a tax on foreign imports to make up the imbalance of not having a border adjustment element in an income tax.  I guess you might be able to make a border adjusted income tax in theory, though this has not been done in practice since it would violate WTO rules.  So I'll reword - thanks for the clarification.  Morphh  (talk) 17:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal inconsistency 

message: I started the Flat tax adoption around the world page because I thought it would be good to have a place where I could work on gathering some simple, factual information with high-quality citations without getting embroiled in flame wars. Now that that page is stabilizing, it may be a good idea to merge it back in with this page. In fact, I think that a simple list of countries with flat tax regimes is more important material for this page than endless lists of arguments about the desirability of the flat tax, which I believe really should go on a separate page. I'm not going to do any merging or moving right now, but please give some thought to this. Sjeng 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just went ahead and merged. I think that's the easiest way out of the Iceland kerfuffle and the whole contradicting pages issue. There is now some redundant information, which you are of course free to clean up, but please leave in the version that has all the citations (mine ;-) ). Sjeng 14:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More factual information, fewer "arguments". Merge the adoption list, split off the politics. Good idea? 

message: In possible implementation souln't the czech republic be discuosed? --J intela 04:45, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it probably should. WP:Be bold and go discuos (or discuss) it. ;-) Sjeng 15:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Czech republic 

message: Hasn't there been a modern, American discourse on the flat tax by some famous businessman/politician? I think its Forbes or Bloomberg?? Can someone verify and add their ideas here or in the article? Gautam Discuss 08:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Theory

message: Just wanted to put in informal suggestion here that we remove the redirect from proportional tax to this article and turn it into an article.  To follow the idea of progressive tax & regressive tax, this article does not generally discuss the aspects of a proportional tax in that sense but more the aspects of Flat tax legislative implementations and proposals.  I suggest the proportional article discuss information identical to the other two regarding tax incidence.  We could put a  tag on both articles to allow for any disambig.  Morphh  (talk) 13:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright - I followed the Be Bold and Ignore all rules philosophy and created this article.  Please expand as needed. :-) Morphh  (talk) 0:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New article - remove redirect

message: I've created a separate page called flat tax adoption around the world. That page can be a simple list of countries that have adopted the flat tax, along with several reliable references to the media and/or professional literature for each country, and a description of any peculiarities in the particular country's implementation. That way, this simple, factual information can be separated from the long lists of arguments for and against on this page, and we'll be able to focus on completeness, accuracy, and sources. Sjeng 12:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your efforts - the sources are great.  However, I disagree with creating a separate article for this information.  I would much prefer to see that in a section of this article.  We already have a separation of data where that article has sources that this one doesn't.  I think that this article needs a serious cleanup / restructure and your article could help in this as a major section to this.  Any heavy discussion on a country's tax system should be done in an article specific to that country's tax structure.  Morphh  (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, do with it as you please. If you want that information to go on the main flat tax page, go ahead. The problem is that the main flat tax page is already very long, and I didn't want to make it much longer. Probably there are other parts of it (especially the long swaths of vague "arguments" for and against) that should be removed or moved elsewhere, whereas some solid factual information with citations about which countries adopted a flat tax and when could well go on the page itself, I suppose. Personally, I think that the history of the adoption of the flat tax in various countries is more interesting, and more easily described in an NPOV way, than the details of various politically rather fringy (albeit economically mostly quite sound) US proposals. Also, some references to economics research (gasp!) might be appropriate.Sjeng 06:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Adoption page

message: These four lists need attention to be synchronized:
*Flat tax adoption around the world
*Flat tax
*Income tax#Countries with no personal income tax
*Tax rates around the world
Discuss here Talk:Tax_rates_around_the_world#Contradictions_in_the_list_with_other_articles
Alinor 18:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradictions in the list with other articles 

message: How come mostly former communist countries employ flat taxes and other very liberal economic policies? --J intela 06:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Many western European countries have a long history with moderately collectivist policies applied by democratically elected government. In those countries, some rather unfortunate experiments were tried, but the democratic system has usually been able to backtrack when the collectivism went so far as to stifle the economy, or civil liberties, too obviously. In former communist countries, on the other hand, extremely radical collectivism was pushed on the people by dictatorial governments for decades, and it very obviously did not work. I actually don't think it is surprising at all that given such a history, people would choose to adopt more radically liberal (in the European sense of the word) policies. Note that all of this is not really all that appropriate for the talk page. Talk pages are misleadingly labeled "discussion", but it's usually appreciated if you talk about fixing the article. (What? Did I just break the rules myself? Oh my...) Sjeng 15:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post Communism 

message: This section reads like it's POV, and has no citations.  I'm going to mark it neutrality-disputed.
Evilteuf (talk) 16:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't read through it yet, but could you please expand on why you think it is POV so the editors here can try to address it.  I don't think a tag is needed if we can work to address the problem.  You should normally only tag after discussion has not corrected the issue.  Morphh  (talk) 16:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical use of flat tax. 

message: …10:26 a.m. e.s.t.≈
Concerning the Posting after 12:35 13 june 2007
Reference
posting her by D.G.DeL-Dorchester Mass wikipedia.com user talk/.
PROPORTIONAL Flat Tax income 1.0 * taxrate 
PROGRESSIVE Tax agreed {}
REGRESSIVE Tax  I agree
flat tax exemtion-----This is important for an Exemption is Granted and why is because it is exempted by Whom. Ahead of a bodied matter,which in the course at the begining would be perhaps the issuer exemting it through the Government concerning a flat tax in secne meaning if issued a F L A T  T A X the why adjust it wich brings the Quality of a FLAT TAX  to Reverse calculation,the study I've received and not ofcourse by this is the matter of the issue FLAT TAX the meaning in the dictionary is concerned with an even as for tax during King david's Reign an X perhaps established as a numeral number is a basic of an even and since it represents The Awareness of T&A it is concidered to be a horizontal matter tax in all both mean the same,in General a flat tax is an issue towards the value of something,which then is not a thing Pertaining to one unless haveing it,in source the value of a thing is what is cosidered overall by a tax, why then reinburse it,what the source is of value in which coinsists with the tallents of it,there could of been a better discription though,for an example if you build something the achievement would then be to accumilate the value this is called profit now if "it is considered within many under "a" controll' then the controll would estimate the value for exceptance.
estimate is the value of production I'mhere about an erea,the erea is the deed,the circumstance of the erea is a capability of many,which are now involved "within" a gover-n-ment the collection of it's trade is the collection of it's production wich is a stable thing that is shared this thing is a tool to be used the tool earns profit trade and perhaps something else it continues to be collected as an income of source,till next time pened 10:13 a.m./e.s.t. 10:56 a.m.e.s.t.D.G.DeL-Dorchester Mass wikipedia user talk/David George DeLancey (talk) 15:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Flat tax

message: This article references defines a "true flat tax" with a partial applied tax.  There is a difference between a flat tax that taxes just income verses a flat tax that taxes income as well as already existing wealth.  Therefore, I must argue that this WikiPedias article mention of the definition of "true flat tax" is actually not entirely correct.  The only perfect flat tax is one that taxes both income and wealth, and therefore the perfect mechanism of a flat tax is a pure fiat money whereby tax is levied through gradual inflation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mozkill (talk • contribs) 
:Not really. If the government attempted to levy tax solely via inflation of pure fiat money, I could (assuming that I was sufficiently wealthy) avoid all taxation by spending all my money on desirable assets, including a plot of land at least large enough to make my family self-sufficient, then bartering for any needs that the land was unable to provide. -- Derek Ross | Talk 22:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  True Flat Tax 

message: Is 0% a flat income tax? If so, Texas and Florida should be included in the list of States & Providences with flat income taxes 70.116.11.119 (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Texas and Florida in flat tax list? 

message: In the brief "Economic Efficiency" section, it says: A common approximation in economics is that the economic distortion or excess burden from a tax is proportional to the square of the tax rate.[8] This is mentioned as a rule-of-thumb in the reference (p.68, with plenty of qualifications), but it's only one little piece of the article, not a major focus.
The rest of the paragraph says: A 20 percent tax rate thus causes four times the excess burden or deadweight loss of a 10 percent tax, since it is twice the rate. Broadly speaking, this means that a low uniform rate on a broad tax base will be more economically efficient than a mix of high and low rates on a smaller tax base. I've skimmed the source, and I can't find anything like that. It's not an obvious deduction, so it needs a source. Without a source on this latter bit, the "approximation" bit and the reference in general look irrelevant to this article, because its model uses a proportional tax rate throughout. CRETOG8(t/c) 16:32, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  square rule-of-thumb and economic efficiency 

message: Can someone please draw some comparison graphs to show various taxes, including Thatcher's head tax, flat rate tax, graduated tax, etc.?  A graph is worth a thousand words. Korky Day (talk) 23:49, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can someone draw graphs of various taxes? 

message: This section is about tax competition between different jurisdictions, which exists under any tax structure, not just a flat tax (as is written).  If there are indeed people who criticize a flat tax because they argue that it somehow uniquely increases tax competition and causes a "race to the bottom," then that needs to be cited.  Even then, it should also be noted that this argument is false, because tax competition is an issue that is entirely separate from the flat tax.  
This is how it is done in section 1.2, in which Hall and Rabushka are cited as supporting the flat tax because it simplifies the tax code, but then it is pointed out that "Tax simplification ... is an issue wholly separable from that of the rate structure."
To sum up: if there is no similar citation available for section 1.7, then that section should be removed.  If an appropriate citation is made, then a clarification similar to that in section 1.2 should be added as well.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.124.77 (talk) 19:47, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The section "1.7 Race to the Bottom" should be removed 

message: The progressive taxation page has a "Arguments against implementation" section, and many wiki pages have "criticism" sections. Why not one for Flat Tax? 
Currently the only mention of a flat tax possibly being regressive is wound up in a discussion of wages vs income. However, a flat taxe without deductions is regressive. An example. If you make $10,000 and you have to pay 20% in taxes, it will be very difficult for you to live (in the US), but if you make $100,000 and have to pay 20% you will not find it difficult to pay for necessitates.
I'm not an expert on taxation, but it seems clear that there should be some mention of this somewhere on this page. --24.10.132.113 (talk) 21:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here specifically to see the con side of a flat tax system. One would assume from this article that there isn't one. Please, authors, do your due diligence and include the critical side of the flat tax concept. Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 06:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  criticism 

message: Under the section heading Discouraging Wasteful Government Spending, we have "...another positive effect would be to discourage increased spending by government". Increased spending is not the same as wasteful spending. In many situations and according to many political philosophies, increased spending can be a good thing.
Is the section trying to imply that ALL increased government spending is bad (obviously POV) or that wasteful government spending is bad? The latter is still POV, but would obviously be a very common view. HiLo48 (talk) 22:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is something that I was wondering about a flat tax, User talk:159.105.80.220, that the money is far more valuable to the lowest incomes than to the higher incomes. Is there any documentation that applies so that the authors will be moved to add it here? Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 06:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increased spending is not the same as wasteful spending. 

message: Map in Eastern Europe section needs to be updated. (e.g. Hungary now has flat tax). How was this map generated?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.155.80 (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Updated map. It was generated with Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG). Heitordp (talk) 10:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map needs update 

message: Somebody raised this point, albeit rather inelegantly. The map in the section 'Countries that have flat tax systems' uses two shades of green, but there is no legend. It doesn't seem to be the same legend in the map of Europe a section above. I looked briefly and couldn't figure out what the colors meant. Can somebody who understands it add a legend? –CWenger (^ • @) 19:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Updated map and fixed legend. Light green means no personal income tax, dark green means flat personal income tax. Heitordp (talk) 10:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  No legend in world map 

message: Bloomberg View: Why a Flat Tax Won’t Work; Making Swiss Accounts Less … Swiss ... The truth about flat-tax plans; it’s time the Swiss stopped protecting tax cheats October 27, 2011, 5:00 PM EDT 
Also see related Talk:Rick Perry presidential campaign, 2012 and Talk:Herman Cain presidential campaign, 2012 # 9-9-9 WSJ resource
97.87.29.188 (talk) 22:32, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  potential resource [[BusinessWeek]] (and related [[WSJ]]) 

message: In the wake of the economic crisis and to save the economy and public sector, Iceland had to abandon the flat taxation. Both images are incorrect. Dnm (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Slovakia abandoned the flat taxation too . --Pass3456 (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Updated maps. Slovakia is planning to abandon the flat tax, but it has not done so yet. Heitordp (talk) 10:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it has. From tax year 2013 on the flat tax is abandoned. , . --Pass3456 (talk) 18:42, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

text: You're right, and thanks for the source in English. I tried to read the source in German with an automatic translation but it wasn't very clear. Anyway, the flat tax is still valid for 2012, so I'll keep Slovakia on the maps until the end of the year. I also put a note in the article. Heitordp (talk) 00:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. --Pass3456 (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Flat tax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070427231514/http://www.setimes.com:80/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2007/04/06/feature-02 to http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2007/04/06/feature-02
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130924115027/http://investnet.bg/bulgarian-economy/InvestmentIncentives/why-invest-in-bulgaria.aspx to http://www.investnet.bg/bulgarian-economy/InvestmentIncentives/why-invest-in-bulgaria.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20041210012615/http://www.russiaeconomy.org:80/comments/032304.html to http://www.russiaeconomy.org/comments/032304.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Flat tax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070224012548/http://www.investinmacedonia.org:80/news.aspx?news=35 to http://www.investinmacedonia.org/news.aspx?news=35
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140903053609/http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2007/04/06/feature-02 to http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2007/04/06/feature-02
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:36, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Flat tax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110514152858/http://www.uni-graz.at/~parncutt/BIFT2.html to http://www.uni-graz.at/~parncutt/BIFT2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Flat tax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100523210531/http://www.hoover.org:80/publications/books/3602666.html to http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/3602666.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110926051459/http://www.hermancain.com/999plan to http://www.hermancain.com/999plan
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:32, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Flat tax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070707094006/http://www.hoover.org/research/russianecon/essays/5222856.html to http://www.hoover.org/research/russianecon/essays/5222856.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070224012548/http://www.investinmacedonia.org/news.aspx?news=35 to http://www.investinmacedonia.org/news.aspx?news=35
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070626073741/http://www.hoover.org/research/russianecon/essays/5471761.html to http://www.hoover.org/research/russianecon/essays/5471761.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified