University of Surrey

Test tubes in the lab Research in the ATI Dance Research

Tax Fairness by Convention: A Defense of Horizontal Equity

Lindsay, IK (2016) Tax Fairness by Convention: A Defense of Horizontal Equity Florida Tax Review, 19 (2). pp. 79-119.

[img]
Preview
Text
LINDSAY-Full article.pdf - Version of Record

Download (222kB) | Preview
Official URL: http://upf.com/ftr.asp

Abstract

Horizontal equity is the principle that people who earn equal income should owe equal tax. It has gotten a bad name. Although horizontal equity remains a textbook criterion of tax fairness, scholarly literature is largely hostile. Scholars ranging from the legal theorist Louis Kaplow to philosophers Thomas Nagel and Liam Murphy question its conceptual coherence and normative significance. The crux of the case against horizontal equity is that it seems irrational to worry about the relationship between pre-tax income and tax obligations rather than determining tax policy in light of what our best theory of distributive justice tells us is the best post-tax outcome. I argue that horizontal equity is best understood as a compromise principle for people who disagree about deeper principles of distributive justice. The debate over horizontal equity reflects two distinct ways of thinking about fairness. One approach starts with principles that specify a just distribution of income, resources or utility and uses these principles to derive appropriate tax laws. A second approach analyzes fairness norms as stable and mutually advantageous compromises between people who have conflicting interests and differing moral commitments. Proponents and opponents of redistributive taxation can agree that at any given level of redistribution they will each be better off if taxes are horizontally equitable. Horizontally equitable taxation can thus prevent rent-seeking and ideological conflict over tax policy from generating a wasteful patchwork of narrow taxes and tax subsidies. Observing horizontal equity may be unimportant when people agree on ideal principles of justice and the relevant empirical facts. But under more usual conditions of deep moral and empirical disagreement over tax policy, treating pre-tax income as a normative baseline can prevent conflict over distributive questions from leading to wasteful and inequitable tax policy.

Item Type: Article
Subjects : Law
Divisions : Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences > School of Law
Authors :
NameEmailORCID
Lindsay, IKi.lindsay@surrey.ac.ukUNSPECIFIED
Date : 2016
Copyright Disclaimer : Copyright © 2016 by the University of Florida
Uncontrolled Keywords : Taxation, Tax, Equity, Fairness
Related URLs :
Depositing User : Symplectic Elements
Date Deposited : 16 May 2017 15:39
Last Modified : 13 Sep 2017 09:14
URI: http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/id/eprint/821080

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year


Information about this web site

© The University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, United Kingdom.
+44 (0)1483 300800