If you study the history of taxation of any country, you will note that it has been one long debate on constitutionality and unconstitutionality of taxation. Most often than not, taxation was seen as a means of amassing wealth, subjugating the enemy, financing a war or developing a nation by the rulers. All land and all wealth rightfully belonged to the monarch and the citizen was allowed to enjoy “income” at the mercy of the State. Property could be taken over, confiscated without explanations by the State. It was a declaration of the power and right of the State and a definition of the boundaries of their freedom. If the subjects saw the ability to tax differently, it was just too bad.
The concept of taxation in the modern world is really not very different. In countries driven by socialistic principles, the common good is placed above the individual good and all land, property and incomes belong to the society/State. Individual wealth and inheritance concepts do not exist. In capitalistic countries where the concept individual freedom and personal good reign supreme, voluntary compliance is, seemingly encouraged and people are persuaded to consider paying taxes a duty. Penal sections of the law were enacted as disincentives to tax avoidance.
Even today, in most countries, tax laws define the boundaries of your economic freedom. You are free to earn, live and love in a community so long as you give back to the community something of what you receive from the community. If you do not do so with the spirit of joy, voluntarily, the state has the power to act Robin Hood. It is no wonder, therefore, that there are several voices that declare taxation a socialistic tenet in a capitalistic world!
It follows that while economies can be capitalistic or socialistic, no Government can afford to be wholly capitalistic. While they can respect the concepts of “liberty, equality and fraternity”, they cannot place the individual good over the common good without extending an invitation to anarchy. Unbounded freedom is a myth and rightly so. Do you agree?
