DEATH AND TAXES: A LIBERTARIAN REAPPRAISAL

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS Social Philosophy & Policy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1017/S0265052523000092
M. Fleischer
{"title":"DEATH AND TAXES: A LIBERTARIAN REAPPRAISAL","authors":"M. Fleischer","doi":"10.1017/S0265052523000092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Imagine two friends. Anna inherits nothing and works for every penny she has, while Mary inherits millions. How should a world that respects individual autonomy and private property rights treat Anna’s earnings and Mary’s inheritance? Should it tax them the same, or tax one more heavily than the other? If the latter, which one? The conventional wisdom holds that although some “right” libertarian theories justify taxing income, none justify taxing inheritances. Such taxes are “expropriations” and “an especially cruel injury” that “run[] roughshod over [a] deceased’s interest in the ends his property will serve.” This essay explores the standard libertarian objections to taxing gifts and bequests and argues that libertarians overstate their case when distinguishing the taxation of gratuitous transfers from other types of taxation. At minimum, the benefit theory of taxation embraced by many minimal statists and classical liberals mandates that the receipt of gifts and bequests should be taxed to the recipient. Moreover, the goals of curbing inherited political power and preventing wealthy families from insulating their members from market competition provide two additional explanations for why taxing inheritances to recipients is compatible with classical liberal values.","PeriodicalId":46601,"journal":{"name":"Social Philosophy & Policy","volume":"39 1","pages":"90 - 117"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Philosophy & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052523000092","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Imagine two friends. Anna inherits nothing and works for every penny she has, while Mary inherits millions. How should a world that respects individual autonomy and private property rights treat Anna’s earnings and Mary’s inheritance? Should it tax them the same, or tax one more heavily than the other? If the latter, which one? The conventional wisdom holds that although some “right” libertarian theories justify taxing income, none justify taxing inheritances. Such taxes are “expropriations” and “an especially cruel injury” that “run[] roughshod over [a] deceased’s interest in the ends his property will serve.” This essay explores the standard libertarian objections to taxing gifts and bequests and argues that libertarians overstate their case when distinguishing the taxation of gratuitous transfers from other types of taxation. At minimum, the benefit theory of taxation embraced by many minimal statists and classical liberals mandates that the receipt of gifts and bequests should be taxed to the recipient. Moreover, the goals of curbing inherited political power and preventing wealthy families from insulating their members from market competition provide two additional explanations for why taxing inheritances to recipients is compatible with classical liberal values.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
死亡与税收:自由意志主义的重新评估
想象两个朋友。安娜没有继承任何遗产,她为自己拥有的每一分钱而工作,而玛丽继承了数百万美元。一个尊重个人自主权和私有财产权的世界应该如何对待安娜的收入和玛丽的遗产?应该对他们征收同样的税,还是对其中一个课以重税?如果是后者,是哪一个?传统观点认为,尽管一些“正确的”自由意志主义理论证明对收入征税是合理的,但没有一个理论证明对遗产征税是合理的。这种税收是“征用”,是“一种特别残酷的伤害”,“践踏了死者的财产将为其服务的利益”。本文探讨了自由意志主义者对赠与和遗赠征税的标准反对意见,并认为自由意志主义者在将无偿转让征税与其他类型的税收区分开来时夸大了他们的观点。至少,许多最小的中央集权主义者和古典自由主义者所接受的税收利益理论规定,收到的礼物和遗赠应该向接受者征税。此外,遏制继承政治权力和防止富裕家庭将其成员隔离在市场竞争之外的目标,为为什么向遗产接受者征税与古典自由主义价值观相容提供了两个额外的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Social Philosophy and Policy is an interdisciplinary journal with an emphasis on the philosophical underpinnings of enduring social policy debates. The issues are thematic in format, examining a specific area of concern with contributions from scholars in different disciplines, especially philosophy, economics, political science and law. While not primarily a journal of policy prescriptions, some articles in each issue will typically connect theory with practice. The 2006 issues are "Justice and Global Politics" and "Taxation, Economic Prosperity, and Distributive Justice". The 2007 issues will be "Liberalism: Old and New" and "Ancient Greek Political Theory".
期刊最新文献
A LIMITED DEFENSE OF EFFICIENCY AGAINST CHARGES OF INCOHERENCY AND BIAS WHO SHOULD TAX MULTINATIONALS? PREDISTRIBUTION AGAINST RENT-SEEKING: THE BENEFIT PRINCIPLE’S ALTERNATIVE TO REDISTRIBUTIVE TAXATION REALIZATION AND RECOGNITION UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE JUSTIFYING TAXATION
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1