It's mid-February, in the quarter of the year between New Year's resolutions and Tax Day. Tax Day being that balancing act where the exposure created by income is mitigated by the protections of our deductible expenses.
No one likes to pay taxes. Even liberals, who claim to understand why the public sector is important, and appreciate the supports and benefits it provides, don't like to pay taxes. The guy in the booth next to mine at breakfast this morning was explaining to his companion how he "plays the system" and "flies under the radar." It seems he's paid by check, with no withholding, and he essentially invents an income and expenses, allowing him to take advantage of all possible tax benefits, and avoid any changes from one year to the next, changes that might trigger the dreaded tax audit.
Most people aren't quite as sociopathic as that, but there is, as they say, a little larceny in everyone. We all tend to cut a corner here or there, or direct money so as to shelter it if we can. It's not quite as simple as wanting to avoid taxes, so we can keep the money ourselves. Some people give money away, to avoid paying taxes on it. And this is the crux of a problem.
Our system, of society, government, and taxes, is set up so that the government spends money on what we're all supposed to agree is in the common interest, whether it's paying for government itself, constructing a system of highways, providing support for the poor and impaired, declaring war on Iraq, or anything else. We're all supposed to pay a fair share of taxes to support those aims. But we're welcome to pursue other interests, which are not necessarily agreed for the common good. These are our private and personal interests, and can include anything "charitable," as long as it doesn't lobby. Our taxes are deductible, and so are these other contributions.
If there is anything most people dislike more than they dislike taxes, it is "pork," or pork-barrel legislation. Absolutely everyone complains about it. Pork is those narrow interests that are forced upon others, who must support them, despite the fact that the vast majority of supporters gain no advantage at all from the narrow interests. In fact, sometimes it seems that no one at all gains any advantage from them. Alaska's "bridge to nowhere" is a recently discussed example. These cuts of pork do nothing except funnel money into an area that could not independently attract the money, because few Americans would be interested, and the projects do not provide anything representing the general welfare. Except in the very local area of the project.
Aren't charitable and related contributions precisely like that? If I'm not a member of your church or synagogue, and I don't favor the ACLU, and I think the national park service provides protection enough, so conservation groups are superfluous and might have narrow agendas that are beyond what is of value to the public, why should I have to pay for part of your interests in these things?
I think I shouldn't. And I think you shouldn't have to pay for part of my devotions. So I have made a resolution from now on. I no longer take tax deductions for donations I make to anyone for anything. The only exception I make is for donations I make to the public sector. The municipality where I live has an extremely limited ability to raise revenue. I make extra "contributions," of one kind or another, and for one excuse or another. I will deduct those "contributions," because I intend them as extra and voluntary taxes. I will not deduct contributions to public radio, Feeding America, Amnesty International, Southern Poverty Law Center, or any of the several other organizations to which I choose to give some of my money. That's on me, not on you. And if you choose to give some of your money to a religious organization (I'm atheist and anti-religious) or anyone else of interest to you, I would appreciate your making that your own business. You shouldn't have to eat my pork, and I shouldn't have to eat yours.
No comments:
Post a Comment