Economic justification for taxation and tax fairness: a new look at an old problem
- Authors: Bratko T.D.1
-
Affiliations:
- Issue: No 6 (2023)
- Pages: 8-20
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/2454-065X/article/view/360763
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/QBQRBM
- ID: 360763
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
A search for criteria of economically justified and fair taxation has been going on for a long time within studies in philosophy of law, constitutional law and tax law. Often such studies are one-sided and incomplete. The criteria developed by researchers, as well as research-based definition of “economic justification for taxation,” are unsatisfactory and unsuitable for practical use. Without understanding economic justification for taxation, it is impossible to give answers to many practical questions, in particular: is a tax economically justified or not? The purpose of this article is to formulate a new universal, practically applicable definition of “economic justification for taxation,” reflecting modern Russian and foreign ideas about fiscal social contract and constitutional principles of taxation. To achieve this goal, the author resorts to a comparative analysis of two incompatible principles of fair taxation: the equivalence (benefit) principle, arising from “individualistic” Anglo-Saxon theory, and the ability-to-pay principle that is based on continental European “welfare-state” doctrine. The author uses equivalence (benefit) principle to develop a so-called “beneficiary” theory of economic justification for taxation. The beneficiary theory is for the first time set out in this article. The beneficiary theory offers a new understanding of economic justification for taxation which is unconventional for Russian tax law and establishes a clearer – compared to previously known – criterion of economically justified taxation. This criterion makes it possible to identify economically unjustified taxes that do not comply with provisions of tax legislation and Russian Federation Constitution, and therefore can be applied when challenging: 1) validity of legislation establishing economically unjustified taxes; 2) constitutionality of tax legislation. The author, using the beneficiary theory he developed, assesses economic justification for bachelor tax and vehicle tax paid by owner of a vehicle not in use.
About the authors
Tatiana Dmitrievna Bratko
Email: bratkotatiana@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4682-573X
References
Levi M. Of Rule and Revenue. Berkeley University of California Press, 1988. Timmons J. F. The Fiscal Contract: States, Taxes, and Public Services // World Politics. 2005. Vol. 57, no. 4. P. 530-567. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40060117 (дата обращения: 17.01.2024). Leroy, M. (2011). "em"Taxation, the state, and society: the fiscal sociology of interventionist democracy"/em". Bruxelles: Peter Lang. Feld, L. P., Frey, B. S. Tax Compliance as the Result of a Psychological Tax Contract: The Role of Incentives and Responsive Regulation // Law & Policy. 2007. Vol. 29, no. 1. P. 102-120. URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9930.2007.00248.x (дата обращения: 17.01.2024). Umar M. A., Derashid C., Ibrahim I. What Is Wrong With the Fiscal Social Contract of Taxation in Developing Countries? A Dialogue With Self-Employed Business Owners in Nigeria // SAGE Open. 2017. Vol. 7, no. 4. URL : https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017745114 (дата обращения: 17.01.2024). Крохина Ю. А. Актуальные проблемы правового регулирования расходов бюджетов // Государственный и муниципальный финансовый контроль. 2017. № 1. С. 29-33. Хаменушко И. В. О фискальном ядре и регуляторной периферии финансового права // Финансовое право. 2021. № 11. С. 17-22. Цинделиани И. А. Принципы финансового права // Финансовое право. 2019. № 4. С. 3-9. Murphy L., Nagel T. The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Братко Т. Д. Доктрина процессуальной правоспособности налогоплательщика как передовая концепция защиты публичных интересов // Налоговед. 2017. № 9. С. 72-83. Братко Т. Д. Альтернативный подход к обязательности и безвозмездности налога в свете англо-американской правовой доктрины // Налоговед. 2017. № 11. С. 30-41. Гриб В. В. Формы обеспечения доступа к информации о деятельности органов государственной и местной власти // Государственная власть и местное самоуправление. 2016. № 9. С. 3-12. Weston S. F. Principles of justice in taxation. New York: The Columbia University Press, 1903. Slemrod J., Bakija J. M. Taxing Ourselves: A Citizen's Guide to the Debate Over Taxes. Berkeley: MIT Press, 2004. Занкин Д. Б. Понятие экономического основания налога в решениях Конституционного Суда РФ// Налоговед. 2009. №11. C. 32-39. Чуркин А. В. Объект налогообложения: правовые характеристики. М.: Юристъ, 2003. Комментарий к Налоговому кодексу Российской Федерации / Под ред. Б. Н. Топорнина и др. М.: Юристъ, 2005. Щекин Д. М. Налог на холостяков, одиноких и малосемейных граждан, его оценка в трудах С. Д. Цыпкина и перспективы возрождения этого налога в современных условиях // Финансовое право. 2021. № 11. С. 29-37. Тютин Д. В., Попкова Ж. Г. Система принципов (требований) налогового права как отражение системы общеправовых принципов // Принципы финансового права / Под ред. И. А. Цинделиани. М.: Проспект, 2023. С. 171-178. Тютин Д. В., Попкова Ж. Г. Проблема конкуренции принципов (требований) в налоговых правоотношениях // Принципы финансового права / Под ред. И. А. Цинделиани. М.: Проспект, 2023. С. 160-171.
Supplementary files
