Contact FreedomWorks

400 North Capitol Street, NW
Suite 765
Washington, DC 20001

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870

Blog

    Why Shouldn’t the Rich Pay More in Taxes?

    Famous author Stephen King wrote a vulgar article in the Daily Beast calling on Congress to raise taxes on the wealthy. He is just one of several high-profile rich guys, including Warren Buffet and Mark Zuckerberg, that want to pay more in taxes. However, raising taxes on the wealthy is the wrong approach that will hurt everyone.

    Tax hikes on the rich are unjustified from a moral and a pragmatic perspective. All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their own labor. People should be free to spend or donate their rightfully earned money as they please without government coercion. It is unjust for the government to forcibly take money from one person to give to someone else in the name of “fairness.”

    Stephen King writes that, “we all should have to pay our fair share.” Well, fair is a subjective term. King implies that he should be paying 50 percent of his income in taxes. Why 50 percent? Why not 49 or 51 percent? This should be obvious statement: different people have different perspectives on what’s fair.

    If Stephen King considers the amount of taxes he pays to be unfair, then yes, he should donate to the federal government. Nothing is stopping him. People donated $3.5 million to the U.S. treasury to reduce the debt in 2011. That’s a low number considering how many people live in the United States.

    There are numerous possible explanations to why more people don’t donate to the government. Some might say that people are “selfish” but that argument doesn’t add up. Americans donated a whopping $347 billion to charity in 2011. The clearest explanation is that most people see more valuable uses for their money than donating to the government. Government doesn’t do anything particularly well. Most people would rather donate to private charities that have a better track record of actually helping people.

    From a pragmatic perspective, raising taxes on the rich is economically counterproductive. Taking money away from job creators in the private sector that could have used that money to expand their businesses will hurt economic growth. The government lacks proper incentives and cannot spend money better than private citizens.

    Many people are under the false assumption that tax hikes will translate into more tax revenue. But these people do not realize that higher taxes alter incentives and human action. People will be deterred from starting new enterprises and expanding their businesses which means that production will be curtailed.  High taxes will ultimately result in lower tax revenue and hampered job growth.

    Raising taxes on the rich is wrong from a moral and pragmatic perspective. Dramatically cutting spending is the best way to reduce the federal deficit-- not forcing job creators to surrender more of their money to the federal government.

    5 comments
    alex cadell
    02/11/2014

    people like Steven King started as a working/lower class and became rich through his books, he knows haw it feels and there for knows how to help. J. K. Rowling was the same case, but now she is comfortable but not a millionaire because she gave all her money away to charity. Bill Gates was the same case but made money a different way, but the point is, they know how in need the middle class is, because the lower class gets support from the government, and the rich can wave there hand and get insurance, the middle class can't afford insurance usually and if they can't pay the they go into dept, lose their house, (if they had one) and become the lower class.

    William Miller
    02/14/2013

    Stephen King is right! It's not about being fair. It's about the who;e situation.. There are so many really rich people in the US!
    To tell the truth, and I'm sure you will support me, being rich means you can become richer easier than becoming simply wealthy being poor.. http://www.carid.com/

    Eugene Patrick Devany
    05/02/2012

    Better tax reform for both individuals and business can be described in one sentence.

    Tax individual and corporate income at a flat 8% rate (with no deductions, credits or loopholes), tax individual net wealth at 2% (excluding $15,000 cash and retirement funds) and impose a 4% Value Added Sales Tax (VAT) on business.

    The 2-4-8 Tax Blend has the lowest rates and will produce about $500 billion more than current federal revenue with no need for payroll, estate, and capital gains taxes or deferral of foreign income.

    If adopted, congress would be free to focus on better spending, a balanced budget and how best to help the states.

    Eugene Patrick Devany, JD, MPA
    www.TaxNetWealth.com
    home of the 2-4-8 Tax Blend

    chet napier
    05/11/2012

    if you raise the taxes on the factory owner then he just raises his prices which effectively raises the taxes on everyone

    Malleron
    05/06/2012

    If you believe in equal opportunity - we must invest in a level playing field. People are born to wildly different socio-economic conditions that provide children, from the very beginning, an unequal playing field. The kid born in Detroit to parents with few means is likely to live in an area with failing public schools, high crime, and poor economic opportunities. The rare success stories mask the millions who are left behind.

    There is an illusion that individuals make their money based solely on their own hard-work. While that is certainly a component - the conditions that allowed that individual to succeed that are also partly socially determined. While we honor individual achievement - we should realize that the U.S. could be far greater if we offered the opportunities that those individuals often have to the entire population.

    So, yes, that means more government spending. If we do not invest in education, we will continue to fall in world-wide rankings of education systems and fall behind countries who have made this a priority. We need better infrastructure, more police, and we need to offer job retraining programs to ensure that we revitalise communities that are decaying and, in doing so, bringing down young generations with them.

    If we want to remain economically competitive, we need that type of investment. Simply hoping for trickle down economics to work one day is a failed strategy.

    Pages