The tax should not be legitimized for many reasons. It is illegitimate especially when it is aimed at achieving socially desirable wealth distribution. One of the famous opponents of redistributive tax is Nozick who developed liberty concept about wealth redistribution (OOI 188). He argued that it is illegitimate to redistribute wealth on the basis of social justice. The redistribution of wealth infringes other people’s property rights such as disposing of their hard owned properties at their wish. If a person decides to transfer his or her wealth or properties, governments should not interfere with the legal owner’s decision. Nozick concept is built upon the corrective as well as distributive justice concepts developed by Aristotle.
Aristotelian concepts argued that wealth redistribution is not justified on distributive justice grounds. However, it is justified in some cases by corrective justice concerns (OOI 189). Nonetheless, according to the natural law, an individual has right to use what is he or she owns in the way that pleases him or her (Granbom and Heutz 12). An individual is not bound to share his or her property with another person (Granbom and Heutz 12). Additionally, when the rate redistribution tax is too high, it can discourage economic activity. Taxing the rich too high will deter them from investing in the economy. They invest little to avoid being taxed heavily by the government. The will have a high tendency to avoid taxation. The increase in evasion efforts will result in slower economic growth. As a result, the government will not meet its goals of wealth redistribution because it will collect little revenues with the rich people evade redistribution tax. More, redistributive taxation denies the taxpayers the right to their property (Granbom and Heutz 13). The natural provides every taxpayer the exclusive right of owning properties. The violation of the law discourages the rich people from buying properties or investing in expensive projects. The higher taxes imposed by the government on rich men also discourages foreign investors.
Consequently, a country is likely to have slow economic growth because of the low level of investments. On the other hand, the redistributive tax is coercive to the wealthy individuals (Granbom and Heutz 13). The government punishes its people for their hard work. The rich people worked so hard to create wealth. The distribution tax overtaxes the wealthy taxpayers because of their hard work. This tends to discourage them from working harder in their business. The discouragement impacts negatively on the economy. It’s unlawful to overtax people to redistribute wealth. It is unlawful because most of the wealthy individuals have generated wealth in legitimate ways. The redistributive tax violates the rights of citizens to own any amount of property. The tax limits the amount of wealth that one can possess. Lastly, redistribution tax may not achieve its goal of wealth redistribution and ensuring equality when the country has high cases of corruption. Third world countries have high corruption levels. Many corrupt governments overtax its people but the revenues collected to personal accounts of few government officials.
As a result, poverty and underdevelopment in some areas persist as the tax revenues are diverted to personal projects. Many rural areas in the developing countries have poor transport networks and poor medical services despite the governments imposing heavy taxes on business people. A significant portion of the collected taxes is used to repay loans from foreign countries instead of improving social amenities, transport network and coming up with projects capable of creating jobs for youths. Redistributive tax is therefore not the solution to the inequitable distribution of wealth in different communities.
