This House supports a progressive tax rate

Progressive taxation is a fiscal policy system in which wealthier people pay larger proportions of their earnings in taxes than do less well-off people. Generally speaking, states that implement progressive tax regimes do so by setting up a number of tax brackets in which people in society are sorted. People who earn more pay more in taxes. For example, the United states has five tax brackets in place within its federal income tax ranging from 10% for income between $0 and $8500 to 35% for income over $379150.[1] Most states have some form of progressive tax within their tax system, this is usually their income tax, some however have a flat rate income tax (also coming in various forms), where all employees pay the same or similar rate of tax. These countries include Russia, Ukraine and Mauritius.

Proponents of progressive taxation argue that wealthier people are better suited to pay more taxes, as they have disposable income, require each unit of income less than does a poorer person, and have a greater burden to the state because of the benefits it has given them to become wealthy. They also promote the value of progressive taxation as a means of promoting a more equal and just society. Opponents of progressive taxation argue that it is an unfair burden to expect wealthy people to have to give up a larger proportion of what they earn simply because they are successful and that progressive taxation tends to damage economic growth by dampening work ethics and investments; in other words progressive taxation is unjust and inefficient. In the end, both sides contend to be the upholders of social justice and of better economic management.

[1] IRS, ‘Estimated Tax for 2011’,



Batra, Ravi. The Great American Deception: What Politicians Won’t Tell You About Our Economy and Your Future. New York: John Wiley and Sons. 1996.Benabou, Roland. “Social Mobility and the Demand for Redistribution: The Poum Hypothesis”. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2001. Available:, T. William and Gary Quinlivan. The Cultural Context of Economics and Politics. Lanham: University Press of America. 1994.Dalsgaard, Thomas, ‘The tax system in new Zealand: An appraisal and options for change’, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No.281, 31 January 2001,, James. “Ending Tax Socialism”. Cato Institute. 1996. Available:, Paul, ‘Taxes’, Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, updated 5 March 2010,, Lucy, ‘A More Progressive Tax System Makes People Happier’, Association for Psychological Science, 6 September 2011,, ‘Estimated Tax for 2011’,, Matthew. 2007. “Lack of Competitive Tax System Costs Foreign Investment, Study Finds”. Jerusalem Post. Available:, George and Bruce Budner. “Hidden Truths of Progressive Taxes”. Institute for America’s Future. 2007. Available:, Mark, ‘Pros and cons of Rick Perry’s flat tax plan’, BBC News, 26 October 2011,, David. “Wealthy Americans Deserve Real Tax Relief”. On Principle 7(5). 1999. Available:, R. Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books. 1974.Olivastro, Andrew. 2002. “Tax Cuts Increase Federal Revenues”. Heritage Foundation. Available:, Edwin. “Progressive Taxation in Theory and Practice”. Publications of the American Economic Association 9(1): 7-222. 1894.Shapiro, Robert. “Flat Wrong: New Tax Schemes Can’t Top Old Progressive Wrongs”. Washington Post. 1996. Available:, Amanda. “Warren Buffett: ‘I Should Be Paying a Lot More in Taxes’”. Huffington Post. 2010. Available: Frugal Libertarian. “Immorality of Progressive Income Tax”. Nolan Chart. 2008. Available:, Kent. “The Diminishing Marginal Utility of Wealth”. The Financial Philosopher. 2008. Available:, Burton. Public Interest Law: An Economic and Institutional Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press. 1978.White, James. “Internal Revenue Service: Assessment of the 2008 Budget Request and an Update of 2007 Performance”. United States Government Accountability Office. Available:, Martin. “Why the Tax System Keeps Getting More Complex”. MSNBC. 2006. Available:, H. Peyton. 1990. “Progressive Taxation and Equal Sacrifice”. The American Economic Review 80(1): 253-266.


Or log in with...