Publication Date
2022
Abstract
Focusing on individual taxpayers, this article offers moral reflections on state and local, and federal tax policy trends during the first two decades of the twenty-first century. Although tax policy decisions are made by politicians (who often rely on economists), determining the best tax policy is ultimately an ethical issue and serves as a barometer revealing the true moral compass of any community. I started thinking about ethical tax policy while studying theology at the Beeson Divinity School, a conservative evangelical seminary that is part of Samford University. At Beeson, I noticed for the first time the gap between "walk and talk" in my home state. Of Alabama-although more than 90% of Alabamians claimed to be Christians, its regressive state and local taxes and paltry K-12 funding harshly impacted the most vulnerable and powerless Alabamians. In 2002, I published my thesis that condemned this as biblically immoral and urged all Christians in Alabama, especially political and religious leaders, to support reforms.
My article condemning Alabama's tax policy under the moral principles of Judeo-Christian ethics generated nationwide press coverage. Internationally, the London Times also weighed in. This press coverage and numerous questions posed at hundreds of speaking engagements all over Alabama and in twenty-eight states inspired me to embark on a body of scholarship spanning a decade that morally evaluated federal tax policy and the state and local tax policy of all fifty states.
All tax policy issues ultimately boil down to answering two questions. The first defines the amount of revenues to be raised and for what purpose such revenues are to be spent. The second determines how the burden of paying the taxes needed to raise these revenues will be allocated among taxpayers enjoying different levels of income and wealth. Part I of this article briefly identifies fundamental concepts surrounding the discussion of these two questions and explains why economic theories cannot provide definitive answers.
Part II illustrates that the moral principles of Judeo-Christian ethics require tax policy that raises an adequate level of revenues so that all persons have a reasonable opportunity to reach their potential with the tax burden allocated under a moderately progressive model. Part II then explains why several community-oriented secular theories come to similar tax policy conclusions as the Judeo-Christian approach, albeit for different reasons.8 Finally, this part contrasts these moral frameworks to objectivist ethics, a form of atheism that values individual self-interest over all else, which only condones tax policy that raises as little revenue as possible under a burden allocation model void of any progressive elements.
After summarizing my 2002 article condemning Alabama's state and local tax policy as biblically immoral, Part III overviews empirical research conducted a few years later that provided a helicopter view of the state and local tax policy in all fifty states. This part then illustrates that most of the states had tax policies that were just as immoral, only slightly better, or even more immoral than Alabama's tax policy, while the others still failed to raise adequate revenues supporting reasonable opportunity under a moderately progressive model.' Finally, Part III explores the most recent evidence that indicates some states have slightly improved their tax policies while others are even more unfair. Because our nation's state and local policy essentially has not changed, it is still as immoral as it was earlier in the twenty-first century.
Part IV overviews and morally evaluates federal tax policy trends during the first two decades of the twenty-first century. President George W. Bush's first term tax cuts eroded progressivity while benefiting the wealthiest Americans, created substantial federal deficits jeopardizing programs uplifting the most vulnerable Americans, and moved towards eliminating the estate tax. The justifications behind the Bush tax cuts were not only void of Judeo-Christian or community-oriented secular principles but also reflected objectivist ethics values. Despite severe economic challenges and partisan gridlock, President Barack Obama reversed some of these income tax trends, and although his moral conversation more closely reflected Judeo-Christian and community-oriented secular values, his compromises further eroded the estate tax. This part then illustrates that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which in addition to favoring the wealthiest Americans while threatening the nation's fiscal stability, is also driven by objec- tivist ethics. This article concludes that, overall, twenty-first century tax policy trends are headed in the wrong direction that are contrary to the values most Americans claim to adhere to. Although President Joseph R. Biden's ideas could start steering federal tax policy in the right direction, objectivist ethics influence poisoning tax policy, which remains a powerful force that, if allowed to continue, will eventually ruin the nation.
Recommended Citation
Susan Pace Hamill, Moral Reflections on Twenty-First Century Tax Policy Trends, 52 CUMB. L. REV. 1 (2022).