Vincenzo Visco, former Minister of Finance and the Economy, one of the leading Italian tax experts rejects the flat tax without appeal due to its characteristic of abandoning the principle of progressivity, with the consequence of "dramatically" penalizing the middle classes and "greatly benefiting" the rich.
“The fundamental proposal of the right in this electoral campaign – explains Visco in a speech, just published, on the Inpiù website – is represented by the flat-tax, the tax with a single (proportional) rate for all incomes and with the progressiveness entrusted to deductions with the aim of protecting the lowest incomes, and therefore the so-called no tax area is raised so that it cannot be said that the proposal harms the poor. And indeed it is true: the proposal does not harm the poor, i.e. those with subsistence-level incomes. On the other hand – underlines the economist – the proposal it greatly benefits the wealthy, and dramatically penalizes the middle classes that is, taxpayers located in the central deciles of income distribution, ie between 15 and 50 euros”. In fact "for the same amount of revenue, in fact, a flat tax compared to a traditional staggered tax cuts taxes on the rich and increases the impact on the middle classes to the same extent, already penalized by the polarization of income distribution, unemployment and cuts in welfare . The importance of the middle classes for a well-functioning and cohesive society was already well known to Aristotle (Politics, book IV, chap. I), but it is evidently neglected in today's political debate”.
According to Vincenzo Visco “the flat tax proposal pone also the more general problem of the progressiveness of taxes: if progressiveness is ensured only by deductions, it is apparent and represents an intervention of a substantially welfare nature, while the tax rate is the same for everyone, rich, poor and middle classes. One can ask whether this is right, and this question has been at the center of the reflection of philosophers, social thinkers, religious and politicians since time immemorial. Already in the Old Testament there are affirmations in favor of the progressiveness of taxes; it was already practiced in Athens at the time of Solon, and in Europe, but also in Asia, in the Middle Ages and later".
“Adam Smith, who was a moral philosopher – recalls the former minister – was not very supportive of public interventions in the economy, however he wrote: “It is not unreasonable that a rich person should contribute somewhat more than the simple proportionality with respect to income”. In essence, the proposal under discussion today expresses a dramatic collapse of awareness and ethical standing in our society: the rich do not want to contribute to the financing of the welfare of the poor, while the middle classes have not only lost status and role, but also the awareness of their identity and function”.
