Taxation defines the company

The tax system is directly related to the social pact, to the distribution of income within the country and to the structure of power. 
The so-called social pact is an agreement between the different social and economic sectors that coexist in that society – achieved by consensus or by imposition of one of the parties – regarding the problem of how much each one should contribute to the support of the State.
Everyone agrees that having a State that has social, political and economic responsibilities requires that everyone contribute something so that that State can function, because carrying out those responsibilities requires funds and resources that must come from somewhere. Hence, since the dawn of humanity, having a state has been accompanied by the imposition of taxes. It is often said, when these matters are analyzed, that only in the jungle there are no tributes. From then on, all known societies have collected taxes from citizens who are subject to the jurisdiction of that State. That has been—and probably will continue to be—a constant of history.
The big difference between the different societies, however, lies in how much each of the individuals or sectors that make up that society is taxed – in absolute or relative terms. Obviously, it is not easy for society to agree on how much each one should contribute. That decision is the result of many tensions and confrontations. But by whatever method, you have to reach an agreement for society to work. This way of distributing the burden is what is usually identified as the “social pact” that presides over that society.
If we abandon the idea that there is a tax system that is perfect, and limit ourselves, with more humility, to merely seeking tax systems that are better than others, the most universally accepted qualification criterion – at least in modern times – is that those who have more money, income and wealth, should contribute more to the sustenance of that State, that is, they should be taxed more.
But the problem doesn’t end there. Taxing more, or taxing less, contributes greatly to determining the distribution of income that prevails in that society. If the very rich contribute 10% of their income to the support of the State, and the poorest contribute 20% of their income, it can be said that a poor distribution of income is being consolidated, even if the amount of taxes of the richest ends up being greater than the amount of taxes contributed by the poorest. But the percentage that each one contributes is different, and what is left to each one after having taxed is also different. It turns out, then, that it is not the distribution of income that defines the tax contribution of each one, but it is also the tax system that defines, conditions or determines a specific distribution of income.
And to have a lot of income and to pay little is to have power. Power that is expressed not only in which people are in government or parliament, but also in the ability to substantively influence the course of the country’s economy and finances: what is invested, how much is paid in wages, how income is distributed, how much is allocated to social spending, what is consumed, what is seen on television or in the mass media, or what kind of education every member of society should receive. The underground power of the powers that be, based on a poor distribution of income, contributes, in a relevant way, among other things, to sustaining the tax system and deepening the poor distribution of income prevailing in the country.
From all the above it follows that modifying the tax system, trying to approach the simple and profound postulate that those who have more should pay more, is a political problem of high relevance, because what is at stake, ultimately, is the way in which power is distributed and used, which is the quintessence of all politics. 

The content expressed in this opinion column is the sole responsibility of its author, and does not necessarily reflect the editorial line or position of El Mostrador.

Original source in Spanish