Utilitarian Argument

Utilitarianism is the doctrine that espoused the idea that the worth of an action is determined by its overall use. Utilitarianism therefore is about the outcome of a particular action. In this case, the action is raising the income tax rate for people who earned more. “The greatest good for the greatest happiness” introduced by Bentham is at the heart of the Utilitarianism principle.

As in the above mentioned example $750, 000 income should be taxed higher than those who earned $75,000. Progressive taxation or higher taxes for higher incomes enable is only fair.

If people earning $75,000 have the same tax rate for those earning $750,000, the privileges granted to both would not be equal. It will be really easy for people earning higher income to shell out few thousand dollars to pay for the income tax because that will not create a dent in their spending capacity.

Meanwhile, deducting income tax worth several thousands of dollars to those in the lower income bracket would affect their spending capacity to a greater extent. To put it simply, tax imposed on lower income bracket is greatly felt because they have to make do with the dwindling balance. Those in the higher income however could still spend and afford the luxuries they need because their basic salary is already way higher than most.

Shaw and Barry (1989) define ethics as “the social rules that govern and limit our conduct, especially the ultimate rules concerning right and wrong” (pp. 2-3). According to them the Elements of moral theory are:

• Utilitarianism and cost-benefit analysis
• Moral rights
• Duty based morality of Kant
• Principles of justice
• Moral development and gender
• Ethics of care
• Virtue ethics

The moral standards are different from ethics and laws because they govern behavior that could possibly cause serious consequence to human welfare whether to injure or benefit people. Moral norms against lying, stealing, and murdering are intended specifically to address actions that can harm people. The moral principle on dignity and respect is intended to benefit human.

Anything that seriously affect human well-being are governed by moral standards from healthful or harmful products, safe or dangerous work environment, fair or unfair personnel methods or respect to one’s privacy all these areas fall under moral standards.

Another characteristic of moral standards which separate it from the rest is it takes precedence over other standards including self-interest. Moral standards are more important than other matters in guiding our actions.

The third characteristic of moral standards is that they depend on the reasons that justify them. There are no authoritative bodies that can determine moral standards although some bodies do support or reject them. The validity of moral standards then unlike other standards does not depend on authorities but on the reasons that support them. This determines the legitimacy of moral principles.

In case of progressive taxation, moral rights support this particular issue in the sense that it puts the interest of the majority above the interests of the few. People earning $750,000 or more are relatively fewer than people earning $75,000. Since people earning more generally enjoys more privileges and luxuries therefore they need to be taxed more for the privileges they enjoy. People in the lower income bracket spend their money on the basic necessities because they don’t have enough to spend for expensive luxuries. Therefore, imposing higher tax on them would greatly decrease their ability to avail these basic necessities such as food, clothing and shelter. Those with higher income can afford to buy the basic necessities and still have more to spare. Increasing the income tax of those earning more will not curtail their ability to buy the basic necessities. It is only morally right that they pay more taxes because they enjoy more privileges than those in the lower income brackets.