Tax Incidence Quotes

When you think of policies that are going to address inequality of wealth, you have to be very thoughtful about what economists call "incidence of taxes." If most of the savings is being done by capitalists, and you tax the return on capital, then they will have less to invest. That would mean, over the long run, that the rate of interest would go up. That would therefore undo some of the intent to lower the income of capitalists.

Economists have long understood that taxes do more than raise revenue for the governments that impose them; to some extent, at least, they also discourage and reduce the economic activities that are taxed.

Almost all taxes on production fall finally on the consumer.

Every tax on business is just a part of the cost of production, and the customer ends up paying it when he buys the product. It’s a hidden sales tax.

You can’t tax business. Business doesn’t pay taxes. It collects taxes.

No matter what anyone may say about making the rich and the corporations pay the taxes, in the end they come out of the people who toil. It is your fellow workers who are ordered to work for the Government, every time an appropriation bill is passed. The people pay the expense of government, often many times over, in the increased cost of living. I want taxes to be less, that the people may have more.

Economists are almost unanimous in conceding that the land tax has no adverse side effects. ...Landowners ought to look at both sides of the coin. Applying a tax to land values also means removing other taxes. This would so improve the efficiency of a city that land values would go up more than the increase in taxes on land.

I hope people understand that when you tax corporations that the concrete and the steel and the plastic don't pay. People pay. And so when you tax corporations, either the employees are going to pay or the shareholders are going to pay or the customers are going to pay. And so corporations are people.

We ought not to cripple them [the Australian States] using our power of direct taxation, unless under the stress of some great emergency; we ought to leave them free to enlarge their revenues by direct taxation [income and property taxes], seeing that they will have no power to resort to customs or excise duties if they want additional revenue.

No matter what anyone may say about making the rich and the corporations pay taxes, in the end they come out of the people who toil

Obama and Clinton wrongly believe that the corporate income tax is a tax on the rich. The reality is that rich corporations don't pay taxes - workers do.

Congress can raise taxes because it can persuade a sizable fraction of the populace that somebody else will pay

Research has shown that middle-income wage earners would benefit most from a large reduction in corporate tax rates. The corporate tax is not a rich-man's tax. Corporations don't even pay it. They just pass the tax on in terms of lower wages and benefits, higher consumer prices, and less stockholder value.

A one-time tax does not get figured into people's investment decisions.

The true principle of taxation is the benefit principle - those who benefit from a government service should pay for it. It's also known as the 'user pay' principle. Every effort should be made to link the payment of taxes or fees to the cost associated with the government service.

All taxes must, at last, fall upon agriculture.

All taxes have a negative effect on economic activity.

But a tax on luxuries would no other effect than to raise their price. It would fall wholly on the consumer, and could neither increase wages nor lower profits.

All taxes, except a 'lump-sum tax,' introduce distortions in the economy. But no government can impose a lump-sum tax - the same amount for everyone regardless of their income or expenditures - because it would fall heaviest on those with less income, and it would grind the poor, who might be unable to pay it at all.

If a tax on malt would raise the price of beer, a tax on bread must raise the price of bread.