There are at least three major doctrinal mythologies typically raised in opposition to the principled development of specific tax structures. One, often asserted under the banner of equitable treatment and ability to pay, is to view all tax policies only through the prism of a persistent wealth redistribution agenda. A second, which asserts the familiar admonition against so-called tax pyramiding, often justified in the interest of transparency, actually has no more economic policy grounding than simply being a way to slightly narrow the array of structural means available for tax imposition in general. Third are arguments against certain tax structures raised in the name of free market competitiveness (among taxing jurisdictions and within industries) which are, ironically, rarely founded on a holistic consideration of free market influences, common sense and actual experience.
In this essay, Former State Tax Commissioner and Senior Fellow Michael Caryl exposes the fallacies in each of these arguments. Click here to read the article.
Combating the State's Drug Problem Kicks Off PPFWV Policy Series