A consumption tax policy like you are suggesting is regressive, meaning people with lower incomes are more impacted by the change in tax laws. They benefit less proportionately when their income is untaxed but things they buy is taxed more. It benefits the wealthy and investment class more.

However congress has recently introduced a "Fair Tax" bill, abolishing income tax, corporate tax, and estate tax. Replacing it with additional consumption taxes that will be managed by the states. https://www.newsweek.com/republican-plan-abolish-federal-inc...

Not having income tax is not new. For a period of time before 1913 Americans didn't pay any income tax. The government was much smaller then and was funded mostly through tarrifs.

There is an argument to be made that American's don't need to pay any tax and that the government could be run through money creation. El Salvador's president Bukele mentioned this in a speech last year. https://x.com/wallstwolverine/status/1860393853355806942 That approach has its own problems.

In "The Revolution of the Giving Hand" (2009), Peter Sloterdijk proposes replacing mandatory taxation with voluntary contributions. He criticizes the state as a "fiscal feudalism" that expropriates citizens and instead advocates for a culture of generosity, where wealthy individuals voluntarily fund public services.

He points to American philanthropy as a model. Critics argue this is unrealistic since essential state functions depend on reliable tax revenue. Sloterdijk’s idea is thought-provoking but difficult to implement.

Could a voluntary tax system actually work? I really like the idea.

I know I am gonna regret posting it but here you go :)

First of all, to design such system, we should define some principles.

1. Guiding Principles for a Transparent Tax System Simplicity - Minimize the number of different taxes. - Simplify the calculation process for individuals and businesses. - Reduce administrative layers and compliance costs.

Transparency - Make it clear to every taxpayer exactly how much is taxed and for what purpose. - Ensure it is politically difficult to hide tax increases or carve out hidden subsidies.

Efficiency - Minimize distortions in economic decisions (e.g., producing, saving, investing). - Reduce or remove unnecessary complexity and loopholes.

Fairness (Progressivity) - Ensure that tax burdens are shared in a way that does not unduly penalize lower-income households. - Compensate or shield essentials from high taxation to avoid regressive impacts.

Predictability and Stability - Support stable revenues for the government. - Avoid radical swings in revenue collection based on small macroeconomic changes.

2. Core Proposal: A Unified Consumption Tax (Sales Tax or VAT) a. Single-Rate Consumption Tax Basic Idea: Replace all existing taxes (income, corporate, payroll, capital gains, estate, etc.) with a single consumption-based tax at the point of final sale to consumers. Visibility: Every receipt would include a line showing the exact tax rate (e.g., “Price: $80, Tax: $20, Total: $100”).

b. Broad Base, Few Exemptions Why? The fewer exemptions, the simpler and more transparent. Essential Goods: Many countries either zero-rate or lower-rate staples (like certain groceries, children’s clothing, healthcare items). You could zero-rate truly essential goods or provide targeted subsidies/rebates to low-income households. Reduced Lobbying: By not riddling the system with special rates, it becomes more difficult for industries to lobby for targeted breaks.

c. Addressing Regressivity: Direct Rebate or “Prebate” A common criticism of a consumption-only system is that low-income individuals spend more of their income on basic needs, so a consumption tax can be regressive. To counteract: - Universal Monthly Rebate (“Prebate”) Each legal resident receives a monthly payment intended to cover the taxes on a “basic-needs” consumption level. This ensures that the first portion of everyone’s consumption is effectively tax-free.

- Targeted Rebate Instead of universal payments, the government could use an income-based or means-tested formula to ensure that lower-income individuals receive larger rebates. This method is more complex administratively but can be more cost-effective.

d. Rate Setting - Single National Rate: Suppose the consumption tax is set at, say, 25% of the final retail price. - Simplicity: Everyone sees 25% on top of the sticker price. - Revenue Neutrality: The rate should be designed to bring in roughly the same revenue as the set of taxes it is replacing.

3. Supplementary Taxes or Adjustments While a single consumption tax might be the main pillar, some additional elements can improve fairness, correct for externalities, or stabilize revenue:

Land Value Tax (LVT) A tax on the unimproved value of land, rather than on improvements or structures. Encourages efficient land use and can capture community-created land value (e.g., transit, public services). The LVT is relatively transparent if done on a straightforward formula: “X% of assessed land value.” It is also harder to evade and generally considered economically efficient (it does not discourage production).

Environmental / Pigovian Taxes Taxes on negative externalities like carbon emissions, pollution, or congestion. Transparent and promotes socially beneficial behavior changes. E.g., a clear carbon tax per ton of CO₂ equivalent, shown on fuel receipts or energy bills.

Minimal “Sin” Taxes Some jurisdictions prefer additional excise taxes on things like tobacco or alcohol to reduce harmful consumption and fund health programs. If used, these should also be transparent: “Alcohol excise tax: $X per bottle.”

Estate or Wealth Surcharge (Optional/Controversial) Even in a consumption-based system, some argue for a small estate or wealth tax to prevent extreme concentration of wealth. Alternatively, a well-designed inheritance tax or progressive property transfer tax can be more transparent than complicated estate valuation rules.

4. How This System Stays Transparent One Main Tax at Checkout Individuals see the tax clearly on every transaction. Harder for policymakers to quietly raise taxes—consumers will notice instantly if the rate changes from 25% to 26%.

Public, Simple Rate Schedules The rate is set by law, widely publicized, and uniform.Any adjustments require open debate, avoiding hidden complexities. Limited Deductions/Exemptions

Minimizing carve-outs helps everyone see the baseline. If the system only allows for a short list of zero-rated essentials, that list is well-known and easy to understand (e.g., “milk, bread, children’s medicine, etc.”).

Digital Transparency and Reporting Modern point-of-sale systems can automatically track consumption taxes. Governments can release monthly or quarterly data on total sales tax receipts, providing real-time insight into how much is being collected and from what sectors.

5. Potential Advantages Reduced Bureaucracy Fewer tax returns, fewer forms—everyone pays tax via consumption. Corporations and small businesses only need to handle sales tax remittance (although that can be a burden, it’s often simpler than handling complex income tax rules).

Lower Compliance Costs No need for complicated personal or corporate tax filings with endless deductions and credits. Accounting tasks are more focused on sales reporting.

Enhanced Economic Growth Incentives Because income, payroll, and corporate taxes are eliminated, producing more, saving, and investing are not penalized directly. The tax hits consumption, which can encourage more saving/investment (in principle).

Political Accountability If politicians want to raise taxes, they must raise the visible rate. Voters can directly see and judge any increase in daily transactions.

6. Potential Drawbacks and Mitigations Regressivity: Without the rebate/prebate, a consumption tax alone is regressive. Mitigation: Direct rebates or zero-rating essential items can address the basic-needs portion of consumption.

Volatility in Revenues: Consumption-based taxes can fluctuate more with economic cycles; during recessions, people cut back, and tax revenue can decline sharply. Mitigation: Stabilize with additional land value taxes, environmental taxes, or small cyclical adjustments.

Administrative Complexity for Businesses: While simpler than administering corporate income taxes, collecting and remitting sales tax is not zero effort (especially for small businesses or those selling online across state lines). Mitigation: Offer robust, standardized digital systems that automate collection and remittance.

Wealth Inequality: High-income individuals who invest rather than consume could potentially avoid much of the tax. Mitigation: A small net-worth or inheritance tax, or progressive property-based taxes, can help. Alternatively, if they eventually consume (buy yachts, luxury items), the tax is captured then.

Political Resistance: Transitioning from the status quo might face pushback from industries or lobby groups that benefit from existing loopholes. Mitigation: Emphasize the simplicity, fairness, and broad-based nature of the new system, and possibly phase it in gradually.

Putting It All Together: Example Structure - National Consumption Tax (25%): Applies to final sales of goods and services. Clearly listed on receipts. - Monthly “Prebate”: Universal or means-tested, ensuring basic living expenses (e.g., up to the poverty line) face zero net tax. - Zero-Rated Essentials (Optional/Selective): Core groceries, children’s medicine, etc. to further reduce regressivity concerns. - Land Value Tax: A small percentage on the unimproved land value. Provides steady revenue and limits real estate speculation. - Environmental Taxes: Carbon tax or similar charges for pollution. Rates are fixed, transparent, and specifically target negative externalities. - (Optional) Estate or Wealth Transfer Surcharge: A moderate rate targeting only very large estates or wealth transfers to limit extreme inequality accumulation.

A single consumption tax—combined with targeted rebates (or zero-rating essentials) and supplemented by a land value tax and Pigovian taxes—can achieve: - Simplicity for individuals and firms. - Transparency so that all taxpayers see the rate and the government’s funding levels. - Fairness through rebates and progressive elements (like zero-rated essentials or land taxes). - Efficiency by minimizing distortionary taxes on productive activities. This sort of system takes the core spirit of “Fair Tax” proposals but refines it to avoid the major pitfalls of regressivity, revenue volatility, and wealth concentration. The exact rates, exemptions, and supplementary taxes can be adjusted based on each country’s economic, cultural, and social priorities. Nonetheless, the guiding principle remains: keep taxation visible, broad-based, and simple, while providing straightforward policy tools to preserve progressivity and protect lower-income citizens.