The Tax Laws And The United States Constitution

The current tax policy in the United States is very confusing and it is very costly for our government to administer it. It is in the best interest of our country and its citizens to revise or replace our current tax policy.

People do not enjoy talking about taxes because they are too political, confusing, and depressing. It is no secret that the American tax code is a mess and something many economists describe as too broken to fix. Despite this, politicians have never stopped from trying to “fix” the code, yet they have had very little success. The U.S. Government’s tax code currently comprises “more than 67,000 pages of complexities” (Boortz, Linder, & Woodall 14). The Americans for Fair Taxation (AFFT) was founded in 1995 with one goal: create the simplest and best tax reform plan that would work in the modern market and economy. The AFFT’s best solution was a bill which they promptly called the FairTax.

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

After the passage of the 16th Amendment, the nature and process of taxation changed many times. An author for the Virginia Law Review wrote in 1972, “Developing and maintaining an appropriate tax structure for a nation as economically complex and dynamic as the United States is a mammoth task” (Graetz, p. 1401). Because of this complexity, the nature of the Tax Code would need to be altered to keep up with what the country requires at a given time. Several significant changes have been made to the Tax Code, but none more significant than the passage of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA 86). TRA 86 was one of the most polarizing changes in tax law and where the current Code gets its name (Spilker et all., 2016, p. 2-11). It brought about more revisions than most people and businesses could keep up with, and it brought to light the deficiencies in implementing amendments to the Code, namely a disturbing lack of awareness from taxpayers of the alterations. Many businesses benefited from the changes—mostly large, well-established firms, but small mom-and-pop stores who have less stake in tax planning suffered (Scholes, Wilson, Wolfson, 1992, p.181). This negative effect would have been avoided if taxpayers had taken precautions and been aware of the impending changes in tax laws and if those changes had been communicated clearly to them.

With the presidential elections coming up, different tax policies are being debated between the candidates. Whether it is proposed by a Democratic or a Republican presidential candidate, there have been many possible solutions presented on how to reform the current tax code. Focusing specifically on four candidates, two from the Democratic Party, and two from the Republican Party, I will compare and contrast their respective tax proposals. While the Democratic candidates generally agree with President Obama’s current tax code, all four candidates are looking to reform it in some way in order to, in their own eyes, better the current tax code affecting today’s citizens.

The current federal tax income code is anything but simple as its complexity imposes high administrative costs, causes constant errors by individuals (us, the taxpayers), and a greater noncompliance with the tax system. I guess a good term would be to say simplification is a

Our current income tax system today is very complex, unfair, inhibits saving, investment and job creation, imposes a heavy burden on families, and weakens the integrity of the democratic process. It can't be fixed and must be replaced. The U.S. income tax code is a long and complex system. The income tax system is so complex; the IRS publishes 480 tax forms and 280 forms to explain the 480 forms. The IRS sends out eight billion pages of forms and instructions each year. The administrative costs of the tax system far exceed those borne directly by the IRS. Each year Americans devote 5.4 billion hours complying with the tax code, which is more time than it takes to build every car, truck, and van produced in the U.S.

Currently, the United States has a federal income tax that is very difficult to understand, to comply with,

The current federal income tax system in the United States (U.S.) is progressive based on the vertical equity principle. However, the tax code is getting increasingly complex and the wealthy are able to avoid paying taxes through loopholes. Hence, more people are yearning for fairness in taxation. With the looming 2016 presidential election, Senator Rand Paul’s proposal of ‘Fair and Flat Tax’ appears to have the most significant change to the current tax policy and I will now analyze if this proposal will improve the efficiency and equity of the U.S. tax code.

Taxation surrounds us in the world. Individuals fear tax, and a majority of the items we use and need are taxed. Even on topics such as Celebrities and the Olympics, taxation manages to find its way to still come up.

The United States tax system is in complete disarray. Republicans and Democrats agree that the current tax code is complex, unfair, and costly. The income tax system is so complex; the IRS publishes 480 tax forms and 280 forms to explain the 480 forms (Armey 1). The main reason the tax system is so complex is because of the special preferences such as deductions and tax credits. Complexity in the current tax system forces Americans to spend 5.4 billion hours complying with the tax code, which is more time than it takes to manufacture every car, truck and van produced in the United States (Armey 1). Time is not the only thing that is lost with the current tax system; Americans also lose

Taxes are a required aid from individual incomes or business profits collected by the government that funds certain actions and services is provided by the government for the people. Taxes in the United States originated all the way back in the 1760s. The current tax system the country has is a progressive tax. A progressive tax is a taxation system where higher incomes get taxed at higher percentages than those with lower incomes. The tax system that was anticipated that the economy should switch to is a flat tax. A flat tax is a system where all income would have to pay the same percentage towards taxes regardless of how much money they make. This is a major controversy because of the major impacts switching the current tax

Reforming or limiting itemized tax deductions for individuals has gained the interest of policymakers as one way to increase federal tax revenue, increase the share of taxes paid by higher-income tax filers, simplify the tax code, or reduce incentives that might lead to inefficient economic behavior. However, limits on deductions could cause adverse economic effects or changes in the distributional burden of the federal income

A thorough examination of the current national taxation policy reveal that it is comprehensive when compared with earlier attempts at designing a policy. However, there are some perceived challenges that this draft is likely going to face because of the experiences of past taxation laws. These challenges are as follows:

The philosophy of tax reform has undergone significant changes over the years in keeping with the changing perception of the role of the state.‭ ‬The recent approaches to tax reforms lay emphasis on minimizing distortions in tax policy to keep the economy competitive.‭ ‬Minimizing distortions implies reducing the marginal rates of both direct and indirect taxes.‭ ‬To achieve this,‭ ‬emphasis has shifted from vertical equity to horizontal equity.