The
FairTax, Tax Evasion, and the Underground Economy
Under today's income tax system, tax evasion is a major, continuing and growing problem. Under the pressures of a much larger Internal Revenue Service (IRS), more burdensome information reporting requirements, increasingly stiff and numerous penalties, and a host of legislative initiatives, the problem is getting worse. Based on IRS figures, tax evasion has increased by 67 percent during the most recent 11-year period for which data is published. As a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), tax evasion has reached 2.0 percent in 1992 as compared to 1.6 percent in 1981. Tax evasion continues to amount to approximately 22 to 23 percent of all income taxes collected. (See table next page). And, these IRS figures do not include taxes lost on illegal sources of income. The
income tax is collected with a heavy hand. In 1997, the IRS assessed
over 33 million civil penalties on American taxpayers in an effort to
force compliance with the tax system. Of these, about 4.1 million were
forgiven. 22.7 million penalties involved the income tax and 9.7 million
involved the payroll tax, taxes that the FairTax would replace.[2]
Under the FairTax, even if we assumed that every business
in America was a retailer and required to file a tax return, no more
than 19 million businesses would be required to file returns compared
to over 154 million returns (of all types) filed The tax gap is the difference between what is theoretically owed in taxes and what is actually collected in taxes. In a comprehensive look at the tax gap, the General Accounting Office stated: Almost every year since 1981 has witnessed legislation to address tax gap issues. These legislative actions generally required information returns [1099's] reporting on income and deductions, imposed penalties for tax noncompliance, or reduced the opportunity for noncompliance by eliminating certain tax write-offs. [The] IRS estimated that some of these provisions resulted in additional 1990 tax revenue of $3.4 billion. Even so, [the] IRS' estimated tax gap increased $50.7 billion in current dollars from tax years 1981 to 1992. However, the growth of the gap could have been higher without these legislative actions.[4]
Periodically,
the IRS conducts a series of extremely intrusive audits of taxpayers
selected at random, and requires those taxpayers to document every item
on their tax return to the minutest detail. These audits are part
of the Taxpayer Compliance Measurement Program or TCMP. The 1988 TCMP
statistical sample included audits of over 54,000 individual taxpayers,
theoretically representing 104 million taxpayers. CMP data showed that
if all 104 million taxpayers had been audited, 42 million (40 percent)
of them would have seen increases in their tax liabilities.[9]
The General Accounting Office, in its recent tax gap report said: The TCMP data showed that an estimated 33 million of the 42 million taxpayers (82 percent) were not assessed a fraud or negligence penalty, suggesting that much of their noncompliance was unintentional. Although
forty percent of Americans are not in compliance with the income tax,
the reasons for non-compliance are instructive: (1) taxpayers lack the
requisite knowledge of the tax lawof course, even tax lawyers
and IRS agents cannot grasp the entire tax code these days; (2) taxpayers
interpret the law differently than the IRSbut you can depend on
the IRS to almost always make aggressive interpretations in favor of
the government; (3) taxpayers lack record-keeping ability sufficient
to satisfy the IRSthis from an agency that has such poor internal
records that it cannot even be audited! (4) taxpayers do their math
wrong, or they rely on professional return preparers who get it wrongif
professional tax preparers can't get it right, how are ordinary Americans
to do so?[11]
The
FairTax and Tax Evasion
Much
is made from the fact that a federal sales tax would place the responsibility
for tax collection with the retailer, a sector of the economy in which
small businesses are better represented. Small businesses are viewed
as more likely to evade taxes since the owner, and beneficiary of
tax evasion, is more likely to also be responsible for keeping the
books and filing the tax returns. While there is, of course, some
truth to the proposition that evasion rates among small businesses
are higher, it is highly implausible to suggest that evasion would
increase under the FairTax. First, those small businesspersons that
are inclined to cheat on their sales tax are probably already cheating
on their income tax and would be inclined to do so under any tax system.
Second, the economic importance of small firms in the retail sector
is usually grossly overstated According to the Joint Committee on
Taxation (JCT), small firms only account for 14.9 percent of gross
receipts by all retailers, wholesalers and service providers.[19]
Since the gross receipts of wholesalers would not typically be subject
to tax, the true scope of the small "problem" companies
is smaller still. However, sole proprietorships, perhaps the most
likely to evade tax under the present system and under the FairTax,
are not included in the JCT figures.
Any one of the 118 million income tax filers can cheat the income tax system today, and a great many do so. Under the FairTax, however, only retailers (about 14 million-tax filers altogether) would be in a position to cheat In addition, the vast majority of retail sales, 90 percent, are made by large firms that are less likely or find it more difficult to cheat. A retailer who cheats under the income tax system has very similar, if not the same financial gain, as a retailer who cheats under the FairTax system. If a retailer under the FairTax system, failed to report taxable sales, the government would lose and the evader would gain by an amount equal to the sales tax on the good or service purchased. In an income tax system, the government loses and the evader gains by an amount equal to the marginal income tax rate times the amount not reported. An income tax evader will see his taxable income go down dollar for dollar, for every dollar of income not reported. Typically, failing to report a small fraction of a business' gross income will be sufficient to drive its reported profit to zero.
Even if, however, we were to make the unlikely assumption that evasion rates would be higher under the FairTax system than under an income tax system, they would have to be much higher to justify the income tax's huge compliance costs (estimated to be over $225 billion in 1996), many of which are incurred by businesses and are deductible as a business expense. Moreover, if compliance proved to be a problem, information reporting along the lines of present law (1099's) could be implemented to facilitate cross-checking by government auditors. These 1099s would reflect the quantity of product sold to retailers. An auditor could then ensure that the retailer's books either reflected a sale of these products or that the products were in inventory. The FairTax requires all businesses (including non-retailers) to keep business records kept in the ordinary course of business that would aid cross checking by government auditors.[22]
The FairTax is likely to reduce rather than exacerbate the problem of tax evasion. The increased fairness, transparency, and legitimacy of the system will induce more compliance. The roughly 85 to 90 percent reduction in filers will enable tax administrators to address instances of noncompliance more effectively, and increase the likelihood that tax evasion will be discovered. The relative simplicity of the FairTax will promote compliance. Businesses will need to answer one question to determine the tax due: how much was sold to consumers? Finally, the dramatic reduction in marginal tax rates will reduce the gains from tax evasion. If the cost of noncompliance remains comparable (or even increases due to the increased likelihood of getting caught caused by the much smaller number of filers), then both the expected profit from and frequency of tax evasion will decline. [1] In the parlance of modern tax administration, the question of whether the FairTax would increase or reduce voluntary compliance would be posed. Many taxpayers, however, find the term "voluntary compliance" to be oxymoronic since failure to pay taxes would result in a prison term. [2] Internal Revenue Service, 1997 Data Book, Table 15. [3] See SOI Bulletin, Winter 1998-1999, Table 12, p. 210. Note: Sole Proprietorships with less than $2,500 in annual receipts excluded since they de minimus rules in the FairTax would not require most of them to file returns. [4] Tax Gap: Many Actions Taken, But A Cohesive Compliance Strategy Needed, May 1994, General Accounting Office, GAO/GGD-94-123 (hereinafter "GAO") [5] GAO, Supra. [6] $198 billion in 1998 dollars. See, e.g. "IRS Doubles Previous Estimate of Unpaid Taxes," Associated Press, May 3, 1998. [7] 4.79 percent using a continuously compounding growth rate. [8] 5.72 percent using a continuously compounding growth rate. [9] GAO, Supra. [10] See, GAO, Supra. [11] The annual Money magazine survey in which 50 accountants prepare a hypothetical middle class couple"s tax return and come up with at least 45 different answers each year is a major indication that our tax system is simply not administrable. [12] GAO, Supra. [13] See, e.g. "Federal Tax Compliance Costs Climb to $225," Tax Features, Tax Foundation, March 1996. See also, March 20, 1996. James L. Payne, Costly Returns, The Burden of the U.S. Tax System. (ICS Press, 1993). Testimony of James L. Payne, "Replacing the Federal Income Tax", Hearings before the Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, June 6, 7 and 8, 1995, Serial 10428, p. 183-187. [14] Source: Income Tax Compliance Research, IRS Publication 1415. Gross Tax Gap Estimates by Source of Tax Gap for Tax Years 1981 and 1992, in 1992 Dollars, reprinted in GAO Supra. [15] For 2000, the 28 percent marginal rate is effective on taxable incomes of $43,850 for joint filers and $26,250 for single persons. The top federal tax rate, of course, is 39.6 percent. [16] The USA Tax has a top marginal tax rate of 40 percent (actually an effective rate of 32.35 once the payroll tax credit is considered) that takes effect at relatively low taxable income levels. Even a relatively low flat tax rate of 17 percent, plus the 15.3 percent payroll tax, yields a marginal tax rate of 32.3 percent until the Social Security wage base is reached and 19.9 percent thereafter (including the 2.9 percent Medicare tax). At a 20 percent flat tax rate (the beginning rate under the Armey plan), the lowest marginal tax rate is 22.9 percent and 35.3 percent for most middle class wage-earners. [17] For a particular taxpayer, the marginal benefit from failing to report a given amount of gross receipts under an income tax and a given amount of gross receipts under the FairTax are the same. Under an income tax, the taxpayer will reduce his taxable income one for each dollar not reported. In the FairTax, failing to report sales receipts would also reduce taxable receipts dollar for dollar. Although the problem of falsifying deductions or deducting personal items as a business expense does not arise in the FairTax, the corresponding problem in the FairTax is using a business to attempt to purchase personal goods and services on a tax-exempt basis. [18] See, e.g. "Estimating the Underground Economy: A Critical Evaluation of the Monetary Approach", Peter S. Spiro, 42 Canadian Tax Journal 10591081 (1994); "The Underground Economy in the United States: Annual Estimates, 1930-80", Vito Tanzi, 30 International Monetary Fund Staff Papers 283305 (June 1983). [19] IRS Statistics of Income, reported in "Impact on Small Business of Replacing the Federal Income Tax," Joint Committee on Taxation, April 23, 1996, JCS-3-96, pp. 109127. [20] Ibid. [21] See note 3, supra. [22] State governments, particularly with respect to tax due on out-of-state purchases by businesses, currently use this method. State sales taxes are, unfortunately, often applied to business inputs.
|