Government Intervention Does Not Justify More Government Intervention
For many years, advocates of mandatory “life and safety” regulation (i.e., legislated smoking bans, helmet laws, seat belt laws, bans on sugary drinks, etc) have claimed that they are justified on the grounds that, since so many health-care services are taxpayer-funded, then it is both necessary and legitimate that the government therefor mandate more safe and healthy behavior. In other words, since someone who doesn’t wear a seatbelt may end up in a taxpayer-funded hospital, the government has a “right” to lower healthcare costs by mandating seatbelts.
The Fed and the Filthy Rich: An Interview with Mark Thornton
Death and Taxes in the Netflix Series Marco Polo
“Appropriate and Necessary” Is Whatever We Say It Is
The Supreme Court has recently heard oral arguments in Michigan vs. EPA challenging regulations slashing mercury emissions from fossil-fuel power plants. However, the central issue was not, as commonly represented, preventing harm from mercury. The central issue is the use of mercury as a bait-and-switch excuse for more stringent restrictions on fine particulate emissions.
Will Manny Pacquiao’s Huge Tax Bill Be Enough for the IRS?
As most people who at least casually follow boxing know, Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao will finally be squaring off against one another on May 2. Many sports fans wanted the fight to first take place as far back as six years ago. But hey, better late than never, I guess.
What’s so great about the new Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank?
Patrick Barron writes:
Recently a friend sent me the updated Wikipedia link about the newly formed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank that has been in the news so much, mostly gathering glowing endorsements that this is a great undertaking.
4. The Incidence and Effects of Taxation Part II: Taxes on Accumulated Capital
In a sense, all taxes are taxes on capital. In order to pay a tax, a man must save the money. This is a universal rule. If the saving took place in advance, then the tax reduces the capital invested in the society. If the saving did not take place in advance, then we may say that the tax reduced potential saving. Potential saving is hardly the same as accumulated capital, however, and we may therefore consider a tax on current income as separate from a tax on capital.
A. Taxation on Gratuitous Transfers: Bequests and Gifts
The receipt of gifts has often been considered simple income. It should be obvious, however, that the recipient produced nothing in exchange for the money received; in fact, it is not an income from current production at all, but a transfer of ownership of accumulated capital. Any tax on the receipt of gifts, then, is a tax on capital. This is particularly true of inheritances, where the aggregation of capital is shifted to an heir, and the gift clearly does not come from current income. An inheritance tax, therefore, is a pure tax on capital.
