Abstract
Over the years, tax theorists have attempted to justify progressive taxation theoretically, but the case for progressivity has remained stubbornly "uneasy." In this article Professor Byrne asserts that proponents of progressivity have a hard time explaining their preference because the framework for discussion has been based on underlying philosophical assumptions that may be incompatible with progressive taxation. This article examines the assumptions underlying the traditional arguments regarding progressivity and considers the contributions of John Rawls, Robert Dworkin, Robert Nozick, and Judge Richard Posner to the tax structure debate.
How to Cite
37 Ariz. L. Rev. 739 (1995)
4
Views
2
Downloads