Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

(Related to the Chapter Opener on page 600) An article in the New York Times noted that a proposal by 2016 Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton would "increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans to combat a widening gap between rich and poor." a. Currently, does the effect of federal taxes make the distribution of income more or less equal? Briefly explain. b. What are the benefits and drawbacks of using the federal income tax code to reduce income inequality?

Short Answer

Expert verified
Federal taxes generally make the distribution of income more equal due to the progressive tax structure. The benefits of using the federal income tax code to reduce income inequality include promoting economic fairness and reducing wealth concentration. However, the drawbacks include the discouragement of investment and entrepreneurial activities, tax evasion, reduced work effort and potentially slower economic growth.

Step by step solution

01

Understanding Effects of Federal Taxes

The federal taxes generally make the distribution of income more equal. This is primarily because the United States has a progressive tax structure. Meaning, higher-income individuals pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes compared to those with lower income. Thus, this nature of the U.S. tax system tends to redistribute resources from higher-income to lower-income individuals, making the income distribution more equal.
02

Benefits of Using Federal Income Tax

There are several benefits associated with using the federal income tax code to reduce income inequality. The primary advantage is to promote economic fairness by imposing higher tax rates on those with higher income. It also helps to reduce the wealth concentration in the hands of a few wealthy individuals and contributes to reducing income gaps. This could contribute to social stability.
03

Drawbacks of Using Federal Income Tax

There are various drawbacks as well. High taxes on the wealthy could discourage investment and entrepreneurial activities. Taxpayers might look for ways to dodge taxes if they feel their earnings are being excessively taxed. Additionally, it might also discourage work effort and productivity among high-earners. Lastly, it could lead to slower economic growth as it reduces the incentive for wealth creation.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Progressive Tax Structure
At the heart of the federal income tax system in the United States is the progressive tax structure, a system designed to levy higher rates of taxation on those with greater income. The intention behind this approach is to ensure that those who have more financial capacity contribute more to the governmental funds. It operates on the principle of ability to pay, ensuring that as a person's earnings increase, they pay a higher proportion of their income in taxes.

The progressive system includes tax brackets, which categorize income ranges into segments; as one's income ascends through these brackets, they encounter a higher tax rate. This is in stark contrast to a flat tax, where everyone pays the same rate, regardless of earnings. The progressive nature of the tax is essential in moderating income disparity as it effectively levies heavier taxes on the rich and lighter ones on the poor, ensuring a fair collection based on an individual's financial strength.
Redistribution of Income
Income redistribution refers to the transfer of income from wealthier segments of society to poorer ones through various fiscal policies; one of the primary policies used for this purpose is taxation. The federal income tax plays a monumental role in this redistribution. High-income earners not only face higher tax rates but also contribute to funding welfare programs and social initiatives that largely benefit the lower-income groups.

Through these mechanisms, the government aims to even out the economic scales, providing social benefits such as unemployment insurance, healthcare, and educational programs. Redistribution is fundamental to maintaining a certain amount of social cohesion, as it attempts to provide a safety net for the most vulnerable and create opportunities for upward economic mobility.
Economic Fairness
Achieving economic fairness is an ideal wherein every individual receives an equitable opportunity to succeed, unobstructed by skewed wealth allocation. The progressive tax structure is a tool for facilitating such fairness. It posits that those with greater wealth have benefited disproportionately from public goods, like infrastructure, education, and social systems, and therefore should contribute a larger share to sustain these services. However, 'fair' is subjective, and views differ on how much tax variation is justifiable.

While many view progressive taxation as a fair approach to sharing the cost of societal benefits, critics often contend that it could penalize success. Thus, economic fairness, in the context of taxes, strikes a balance between ensuring a productive society where success is attainable and instituting an equitable contribution system where standards of living can be elevated for all.
Wealth Concentration
Wealth concentration refers to the degree to which a country's wealth is distributed among its population. In many cases, if left unchecked, wealth tends to become concentrated in the hands of a few. This concentration can lead to a variety of social and economic problems, such as reduced consumer spending, decreased social mobility, and even political instability as the wealthy have more influence over public policy.

Progressive taxation serves to temper this wealth concentration by redistributing some of the financial resources of the wealthiest toward broader public use. This is grounded in the belief that excessive wealth concentration undermines the collective prosperity and democratic principles. The tax code, therefore, is a critical instrument in attempting to prevent the deepening of economic divides and ensuring a more even distribution of resources.
Investment and Entrepreneurial Activities
While taxation is essential for public services and infrastructure, it’s crucial to consider how it impacts investment and entrepreneurial activities. High tax rates could be seen by businesses and investors as a barrier to innovation and expansion because it reduces the amount of post-tax income available for reinvestment. Critics argue that excessive taxation might stifle the entrepreneurial spirit, leading to decreased economic dynamism. Economies thrive on new ideas and business ventures that create jobs and spur growth.

Consequently, policymakers must find a balance between collecting adequate revenue through taxes and fostering an environment conducive to risk-taking and investment. This includes considering incentives, such as tax credits or deductions for research and development and startup costs which can help promote innovation while still maintaining a progressive tax framework designed to support economic fairness and curb wealth inequality.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

An article in the Economist on the work of the late Nobel Laureate James Buchanan made the following observation: "It was important...to understand the ways that government could fail systematically." a. What does government failure mean in this context? How does public choice theory help us understand how "government could fail systematically"? b. The same article noted that "rent-seeking is a very useful concept to have around when thinking about policy." What is rent seeking? Why is the concept useful when thinking about policy?

Cecil Bohanon, an economist at Ball State University, and Brian Pizzola, an economist with the accounting firm Ernst \& Young, used a proposed tax on income earned by credit card lenders in Minnesota to explain how tax incidence is determined. The tax, which state lawmakers did not pass, would have been imposed on lenders who charged credit card customers more than 15 percent interest on their balances. Bohanon and Pizzola explained that many of those who paid high interest rates were consumers with fewer other sources of credit, and there was nothing to prevent lenders from further raising interest rates after the tax was imposed. John Spry, an economist at St. Thomas University, stated that the proposed tax was "highly regressive \(\ldots\) twenty percent of the new tax would be paid by Minnesota families with the lowest 10 percent of income. Thirty-seven percent of the tax would be paid by families with the lowest 20 percent of income." a. Explain why John Spry believed that the proposed tax would have been "highly regressive." b. Do Bohanon and Pizzola believe the elasticity of demand of those who would have been most affected by the tax was more or less elastic than the elasticity of supply of credit card lenders? Briefly explain.

Jason Furman served as the chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Obama. In an opinion column in the Wall Street Journal discussing President Trump's tax reform proposal, Furman noted the need "for seriously revamping America's inefficient business-tax system to unlock stronger economic growth." But he also observed that tax reform is even more difficult than reforming the health care system "since it touches a larger fraction of the economy and threatens more powerful vested interests." a. Briefly explain what Furman means by "powerful vested interests." b. If tax reform leads to stronger economic growth, shouldn't a majority of Congress support it even if vested interests oppose the reform? Why then has tax reform legislation been difficult for Congress to pass?

In Chapter 4, Section 4.3, we discussed the federal government's agricultural program, which is often called the "farm bill." Because the U.S. Department of Agriculture administers the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more generally known as the food stamp program, its funding is included in the farm bill. Some members of Congress believe that spending on SNAP should be reduced. In an article in the Washington Post, Marion Nestle of New York University was quoted as arguing: "[The program is] at great risk, and what has saved it from being chopped up into little pieces is that it's in the Farm Bill and therefore logrolled with agricultural supports." Briefly explain what Nestle means by "logrolling" and evaluate her argument.

Robert Hall of Stanford University and Nicholas PetroskyNadeau of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco used the U.S. Census Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to divide households into four income levels, or quartiles. They found that in \(2013,\) households in the lowest quartile earned 62 percent of their income from working, while households in the highest quartile earned 96 percent of their income from working. What might explain the difference in the percentage of income earned by working between these two groups? Is your

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free