Is taxation theft?

James (No)

There are several reasons why taxation is not theft. One of the most fundamental reasons is that taxation is based on the social contract between citizens and their government. This social contract establishes a mutually beneficial relationship in which citizens agree to pay taxes in exchange for the services and protections the government provides. Taxation is, therefore, essential for a functional society. Taxes help pay for necessary services like public safety, transportation, healthcare, and education. These services can only be provided to citizens with the taxes brought in. Neglecting these services is detrimental to society. Thus, there is a mutual benefit to all citizens, unlike in a situation involving theft, where one person benefits at the expense of another. 

In addition to being based on a social contract and supporting public services, taxation is also grounded in the rule of law. This means that taxes are not arbitrary or capricious but are instead governed by clear and consistent rules that apply to everyone equally. This principle is essential to ensuring that taxes are fair and just. Taxes are determined by a number of variables, including income, property ownership, and consumption. Before taxes are imposed, elected authorities thoroughly examine and discuss these considerations, and the public has a vote in the tax laws that apply to them. Thus, this kind of public involvement illustrates yet another difference between taxation and theft, namely, public consent. Citizens residing in a sovereign nation know they must pay taxes and have the democratic power to elect officials who can change tax laws. 

Curtice (Yes)

The early stages of the US saw the federal government financed by public land sales to collect 'asset income,' among other things, such as inter-state tariffs. It wasn't until the progressive movement emerged in the early 20th century that the concept of an income tax took root.

One of America’s founders and third president, Thomas Jefferson, believed the only moral commercial exchanges were those that are voluntary. A federal (or state) income tax is not voluntary. To put it bluntly, enacting a federal income tax resultantly increased the federal government's power. If one refuses to pay his or her income tax, they will end up in jail and their property confiscated. The use of force—and the threat of incarceration—can be seen as an infringement on individual liberty. The proverbial example is that if a robber holds a gun to your head and demands your money, that is theft, but if the government does it, that is taxation. 

Further, a federal income tax implies that we don't own our own money. The government effectively tells its citizens how much of their own money that they’ve earned that they’re allowed to keep. In addition to confiscation under coercion, much of what the government does with the taxes it collects is immoral, including its disproportional collection and distribution of it. Higher-income individuals pay a disproportionate amount of taxes compared to their lower-income counterparts. 

Under this model, taxpayers have limited control over how the government spends our tax money. The federal budget is gargantuan, fueled by misguided spending and borrowing. Much of it is wasted, and much more is spent on things the government should not be doing.