There have been some unfortunate and dark days in American history, but what was the worst day?
Some obvious choices include December 7, when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, and September 11, when the terrorists launched their despicable attack.
Another option (somewhat tongue in cheek) might be January 20 since Republican partisans would say that’s the day that both Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama became President while Democratic partisans would say that’s the day Ronald Reagan became President.
But allow me to suggest that today, October 3, should be a candidate for America’s worst day.
Why? Because on this day in 1913, one of America’s worst Presidents, Woodrow Wilson, signed into law the Revenue Act of 1913, which imposed the income tax.
The law signed that day by President Wilson, to be fair, wasn’t that awful. The top tax rate was only 7 percent, the tax form was only 2 pages, and the entire tax code was only 400 pages. And a big chunk of the revenue actually was used to lower the tax burden on international trade (the basic tariff rate dropped form 40 percent to 25 percent).
But just as tiny acorns become large oak trees, small taxes become big taxes and simple tax codes become complex monstrosities. And that’s exactly what happened in the United States.
We now have a top tax rate of 39.6 percent, and it’s actually much higher than that when you include the impact of other taxes, as well as the pervasive double taxation of saving and investment.
And the relatively simply tax law of 1913 has metastasized into 74,000 pages of Byzantine complexity.
Not to mention that the tax code has become one of the main sources of political corruption in Washington, impoverishing us while enriching the politicians, lobbyists, bureaucrats, and interest groups. Or the oppressive and dishonest IRS.
However, even though I take second place to nobody in my disdain for the income tax, the worst thing about that law is not the tax rates, the double taxation, or the complexity. The worst thing is that the income tax enabled the modern welfare state.
Before the income tax, politicians had no way to finance big government. Their only significant pre-1913 sources of revenue were tariffs and excise taxes, and they couldn’t raise those tax rates too high because of Laffer Curve effects (something that modern-day politicians sometimes still discover).
Once the income tax was adopted, though, it became a lot easier to finance subsidies, handouts, and redistribution. As you can see from the chart, the federal government used to be very small during peacetime.
But as the decades have passed, the Leviathan state in Washington has grown. And in the absence of genuine entitlement reform, it’s just a matter of time before the United States morphs into a bankrupt European-style welfare state.
And as government becomes bigger and bigger, diverting more and more resources from the productive sector of the economy, we can expect more stagnation and misery.
That’s why October 3 is an awful day in American history. All the bad results described above were made possible by the income tax.
P.S. It’s totally off topic, but I don’t think we should commemorate September 11. I’d much rather we celebrate May 1, which is the day that Osama bin Laden became fish food.
P.P.S. If the income tax facilitated today’s bloated government, it should go without saying that giving politicians another big source of revenue would lead to an even bigger burden of government. That’s why the value-added tax is such an awful idea.
P.P.P.S. Government also used to be very small in Western Europe before the income tax. Indeed, it was during that period when European nations became rich.
P.P.P.P.S. One could also argue that February 3 is the worst day in history because that’s when Delaware ratified the 16th Amendment, thus making an income tax constitutional.
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] P.S. While I recognize that a national sales tax has political vulnerabilities, I actually think its biggest problem is the risk that politicians would not actually get rid of the income tax. Or, maybe they would get rid of the income tax, but then reinstate that awful levy after a few years. This is why, in this video, I explain that a national sales tax only should be considered after the 16th Amendment is repealed and replaced with something that unambiguously prohibits the income tax from ever again plaguing the nation. […]
[…] problems in the current system. That’s technically true, but tinkering with the tax code over the past 110 years is what’s produced the current […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] since that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was enacted, presidents and members of Congress have been making the system […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and […]
[…] some cases, that will lead to decisions I don’t like. For instance, the (tragic) 16th Amendment gives the federal government the authority to impose an income tax and voters […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] I suppose we should be aware that a small tax can grow into a big tax (the original 1913 income tax had a top rate of just 7 percent and we all know that the internal revenue code has since morphed […]
[…] I suppose we should be aware that a small tax can grow into a big tax (the original 1913 income tax had a top rate of just 7 percent and we all know that the internal revenue code has since morphed […]
[…] I should have called for repeal of the 16th Amendment, so we also could enjoy the experience of living in a nation without an income […]
[…] I should have called for repeal of the 16th Amendment, so we also could enjoy the experience of living in a nation without an income […]
[…] of course, politicians first get rid of the income tax – including repealing the 16th Amendment and replacing it with an ironclad prohibition […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] 15 may be the worst day of the year, but there’s an argument to be made that October 3 is the worst day in […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] Kingdom in the mid-1800s and other nations followed over the next 50-plus years (the United States joined that unfortunate club in […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] the IRS. After all, our wretched tax system is largely the fault of politicians, who have spent the past 108 years creating a punitive and corrupt set of tax […]
[…] cause growth in the 1800s. Our prosperity was more a result of no income tax, no welfare state, and no intrusive regulatory/administrative […]
[…] Biden recently attacked the 2nd Amendment, and some clever person applied his thinking to the 16th Amendment. […]
[…] Many people understandably are hesitant about this concept, particularly if government is involved. After all, we have many examples of seemingly innocuous ideas becoming nightmarish mistakes (such as adopting the income tax). […]
[…] And that does happen, sometimes with bad consequences. […]
[…] And that does happen, sometimes with bad consequences. […]
[…] be no tax on profits because we have a government that is so small that there’s no need for any type of income tax. But I’m in the United States rather than a fiscal paradise such as Bermuda, Monaco, or the […]
[…] be no tax on profits because we have a government that is so small that there’s no need for any type of income tax. But I’m in the United States rather than a fiscal paradise such as Bermuda, Monaco, or […]
[…] be no tax on profits because we have a government that is so small that there’s no need for any type of income tax. But I’m in the United States rather than a fiscal paradise such as Bermuda, Monaco, or the […]
[…] but they conveniently never explain that Holmes reportedly made that statement in 1904, nine years before there was an income tax, and then again in 1927, when federal taxes amounted to only $4 billion and the federal government […]
[…] but they conveniently never explain that Holmes reportedly made that statement in 1904, nine years before there was an income tax, and then again in 1927, when federal taxes amounted to only $4 billion and the federal government […]
[…] who advocate the above taxes are not proposing to eliminate the income tax and repeal the 16th Amendment. Instead, they simply want to levy a new tax without fully repealing the awful system that already […]
[…] that America’s Founders created a very small central government that operated for more than 100 yearswithout any income tax (or any other broad-based tax), it’s very disappointing that Washington is […]
[…] thanks to the unfortunate mistake of the 16th Amendment, our wretched internal revenue code passes constitutional muster (though having the authority to […]
[…] we didn’t have an income tax or a welfare state, there were other forms of intervention, as illustrated by the video, as well as […]
[…] the income tax – The internal revenue code began when Wilson signed into law an income tax on October 3, 1913. The initial tax wasn’t overly onerous – with a top […]
[…] I’m definitely not a fan of the income tax, I certainly endorse this […]
[…] Nixon was so terrible. More important, the wretched track record of Woodrow Wilson (creator of the income tax and Federal Reserve, as well as an odious racist) suggests he may deserve the prize for being the […]
[…] While eurobonds are a very bad idea, it would be even worse (akin to the U.S. approving the 16th Amendment) if the European Union somehow got the authority to directly impose […]
[…] the way, this theorem also applies when an income tax gets imposed, as happened with the United States in 1913 (and also a lesson that New Jersey residents learned in the 1970s and Connecticut residents […]
[…] starting about 11:50, I put forth an analogy – involving a hypothetical referendum to repeal the income tax in the United States – to illustrate why the issue is arousing so much passion. This is […]
[…] my libertarian fantasies, we dramatically shrink the size of the federal government and return to pre-1913 policy by getting rid of the income […]
[…] used to be in that lucky club. The income tax did not become a permanent blight upon the nation until 1913 (there was a temporary income tax during the Civil War and an attempted income tax in 1894 – […]
[…] used to be in that lucky club. The income tax did not become a permanent blight upon the nation until 1913 (there was a temporary income tax during the Civil War and an attempted income tax in 1894 – […]
[…] wouldn’t be able to resist blurting out that the United States prospered for 100-plus years without an income tax, or that taxes could be very low even with an elastic definition of what counts as public […]
[…] are the ones who have unceasingly made the internal revenue code more complex, starting on that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was […]
[…] but trade taxes didn’t cause growth in the 1800s. Our prosperity was more a result of no income tax, no welfare state, and no intrusive regulatory/administrative […]
[…] short-run goodies and eliminating the long-run savings? It’s worth remembering that the original income tax in 1913 had a top rate of 7 percent and it only applied to 1/2 of 1 percent of the population. How […]
[…] the short-run goodies and eliminating the long-run savings? It’s worth remembering that the original income tax in 1913 had a top rate of 7 percent and it only applied to 1/2 of 1 percent of the population. How long […]
[…] Sometimes bad things happen for good reasons. The income tax in the United States also was adopted in part to offset the […]
[…] replaced by something that unambiguously ensures that the income tax is permanently abolished. A nice goal, but I’m not holding my […]
[…] didn’t necessarily want to block imports. This was before America was plagued by an income tax and some source of revenue was needed to finance the […]
[…] to that awful day in 1913, there was no income tax, no payroll tax, no capital gains tax, no death tax, and no corporate […]
[…] spending basically didn’t exist, and most nations didn’t even have income taxes (the U.S. didn’t make that mistake until […]
[…] spending basically didn’t exist, and most nations didn’t even have income taxes (the U.S. didn’t make that mistake until […]
[…] United Kingdom was an early adopter, but France, Sweden, and the United States didn’t impose that onerous levy until the 1900s. And it’s no coincidence that the tax burden […]
[…] United Kingdom was an early adopter, but France, Sweden, and the United States didn’t impose that onerous levy until the 1900s. And it’s no coincidence that the tax […]
[…] spending basically didn’t exist and most nations didn’t even have income taxes (the U.S. didn’t make that mistake until […]
[…] helps to explain why it is the world’s richest jurisdiction. Makes me wish we could reverse that terrible day in 1913 when the income tax was imposed in the United […]
[…] Or should we blame politicians, who have been making the tax code more onerous ever since that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was […]
[…] Or should we blame politicians, who have been making the tax code more onerous ever since that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was […]
[…] as the income tax was first imposed on just a tiny handful of very wealthy people, but it eventually morphed into a malignant tax code that now bedevils tens […]
[…] the short-run goodies and eliminating the long-run savings? It’s worth remembering that the original income tax in 1913 had a top rate of 7 percent and it only applied to 1/2 of 1 percent of the population. How long did […]
[…] that America’s Founders created a very small central government that operated for more than 100 years without any income tax (or any other broad-based tax), it’s very disappointing that […]
[…] Politicians who advocate the above taxes are not proposing to eliminate the income tax and repeal the 16th Amendment. Instead, they simply want to levy a new tax without fully repealing the awful system that already […]
[…] worse because of the recent tax bill), I generally focus my ire on the politicians who have spent more than 100 years creating an insanely complicated and convoluted […]
[…] chart from the Politico story shows the top tax rate beginning on that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was adopted. It started very low, then jumped dramatically during the horrible […]
[…] chart from the Politico story shows the top tax rate beginning on that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was adopted. It started very low, then jumped dramatically during the horrible […]
[…] chart from the Politico story shows the top tax rate beginning on that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was adopted. It started very low, then jumped dramatically during the horrible […]
[…] chart from the Politico story shows the top tax rate beginning on that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was adopted. It started very low, then jumped dramatically during the horrible […]
[…] (like the Founders envisioned) that we don’t need any broad-based tax. In other words, we can get rid of the income tax and replace it with […]
[…] Second, I’d ultimately like to shrink government so much that we could eliminate the income tax entirely. […]
[…] tax that’s been imposed by our overlords in Washington. Indeed, I’ve speculated whether October 3 is the worst day of the year because that’s the date when the Revenue Act of 1913 was signed into […]
[…] like me doesn’t think that’s actually the case. Instead, our awful tax system is the result of 104 years of “public […]
[…] doesn’t think that’s actually the case. Instead, our awful tax system is the result of 104 years of “public […]
[…] until the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. The United States managed to hold out until that awful dreary day in 1913. It’s worth noting that the U.S. and other nations managed to become rich and prosperous prior to […]
[…] punitive levies until the late 1800s and early 1900s. The United States managed to hold out until that awful dreary day in 1913. It’s worth noting that the U.S. and other nations managed to become rich and prosperous prior to […]
[…] punitive levies until the late 1800s and early 1900s. The United States managed to hold out until that awful dreary day in 1913. It’s worth noting that the U.S. and other nations managed to become rich and prosperous […]
[…] Is Today – the Anniversary of the Income Tax – the Worst Day in American History? (danieljmitchell.wordpress.com) […]
[…] That might be an accurate description of Woodrow Wilson, the despicable person who gave us both the income tax and the federal […]
[…] That might be an accurate description of Woodrow Wilson, the despicable person who gave us both the income tax and the federal reserve. doubled the size of the federal government and wanted radical […]
[…] That might be an accurate description of Woodrow Wilson, the despicable person who gave us both the income tax and the federal reserve. Or Franklin Roosevelt, who doubled the size of the federal government and […]
[…] of the income tax in Antigua and Barbuda – It’s a terrible idea (as we know from America’s experience) to give politicians a new source of revenue. They’ll quickly use the new levy to finance a […]
[…] and come to their nation so I could explain to politicians and the public why an income tax would be a terrible mistake. Being a noble person and nice guy, I said yes, even though it means I’m having to miss some […]
[…] this was before the income tax was enacted. After all, there was no need to have a punitive levy when the fiscal burden of government was so […]
[…] this was before the income tax was enacted. After all, there was no need to have a punitive levy when the fiscal burden of government was so […]
[…] this was before the income tax was enacted. After all, there was no need to have a punitive levy when the fiscal burden of government was so […]
[…] more than 100 years. It wasn’t until that wretched day when the 16th Amendment was approved that the stage was set for the oppressive tax system that now […]
[…] than 100 years. It wasn’t until that wretched day when the 16th Amendment was approved that the stage was set for the oppressive tax system that now […]
According to Article 1, Section 8, the income tax was prohibited. This fact, the fact that slavery is against the U.S. Constitution, should be grounds for the elimination of the income tax.
[…] Yes, the 16th Amendment (sadly) gave Congress broad powers to tax, but that’s not the same as giving the federal government […]
[…] wonder whether October 3, 1913, was the worst day in American history. That’s when one of America’s worst presidents signed into law the income […]
[…] wonder whether October 3, 1913, was the worst day in American history. That’s when one of America’s worst presidents signed into law the income […]
[…] wonder whether October 3, 1913, was the worst day in American history. That’s when one of America’s worst presidents signed into law the […]
[…] the bottom of the list is probably Woodrow Wilson, who gave us both the income tax and the Federal Reserve. And he was a disgusting racist as […]
[…] should be eliminated. Heck, I would also eliminate October 3 from the calendar because that’s the awful day in 1913 that the income tax was signed into […]
[…] should be eliminated. Heck, I would also eliminate October 3 from the calendar because that’s the awful day in 1913 that the income tax was signed into […]
[…] should be eliminated. Heck, I would also eliminate October 3 from the calendar because that’s the awful day in 1913 that the income tax was signed into […]
[…] Which is why October 3, 1913 may be the worst day in American history. […]
[…] sympathetic to the final option, in part because of my disdain for the income tax. And if an income tax is imposed, I prefer a simple and fair flat […]
[…] sympathetic to the final option, in part because of my disdain for the income tax. And if an income tax is imposed, I prefer a simple and fair flat […]
[…] sympathetic to the final option, in part because of my disdain for the income tax. And if an income tax is imposed, I prefer a simple and fair flat […]
[…] conveniently forget, though, is that Holmes reportedly made that statement in 1904, nine years before there was an income tax, and then again in 1927, when federal taxes amounted to only $4 billion and the federal government […]
[…] conveniently forget, though, is that Holmes reportedly made that statement in 1904, nine years before there was an income tax, and then again in 1927, when federal taxes amounted to only $4 billion and the federal government […]
[…] conveniently forget, though, is that Holmes reportedly made that statement in 1904, nine years before there was an income tax, and then again in 1927, when federal taxes amounted to only $4 billion and the federal government […]
[…] Unfortunately, most politicians couldn’t find Antigua and Barbuda on a map, much less care about that nation’s fiscal policy. So I’m not holding my breath that we’ll reverse the horrid mistake that was made in 1913. […]
[…] Unfortunately, most politicians couldn’t find Antigua and Barbuda on a map, much less care about that nation’s fiscal policy. So I’m not holding my breath that we’ll reverse the horrid mistake that was made in 1913. […]
[…] a government policy that would be most upsetting to our Founding Fathers, I’d be tempted to pick the income tax. Or maybe some useless agency, such as the Department of Housing and Urban […]
[…] policy that would be most upsetting to our Founding Fathers, I’d be tempted to pick the income tax. Or maybe some useless agency, such as the Department of Housing and Urban […]
[…] no need for any broad-based tax whatsoever. Our nation enjoyed strong growth before that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was […]
[…] no need for any broad-based tax whatsoever. Our nation enjoyed strong growth before that dark day in 1913 when the income tax was […]
[…] The income tax first appeared in England, on a temporary basis during the Napoleanic wars and then permanently in 1842. It then spread like a cancer to other parts of the world, eventually reaching – and plaguing – the United States starting in 1913. […]
[…] The income tax first appeared in England, on a temporary basis during the Napoleanic wars and then permanently in 1842. It then spread like a cancer to other parts of the world, eventually reaching – and plaguing – the United States starting in 1913. […]
[…] was no need for any sort of broad-based tax (remember, the United States prospered greatly for most of our history when there was no income […]
[…] was no need for any sort of broad-based tax (remember, the United States prospered greatly for most of our history when there was no income […]
[…] is also my view on the flat tax. I would prefer no income tax, and America did quite well with that approach until 1913. But if there is going to be an income tax, then you minimize corruption and economic damage by […]
[…] familiar, it’s probably because you’re aware of other slippery slope examples, such as the tiny income tax in 1913 that has morphed into the internal revenue code monstrosity of […]
[…] it’s probably because you’re aware of other slippery slope examples, such as the tiny income tax in 1913 that has morphed into the internal revenue code monstrosity of […]
[…] rid of its flat tax, the easy-money policies of the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank, the 100th anniversary of the income tax, the global shift to higher tax rates, the seemingly permanent drop in the employment-population […]
[…] abuse have relatively benign beginnings (today’s monstrous income tax, for example, began in 1913 as a very simple, two-page tax with a top rate of just 7 […]
[…] Reagan and Coolidge are among the best (with an honorable mention for Bill Clinton) and FDR, Nixon, Wilson, and Hoover are near the […]
Reblogged this on Daňová sebeobrana podnikatele and commented:
V roce 1913 v USA zavedli daň z příjmů: sazba byla v max. výši 7%, přiznání k dani mělo pouze dvě strany a celá daňová legislativa měla pouze 400 stran.
Nyní je v USA horní sazba 39,6% a daňová legislativa má 74.000 stran.
Nepřipomíná nám to u nás také něco podobného?
[…] Dan Mitchell writes: […]
No. A worse day was 21 June, 1788.
“…By 1786, defects in the post-Revolutionary War Articles of Confederation were apparent, such as the lack of central authority over foreign and domestic commerce….”
The article is wrong!
According to Wikipedia, President Lincoln signed the of the 1st income tax that was passed in 1861.
It was a flat tax which was changed to a progressive tax in 1962.
Other enactments
Other important legislation involved two measures to raise revenues for the Federal government: tariffs (a policy with long precedent), and a new Federal income tax. In 1861, Lincoln signed the second and third Morrill Tariff, the first having become law under James Buchanan. Also in 1861, Lincoln signed the Revenue Act of 1861, creating the first U.S. income tax.[236] This created a flat tax of 3 percent on incomes above $800 ($20,400 in current dollar terms), which was later changed by the Revenue Act of 1862 to a progressive rate structure.[237]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln
…In spite of all these mistakes, the rest of the world was already several centuries ahead in coercive collectivism, so for most of its history the primitive and selfish America maintained the steepest effort-reward curves in the world. “Coincidentally” (now imagine that!) it became the richest country in the world, a country where the average “occupy protester” still enjoys a standard of living in the worldwide top ten percent (Poor shortchanged chap indeed! No wonder he wants more and more economic activity under majoritarian voter-lemming control and dirigisme).
So as you engage in the effort-reward flattening coercion of redistribution not much seems to happen so long as the rest of the world does not do any better.
Then… one day… you cross the threshold and your country’s effort-reward curve drops below the equivalent slopes of a group of other, more competitive and more economically free, nations. With your margin of advantage finally gone, the detrimental effect of redistribution is no longer simply growth forgone (to which voter-lemmings are notoriously oblivious so long as there is nothing better to compare). Now the detrimental effect turns into explicit decline as other countries with steeper effort-reward curves pull away into a perpetually compounding higher growth rate (ahh if voter-lemmings only understood the simplest sequences of a geometric series – i.e. compounding). You start feeling the decline from year to year (see Europe for more details).
——————————————-
In practical and timely terms: ObamaCare has introduced an additional 16% marginal tax increase in the middle income range. Starting on January 1, 2014 the American middle and lower class will commence being bribed into a permanent 16% marginal tax increase. This is the inevitable outcome of a roughly $10k subsidy that must be given and then withdrawn as a family increases its productivity from the $30k level to the $90k level. Actually, this is only the insurance premium subsidy. The actual subsidy is a little higher, and so is the marginal tax rate increase, since copays are also subsidized on a similar sliding scale. Some of the subsidy phaseouts are even abrupt, resulting in perverse marginal tax rates of over 100% over small income ranges, but that is a secondary perversion. The elephant in the room (the elephant that is about to sit on US competitiveness) is the additional, inescapable, 16% increase in marginal tax rates. This is for a family of 4, and the calculations are a little different for other social groups but the end result is similar: An unprecedented decrease in productivity incentives and labor force participation. Sure, for now, this affects only a rather modest percentage of the population, those eligible for the exchanges. But soon many other entities will find their way to the gravy train of subsidized healthcare, something politicians will welcome as they will gain additional power by becoming the gatekeepers and allocators of ever more communal wealth.
In summary, this is a new permanent and unprecedented wave of redistribution for America. An unprecedented abrupt flattening of the once steep effort-reward American curves. Those who think this will have only minor consequences in long term prosperity, are in deep denial. American competitiveness is jumping the shark, but it will take a few years for the full effects to materialize and then a few more for the compounding decline in growth rates to be fully felt. By then, for most voter-lemmings, it will be impossible to directly trace the decline back to Obamacare and the other redistribution dreams of HopNChange. Desperate voter-lemmings will rush to the polls to compensate for a sliding standard of living with more…tada!… redistribution. The vicious cycle closes, the event horizon past.
Expect the percentage of people who work to drop significantly over the next decade (it already has since the first Obama redistribution wave passed on as stimulus, but this new wave a redistribution will be much more pernicious and permanent). Expect the motivation levels of those who stay at work to decline significantly. Expect Americans to no longer have the strongest incentive in the world towards exceptionalism. Expect America’s productivity to decline and thus expect the American superior standard of living to cease to be so, as other nations catch up and sink American prosperity into mediocrity. THAT is what decline is about.
Aggregate prosperity == Aggregate productivity of your country.
This is the inescapable equation.
——————————————————————
So what lies ahead?
Redistribution will further flatten the effort reward curve, decrease productivity, lower growth, which will sooner or later compound into a lower standard of living. Desperate voter –lemmings will rush to the polls to rescue their standard of living with …. with… with… with?.. : More Redistribution. The vortex is inescapable. Prepare, because THAT is what decline is all about.
The era America is now living through looks eerily like the Hope and Change days of Greece in the 1980’s. But don’t limit the comparison to the outlier case of Greece. The entire European welfare continent is firmly in the path of decline, riding a 1-2% annual growth trendline (even that seems to have become questionable going forward) in a world that grows 4-5% annually. The rest of the world is catching up to the once enviable European prosperity at the inexorable rate of 3-4% annually, compounding European standards of living into worldwide mediocrity. That is the road Americans chose when they responded to Bush statism by choosing the Obama Euro-culture. That is the event that cemented America’s final entrance into the vicious cycle.
So, enjoy the few short years of the great smorgasboard. Barring some destabilizing event that will trigger a correction of this increasing distortion (not unlikely), it will not be so bad in the beginning. But make no mistake, America’s long term irreversible decline has commenced. THAT is what decline is about.
P.S. As Mr. Mitchell points out: [Rahn Curves] +[The %GDP government spending trajectories of the western world] = The whole story (or most of it, other economic freedoms being the remainder)
Except that I would redefine the [% GDP of government spending] as : [% of economic activity subject to collective voter-lemming control]
Majority is never exceptional (almost by definition). A nation whose exceptional members are enslaved to the majority is a mediocre nation — and so, inevitably, becomes its prosperity. Americans will find out soon enough.
The FairTax revokes the 16th amendment, abolishes the IRS, removes from Congress the social power of taxation, and makes taxation voluntary, rather than penal.
[…] Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, wondered if today is the anniversary of “The Worst Day in American History.” “Once the income tax was adopted,” Mitchell observed, “it became a lot easier to […]
Reblogged this on IdeaTransfuser and commented:
On this day in history, the American Income Tax was created. Fooey.
I agree it was a horrible day but is it correct to mention the implementation of the income tax without also discussing the creation of the Federal Reserve banking cartel?
p.s. To my understanding Osama bin Laden has been dead since December 2001.
Worst day the fay the federal income tax began?
No
How about the day the Constitution replaced the Articles–there would have been no “Civil War” nor the illegal Purchase, war with Mexico, Trail of Tears, anti-trust acts, “civil” rights, national police state–all made possible by the new national government (new in 1787)
And yet Ron Paul likes the original Constitution (to include the “Bill of Rights”)–but that document was used by Hamilton ,Jefferson and the rest for the Alien and Sedition Acts, the illegal Louisiana Purchase and the Second Bank of the U S (the Fed of its day)
Tup–the original Constitution–some acorn–look at it now
Reblogged this on The Colombist.
[…] Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute put up a good piece on the income tax: […]
Only dishonest Abe beats Wilson
Lisa, look here for answers, as with so many of our current problems we are trying to fix what was broken in response to WWII.
http://www.aei.org/article/economics/fiscal-policy/taxes/automatic-tax-withholding/
And it was Milton Friedman who came up with the idea!
[…] that Dan Mitchell termed Wilson “one of America’s worst Presidents” in his great post about this unfortunate anniversary. […]
When did they start deducting taxes from paychecks?
And what about the new french tax on ‘viable factories’?
http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1322798/french-law-sets-fines-firms-close-factories-deemed-viable
Reblogged this on This Got My Attention and commented:
One of the deepest roots of the problems in America. Yet, neither political party wants to slay this terrible monster.
Reblogged this on U.S. Constitutional Free Press.