税收和残疾:支付能力和差额征税

IF 2.5 2区 社会学 Q1 Social Sciences University of Pennsylvania Law Review Pub Date : 2006-05-01 DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051
Theodore P. Seto, Sande L. Buhai
{"title":"税收和残疾:支付能力和差额征税","authors":"Theodore P. Seto, Sande L. Buhai","doi":"10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although people with disabilities make up some 20% of the American population, scholars have largely ignored U.S. tax provisions of particular relevance to them. This article undertakes the first such systematic study. In the process, it reexamines disability theory, tax theory, and the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system. Disability theory has changed dramatically over the past century, to the point that many tax rules important to people with disabilities are no longer justified by modern disability theory. Standard tax theory turns out to be inadequate to deal with the problems of people with disabilities because, consistent with its utilitarian origins, it generally assumes that taxpayers are identical except with respect to income; as a result, it lacks capacity to deal with other individual differences in ability to pay. The failure of theory to deal adequately with ability to pay, in turn, has placed serious strains on the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system as a whole, which has become increasingly incoherent. This article analyzes existing tax provisions of particular relevance to people with disabilities using an ability-to-pay approach to individual income taxation and a human variation paradigm of disability rights, justifying or reframing some and recommending repeal of others. Among other issues, it explores the general welfare doctrine and a dramatic expansion of the medical expense deduction, neither of which has received sufficient scholarly attention elsewhere. Ultimately, the article suggests, if the individual income tax system as a whole were to be reframed in terms of ability to pay, the mechanical complexity of that system could be rationalized and significantly reduced.","PeriodicalId":48012,"journal":{"name":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","volume":"154 1","pages":"1053"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2006-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tax and Disability: Ability to Pay and the Taxation of Difference\",\"authors\":\"Theodore P. Seto, Sande L. Buhai\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although people with disabilities make up some 20% of the American population, scholars have largely ignored U.S. tax provisions of particular relevance to them. This article undertakes the first such systematic study. In the process, it reexamines disability theory, tax theory, and the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system. Disability theory has changed dramatically over the past century, to the point that many tax rules important to people with disabilities are no longer justified by modern disability theory. Standard tax theory turns out to be inadequate to deal with the problems of people with disabilities because, consistent with its utilitarian origins, it generally assumes that taxpayers are identical except with respect to income; as a result, it lacks capacity to deal with other individual differences in ability to pay. The failure of theory to deal adequately with ability to pay, in turn, has placed serious strains on the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system as a whole, which has become increasingly incoherent. This article analyzes existing tax provisions of particular relevance to people with disabilities using an ability-to-pay approach to individual income taxation and a human variation paradigm of disability rights, justifying or reframing some and recommending repeal of others. Among other issues, it explores the general welfare doctrine and a dramatic expansion of the medical expense deduction, neither of which has received sufficient scholarly attention elsewhere. Ultimately, the article suggests, if the individual income tax system as a whole were to be reframed in terms of ability to pay, the mechanical complexity of that system could be rationalized and significantly reduced.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Pennsylvania Law Review\",\"volume\":\"154 1\",\"pages\":\"1053\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Pennsylvania Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Pennsylvania Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609800.051","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

虽然残疾人约占美国人口的20%,但学者们在很大程度上忽略了与他们特别相关的美国税收规定。本文首次进行了这样的系统研究。在此过程中,重新审视残疾理论、税收理论和个人所得税制度的机械结构。在过去的一个世纪里,残疾理论发生了巨大的变化,以至于许多对残疾人很重要的税收规定不再被现代残疾理论所证明。标准税收理论被证明不足以处理残疾人的问题,因为,与它的功利主义起源一致,它通常假设纳税人除了收入方面是相同的;因此,它缺乏处理其他个人支付能力差异的能力。理论未能充分处理支付能力问题,反过来又给整个个人所得税制度的机械结构带来了严重压力,使其变得越来越不连贯。本文使用个人所得税的支付能力方法和残疾人权利的人类变异范式,分析了与残疾人特别相关的现有税收规定,证明或重新构建了一些规定,并建议废除其他规定。在其他问题中,它探讨了一般福利主义和医疗费用扣除的急剧扩大,这两者在其他地方都没有得到足够的学术关注。最后,这篇文章建议,如果整个个人所得税制度要根据支付能力来重新设计,那么该制度的机械复杂性就可以合理化并大大减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Tax and Disability: Ability to Pay and the Taxation of Difference
Although people with disabilities make up some 20% of the American population, scholars have largely ignored U.S. tax provisions of particular relevance to them. This article undertakes the first such systematic study. In the process, it reexamines disability theory, tax theory, and the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system. Disability theory has changed dramatically over the past century, to the point that many tax rules important to people with disabilities are no longer justified by modern disability theory. Standard tax theory turns out to be inadequate to deal with the problems of people with disabilities because, consistent with its utilitarian origins, it generally assumes that taxpayers are identical except with respect to income; as a result, it lacks capacity to deal with other individual differences in ability to pay. The failure of theory to deal adequately with ability to pay, in turn, has placed serious strains on the mechanical structure of the individual income tax system as a whole, which has become increasingly incoherent. This article analyzes existing tax provisions of particular relevance to people with disabilities using an ability-to-pay approach to individual income taxation and a human variation paradigm of disability rights, justifying or reframing some and recommending repeal of others. Among other issues, it explores the general welfare doctrine and a dramatic expansion of the medical expense deduction, neither of which has received sufficient scholarly attention elsewhere. Ultimately, the article suggests, if the individual income tax system as a whole were to be reframed in terms of ability to pay, the mechanical complexity of that system could be rationalized and significantly reduced.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Ultrastructural and Molecular Development of the Myotendinous Junction Triggered by Stretching Prior to Resistance Exercise. The Specification Power Cross-national analysis about the difference of histopathological management in Tis and T1 colorectal cancer between Japan and Korea. Law, Virtual Reality, and Augmented Reality Data-Driven Originalism
×
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