Skip to main content

The Propaganda of the Progressive Income Tax

“Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that fellow behind the tree.” – Russell B. Long
_____

Illinois finally passed a budget. Some may consider this a story of triumph and political cooperation, but the fact remains: Illinois is grossly in debt, and this gorilla in the room must be tackled sometime soon. Considering the new tax hike, expect the call for a progressive income tax to reenter Illinois’ legislative arena soon.
Progressive income taxes are popular political proposals because they tax a person in a higher-income bracket at a higher rate than someone in a lower-income bracket, which contrasts with Illinois’ current flat-rate income tax system, which will now tax 4.95 percent of all earned income. On its face, this seems fair—the rich can afford to give up more of their income, can they not?
But who is “rich?” Taxpayers never seem to ask this question.
Americans are notoriously terrible estimators of their socioeconomic status. Survey results will vary somewhat, but a disproportionate majority of Americans consider themselves “middle-class.” Almost nobody considers himself or herself rich. So, when a politician promises to fund something by taxing the rich more, most taxpayers tacitly assume they will receive some benefit without paying any of the cost. Who wouldn’t support such a deal?
If taxpayers are concerned with their tax bill, they should instead ask how much this new progressive tax would ask of them. After all, if Illinoisans had to pay the income taxes of their neighbors, the middle class would lose more money through taxes than they do under the current flat rate. A few years ago, many Illinoisans were duped by the pretentiously named “Illinois Fair Tax” movement. Despite the marketing, the proposal was effectively a tax hike an all but the lowest of the low-income taxpayers.
That’s the faulty messaging with a progressive income tax, but the marketing wars do not stop there. Much misinformation about a flat income tax rate also circulates the political sphere.
A flat income tax rate means you owe the same percentage of your income in taxes regardless of how much income you make, aside from any credits or incentives that may exist elsewhere in legislation. The Chicago Sun-Times editorial board therefore wrote erroneously when they claimed, “The bigger the disparity [between highest and lowest incomes], the more lower-income people pay in taxes as a percentage of income than their wealthier neighbors.” On the July 6, 2017, television broadcast of the CBS Chicago morning news, Mike Puccinelli falsely protested that people pay the same amount of taxes whether they make $5,000 or $5 million in income.
Rates and brackets only tell part of the story of a progressive income tax’s impact on a state’s economy. By and large, those with higher incomes are more mobile than other state residents. One reason for this trait is that, in today’s economy, higher incomes are often earned in knowledge-based or information-centric occupations, which are relatively less location-dependent. Illinois’ mass out-migration is well documented, but taxpayers should not be surprised that college students and graduates are among the quickest to leave. If Illinois implements a progressive income tax, much of the upper-income tax base will simply seek greener pastures, leaving the tax burden on the middle-class.
Finally, taxpayers should recognize that a progressive income tax is a tax hike. Illinois already weighs its citizens down the highest overall tax burden in the country, and the $5 billion income tax hike from the new budget puts more pressure on its citizens. A progressive tax proposal would further demonstrate that politicians are not putting residents’ needs first. 

Embracing a progressive income tax is a brilliant marketing move for many politicians. It is a cunning way to promote a tax increase without most of your taxpayers knowing. Next time a progressive tax rises from its ashes, Illinoisans must recognize it for the marketing ploy it is. Instead, taxpayers must discourage their lawmakers from further draining their citizens and encourage them to enact structural spending reforms to solve long-term fiscal issues.

 _____
This article was originally written on July 7, 2017.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Introduction

Thanks for taking the time to not only visit my humble site but to also read about my vision for it. Here’s a little bit about me in case we’ve never met.  I’m an undergrad student majoring in Economics and Humanities, and I'm also minoring in Political Science and Business Administration.  Those fields of study probably betray my tendency to think deeply–perhaps too deeply–about everyday things we often take for granted.  When I was young, I was that child who asked “why?” about everything, and I haven't changed much.  I enjoy contemplating the hidden, abstract forces of reality, and I do it a lot.  I also happen to have a short attention span, bouncing from one idea to the next.  Sometimes when I think I’m onto something neat I’ll get distracted and forget what I was thinking about. And that’s where the idea for a blog started.  Blogs are canvases, and I could use one to spit out some thoughts I’d like to develop.  The publicity of a blog would also motivate me to d
Post a Comment
Read more

Fear and Hospitality - A Reaction to the Recent Exclusion of Syrian Refugees

As someone who favors minimal restriction of the freedom of movement, I am greatly concerned about the President's recent executive order.  But the most problematic part of the order, and the part to which I wish to react, is found in Section 5c, which prohibits entry to Syrian refugees “until such time as I have determined that sufficient changes have been made to the [United States Refugee Assistance Program] to ensure that admission of Syrian refugees is consistent with the national interest.”  Although apologists may assert this rhetoric demonstrates reasonable caution, the wording really carries the same permanence as a normal piece of legislation.  In other words, this section contains the one permanent policy in the executive order, and it is directed against the people group most desperate for a land to receive them. Though the United States has long been “a proud nation of immigrants,” as the President himself has said, we have long been suspicious of “the other.”   Sin
Post a Comment
Read more

Prayer Precedes Revival

I recently wrote an article on prayer and the public square for the Illinois Family Institute's prayer team.  Check it out  here . ________________________________________________________________ Our country has never been so parched for prayer, yet we never have found praying harder . Prayer is too hard for us , so our country withers. Our culture’s health intertwines with our prayers, and both contribute to the other’s success. We conservative Christians are quick to point our fingers at our public school system for discouraging prayer, but how many of us pray for our schools? We complain about the decline of church leadership in the public square, but who is praying for their leaders’ humility and wisdom? For the sake of clarity, I do not wish to suggest prayers—or the lack thereof—causes whatever happens in the public square. God rules the nations (Psalm 22:28, 47:8, Job 12:23), which includes the United States. No decisions made by voters, church leaders, or elected official
Post a Comment
Read more