The Pros And Cons Of America's Taxation System

While the Income Share Agreements confront the problem of student debt, the ISAs ignores the affordability problem. The affordability issue not only applies to the rising tuition rates caused by less state funding but also by the sluggish growth in middle class incomes. The middle class, which makes up the majority of the nation’s population cannot afford to pay for a college degree without turning to student loans or other alternatives such as ISAs as a supplement. The stagnation in middle class income as precipitated by low wages, along with rising standards of living, simply cannot keep up with the surges in college tuition rates. While ISAs provide the means of access to a college education, it does not acknowledge the fact that college

Through this recent recession the gap for financial aid has become increasingly large due to the fact that colleges are basing some of their applications by their financial situation. This in turn creates widening on lower to middle class families who cannot send their children to school because the cost are too great to bear with large amounts of financial aid. The wealthy students are not only being accepted to these pricy private universities but are being given grant and aid so that they can make it through. The poorer students are not even given the chance to attend those school not because of their brain but because of their lack of funding. In today’s society were the upper class has become very distant to the middle and

With the shockingly high number of student debt in America, it is no wonder why people constantly look for alternatives to make education cheaper.Certainly, higher education is in need of reformation. However, it should not come at the expense of dollars from people who pay taxes. In theory, free college sounds fantastic, but it must be understood that this luxury is not free. The money would come from people who pay taxes, which is evidently twisted as a majority of people do not value higher education. They should not be forced to pay for something that is optional in one’s life. People will be paying for free college for the rest of their lives in taxes. Moreover, free college removes the incentive of valuing education in high school. There

The reason why progressive taxation is considered fairer and why flat taxation policy is avoided is because the people with lower income have lower ability to pay and the major part of their income is spent on necessities, a flat taxation policy would burden them more. Both the taxation policy have their pros and cons. A progressive tax shifts the burden on the people with higher income, it reduces the amount that the people with lower income pay. Because it reduces the burden of tax it results in reduction for the need of subsidies. Meanwhile a flat taxation system reduces the tax burden on people with high income and gives them an opportunity to further increase their investment. Several reasons can be given to justify progressive taxation policy over flat taxation policy. One reason is that those who earn more can afford to pay more, without having to curtail their standard of living or in any way reducing their chances of prospering Also another important justification is that the small businesses find it difficult and struggle more compared to the big ones and hence burdening them with large amount of tax will

In my opinion as to whether or not the current federal income tax structure is fair for most Americans is that it is not fair. The following information will provide support for my decision. The main federal tax brackets are for single individuals, married individuals filing separately, married individuals filing as a couple and individuals filing as a head of household. In the financial year 2014, the lowest tax bracket paid a rate of 10% on income up to $9,075 while the highest bracket paid an average rate of 36.4% ($406,751 and above). Most individuals pay taxes across several tax brackets, and as a result, they end up with the progressive tax structure. In the current progressive federal income structure, individuals with a lower

Income concentration in United States has changed along with the spending patterns of the individuals. This has induced and widened the pay gap between the wealthy and the middle class. One individual’s demand is now another’s necessity which is why the income ladder is hard to grab now. Although financial aid by the government does help the middle class students to acquire good quality education, but this is not enough as the wealthy can get what they want even if they possess lesser prospects.

For some time now, the United States economy has been trending in the direction of social injustice. Income inequality is ever expanding, and the primary reason is that those people at the very top of the income distribution are accumulating wealth at rates never seen before. The rich are getting richer to the extent that they are driving a massive wedge between socio-economic classes within the United States, and the impacts are far-reaching. Combating this inequality begins with an examination of the economic policies currently in place. Federal tax policy is an ideal place to start, considering the prominent role it plays in determining the distribution of wealth.

Government created financial aid to increase enrollment rates for higher education. Financial aid helps those in need to continue their education. However, financial aid does not help everyone. Society expects young adults to further their education and get good jobs, even with their limited incomes. These expectations drive increases in the price of college dramatically each year. When tuition increases, middle class families struggle to afford their child’s education, resulting in students working to pay for college if they fail to qualify for financial aid. Numerous criteria for financial aid exist, so many middle-class students find it difficult to afford college. Colleges should grant more financial aid to those students working to support themselves and their families.

In the article, “The US Tax System: Who Really Pays” by Stephen Moore, he justifies his belief that there is little to no correlation between economic mobility and equality. Moore delivers his reasoning by contradicting relatively popular statements where some are virtually untrue and others are merely common opposing viewpoints. However, in the end Moore concludes his argument with the belief that raising the taxes on the wealthy would not help the poor’s income mobility, which I support one hundred percent.

Ever since the ratification of the 16th amendment to the United States Constitution, Americans have faced the burden of federal income taxes. Income taxes were first proposed as a better way of gathering revenue, as well as an effective measure to manipulate economic spending. However, the current tax code bears very little resemblance to the relatively simple codes that were originally written into law. Today’s tax laws have grown astonishingly complex and unequally distributes the burden of tax liabilities. Our country should confront the issues derived from the increasing complexity of the tax laws and equally distribute the obligations to each taxpayer.

Isn't it a shame that our own American companies would rather take jobs from us just to pay a little less tax in another country?  I could never turn my back on our American people for that reason.  I know that the money looks better when you move the company over seas and the wages are so much less and the taxes not as much, but this is our country and our people, we should be supporting our own, and not, other countries.  We are still the largest economic country, but China is not far behind and as we move more companies over seas, we are allowing them to catch up and become the big decision maker of the world.  Not too sure how well that will work out for everyone.

The distinctions of these test are important because, in addition to being a tax-saving exemption, “a qualifying child also factors into claims for head of household status, the child tax credit, the child and dependent care credit, the exclusion from income for dependent care benefits and the Earned Income Tax Credit, or EITC” (Bell, 2011). If taxpayers only follow the guidelines of these test, it would have prevented the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes (PATH) Act of 2015.

We have all heard the famous quote by Benjamin Franklin who stated, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” (“Benjamin Franklin Quotes”) We find this to be true as we begin working and feel the pain of money being taken from our paychecks. Then we face the chore of having to file income taxes yearly. Although there are many taxes we are subject to, most people are referring to federal income tax when they complain about taxes. There has been debate for decades about the current system but there has been no agreement on how to fix it. The United States currently has a progressive tax code which means people pay taxes according to their earnings. This has been in place since the time of Abraham Lincoln. An alternative

Many experts believe, as college and university enrollments mushroom and tuition rates soar, the crises of student debt in the higher education system will continue to grow. College tuition from 1982 through 2005 exploded 375 percent, nearly four times the inflation rate, and continued to rise four to eight percent every year since. As a college education becomes more unaffordable, many are left searching for other means for paying for a college education such as, federal grant and loan programs as well as private loans. Meanwhile, low income families can expect to receive some aid to help with cost of tuition, it does not always cover all the cost. Consequently, middle income families are usually just outside the aid income range and will usually have to pay the entire cost of tuition themselves.

While those making near the median income of $51,939 per year fall into the 25% tax bracket, taxpayers making over $413,200 per year pay 39.6% of their income to the government. Though heavily taxing the wealthy may seem to offer a solution to the ongoing economic woes, it has quite the opposite effect. For instance, many of the citizens who have a yearly income of over $413,200 own small and medium-sized businesses, which comprise a crucial part of our nation's economy. Because these private business owners are burdened by such high tax rates, they often have to pay their employees less and refrain from creating new jobs. Even more importantly, progressive taxation undermines the very fundamentals upon which the United States of America was founded by attempting to redistribute wealth through socialism. Our current tax system effectively strips individuals of their incentive to pursue entrepreneurship and positive economic development. In his first inaugural address, Thomas Jefferson stated, “A wise and frugal government… shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” I am utterly disgusted at the way our government has blatantly disregarded the tenets of