A fun Independence Day list of things that are now considered taxes
posted at 11:11 am on July 4, 2012 by J.E. Dyer
If you have decided to go along with Chief Justice Roberts and agree that Obamacare is a tax, now is the time to contemplate the many things this reading will allow Congress to require you to do.
The list is literally endless, because of the endless number of things ideologues can come up with. But these are some of the top tunes.
1. Congress can force you to buy an electric car.
2. Congress can force you to buy solar panels.
3. Congress can force you to buy and install a remote-control thermostat for your home.
4. Congress can force you to buy internet service.
5. Congress can force you to buy particular kinds of food.
6. Congress can force you to buy contraceptives for yourself.
7. Congress can force you to buy biofuels, even if you don’t have any use for them.
8. Congress can force you to donate to political causes and “charities.”
9. Congress can force you to pay union dues.
10. Congress can force you to buy the New York Times.
11. Congress can force you to buy “green travel” packages.
12. Congress can force you to buy a 3-bedroom, 2-bath townhome with a 1-car parking spot for your electric car.
13. Congress can force you to pay for soccer, gymnastics, and ballet lessons for your children.
14. Congress can force you to pay for a gym membership.
15. Congress can force you to rent a 2-bedroom apartment with no parking space.
16. Congress can force you to borrow money.
17. Congress can force you to pay for a state-college education for your children, regardless of where or whether they actually attend college.
17. Congress can force you to buy a goat.
19. Congress can force you to hire people.
20. Congress can force you to buy mass transit passes, whether you use mass transit or not.
The list could go on and on. After all, if fining people for not buying health insurance is the same thing as a “tax,” then fining them for not spending on other things is also a tax.
We rarely make important distinctions in our politics anymore, and that is a great menace to our idea of liberty and limited government. We must not let our concept of the purpose and character of a tax be corrupted, precisely because taxing us is a power accorded Congress in the Constitution. The definition of “tax” is, in fact, the most important limit on what Congress can do with its power to tax. In the wake of the Obamacare ruling, defining “tax” is defending our liberty – or, from the opposite perspective, attacking it.
This is not a minor point. Definitions are central to the idea of constitutionalism. We have let government dig into our pockets in so many different ways that many Americans have lost sight of the importance of definitions, but it is fatal to our liberty if we accept that any old way the government might make us spend money is a “tax.” It’s not. Taxes produce revenue for the government as their primary purpose and first-order effect.
I recommend reading Federalist 30-36 to discern the prevailing view of taxes at the time of our founding, as a revenue-production measure for the expenses of government. Count the number of times you see the word “revenue.” In Federalist 30, Alexander Hamilton makes an illuminating distinction between having power over the people’s lives and having the power to tax:
In the Ottoman or Turkish empire, the sovereign, though in other respects absolute master of the lives and fortunes of his subjects, has no right to impose a new tax. The consequence is that he permits the bashaws or governors of provinces to pillage the people without mercy; and, in turn, squeezes out of them the sums of which he stands in need, to satisfy his own exigencies and those of the state. In America, from a like cause, the government of the Union has gradually dwindled into a state of decay, approaching nearly to annihilation. Who can doubt, that the happiness of the people in both countries would be promoted by competent authorities in the proper hands, to provide the revenues which the necessities of the public might require?
Read the whole paper; it is clear that Hamilton viewed federal taxation as a revenue-raising measure, and not as a means of exercising mastery over the people’s lives and fortunes (e.g., regulating, penalizing, or social- or environmental-engineering the people). If we have come to see federal taxation in the latter light, it is not because such a purpose can be read into the Constitution or the Framers’ intent. We have a choice to accept the statist-interventionist mentality on taxes, or not. The most important thing we can do today is affirm limits on Congress’s power to tax, by requiring narrow definitions.
I am encouraged that the Romney campaign has declined to agree that Obamacare is a tax. People need to read the Constitution. Whatever we accept as a “tax,” Congress has the power to make us pay. The Obamacare purchase mandate is not a tax, and neither is the fine for not buying health insurance. If we agree that they are taxes, the constitutional republic is lost.
J.E. Dyer’s articles have appeared at The Green Room, Commentary’s “contentions,” Patheos, The Weekly Standard online, and her own blog, The Optimistic Conservative.
This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
It’s come to this: Venezuela approves funds to relieve the toilet-paper shortage
Video: Dem Congressman rips IRS for abuses, threatens bringing in special prosecutor
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Only solution to this for Dems and RINOs, for tax ‘expenditures’ –
Tax Ireland!
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:03 PM
Shouldn’t O’bama be able to talk to some of his relatives over there and sort things out?
rightmind on May 21, 2013 at 8:09 PM
That is called “competition’. Something Obama understands about as well as he spells or pronounces common words.
pat on May 21, 2013 at 8:10 PM
Abolish the corporate tax. It isn’t even close to being worth having. Just make dividends part of income.
Count to 10 on May 21, 2013 at 8:11 PM
Don’t touch the Guinness…
d1carter on May 21, 2013 at 8:11 PM
Tax it like hell!
It’s costing American liberals spending money.
What are you — anti-American?
I bet you’d shoot a guy you might catch raping a woman, without knowing his circumstances and how he feels.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:15 PM
Since some of my companies do business offshore, I am as guilty as Apple, albeit on a comparatively infinitesimal scale, in setting up Irish holding companies that place company funds in American banks and other American-based financial vehicles. All perfectly legal.
Why, because I don’t wish to pay a single penny more in taxes, no matter to which government that’s involved. Why does Apple do it or, for that matter, any other huge publicly traded entity do it? Well, if they didn’t, they’d be open to shareholder suits for “wasting corporate assets” or shareholder “Change of Management” proxy fights at their next annual meeting, which would be prosecuted by some multi-billion dollar investment fund holders.
A publicly held company has a lot more scrutiny, due to its board’s fiduciary duty to shareholders, than does a simple, greedy bastard like me.
TXUS on May 21, 2013 at 8:18 PM
lol, He was just socially awkward and didn’t know how to ask politely.
arnold ziffel on May 21, 2013 at 8:19 PM
I hope you get filthy rich.
And never hire liberals.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:19 PM
I love to mention this sort of stuff to my Apple using lib friends.
How Apple uses foreign labor (toss in exploit for extra effect) and minimizes their tax exposure thru perfectly legal means.
Fun to watch them squirm.
Hill60 on May 21, 2013 at 8:20 PM
Ban St Patrick’s Day parades !!
burrata on May 21, 2013 at 8:20 PM
Kill a rapist, offend a liberal.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:21 PM
No! We can’t do THAT!
Tax it instead! See — a level playing field.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:23 PM
If following the law to avoid paying taxes is wrong, can we impeach Obama on the fact that he claimed deductions on his 1040?
malclave on May 21, 2013 at 8:27 PM
That’s funny. When Clinton made one of his returns public years ago, he wrote off his used undershorts at $2.50 each.
I don’t file a long form any more. But when I did, I never claimed my charitable donations. What I return to God does not leave me room to try getting back a piece of it.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:31 PM
I’d like to travel back into the past and bitchslap everyone involved in setting up LoN/UN
dmacleo on May 21, 2013 at 8:33 PM
Well, when your choice is paying the Irish 12.5% on offshore earnings vs. the IRS’s 35% on same, almost three times as much, this Texan’s ready to share a pint and a “top ‘o the mornin’ to ye.”
TXUS on May 21, 2013 at 8:33 PM
Great !
Now let them try to tax Cinco de Mayo parade ,
you know for a level playing field !!
burrata on May 21, 2013 at 8:33 PM
Long as ye buy the first pint, we celebrate!
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:35 PM
That would be racist, man. What is wrong with you?
The Irish aren’t a minority.
Why do I hang out with you people? /
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:37 PM
Nigh a problem, William. I’ll buy the pints, you bring the lassies.
TXUS on May 21, 2013 at 8:47 PM
Deal!
I have a thing for redheads. That okay there?
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:49 PM
Éirinn go Brách (or for my English friends, Erin go Bragh)
IrishEyes on May 21, 2013 at 8:52 PM
From an American of Scot lineage: Ciamar a tha thu?
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:55 PM
Tax Bono.
Ronnie on May 21, 2013 at 8:55 PM
That’s one way of looking at it, the other way of looking at it, is that by claiming the deduction, it provides more to give. i.e, if you are in the 28% bracket, if you don’t take the deduction, for every dollar you donate, you have to earn $1.39.
AZfederalist on May 21, 2013 at 8:57 PM
+1000
Out his a$$!
He’s nothing but an international panhandler in a Bond Street suit.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:58 PM
I’m no longer in position to itemize. But I have a personal religious view. I worked from there.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 9:01 PM
I do, too. If I get $100 bill from a bank (I hate $100 bills) I put it in the first charity box I see, wrapped in a $1. We’re not rich, rich. We just have a little breathing room. My philosophy is good deeds don’t count if you tell someone or claim it as a deduction. My accountant hates me… lol.
Fallon on May 21, 2013 at 9:06 PM
I’m of the view, as according to Scripture, that for what we do in private with the Lord, He will reward us openly.
I believe as you do.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 9:10 PM
Everybody needs to do what their conscience tells them. I think where one would get off track is if one were to give because it is tax deducttible.
AZfederalist on May 21, 2013 at 9:10 PM
… as far as giving without publicizing it; up until this week, I was under the impression that my charitable donations were completely private and that the IRS would keep those records private.
AZfederalist on May 21, 2013 at 9:13 PM
THAT describes a liberal.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 9:13 PM
Think about it — Bill Clinton deducted from his $2.50 a pair for his ‘donated undershorts, and we’re expected to think he’s somehow a ‘nice guy’?
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 9:18 PM
I’m in a bad mood all day.
Give me a troll to chew on.
Liam on May 21, 2013 at 9:21 PM
We do a lot of things wrong in Ireland
but the corporate tax rate was one of the things we did right
now the eurocrats want to take it away
breffnian on May 21, 2013 at 9:29 PM
Apple: “Hey Ireland how about a low tax rate?”
Ireland: Brilliant!
Apple: Brilliant!
BKennedy on May 21, 2013 at 9:56 PM
Good. That’s my only problem with Apple doing this; that they are a bunch of hypocritical progs.
As to declaring taxes, I’ve considered the doing in private aspect, and really respect those who chose that route, but when I consider all the pure evil the government does with my tax dollar, I chose to keep as much out of their wicked hands as legally possible. I still fear it won’t be enough to wash me of the guilt I have in continuing to fund that evil.
pannw on May 21, 2013 at 10:31 PM
The proggie lib hears only “misses out on … tax revenue” and says, “That’s not fair! You’re not paying your fair share!”
When asked about the jobs, the proggie lib responds indignantly, “Well, since you won’t give EVERYONE a well-paying programmer or executive job, then THAT’S NOT FAIR either!”
When told life isn’t fair, the proggie lib snarls, “Once the government controls everything, IT WILL BE!”
Marcola on May 22, 2013 at 12:26 AM
Letting too many snakes onto the Emerald Isle in P.C. stupidity.
O’Sharia.
profitsbeard on May 22, 2013 at 3:49 AM
Say there wasn’t anyone on that panel that has a rich heiress wife that shelters her NINE-figure fortune in a Trust, is there?
Cough-Cindy-Cough-McCain…
Tekov Yahoser on May 22, 2013 at 4:57 AM
I guess the Senate Democrats figured they’d found a pot o’ gold.
Odysseus on May 22, 2013 at 7:27 AM
The nerve of those Irish.
Not taxing everyone that wants to do business in their country over 50%. To not support their ruling elite with well earned compensation and benefits such as “seperate but equal” healthcare, pensions/social security, immunity from tax and regulations as well as most non felonious law.
They are obviously infidels and heathens unworthy of our fearless leaders support.
acyl72 on May 22, 2013 at 7:31 AM