Christians have a lot of ideas about civil taxation, where government funds itself by compelling people to pay some portion of their incomes, the value of their sales, or some other means by which people are required, by force of law, to pay some portion of money for the funding of the government. Most Christians today may dislike high taxes and would personally like them to be lower, but usually they do not see any definable injustice in the way taxes are collected in the United States. Many would appeal to passages such as “render unto Caesar” and believe that Caesar effectively owns whatever amount of money he asks for. Furthermore these Christians usually see passages like Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 as primarily descriptive in nature (ie. explaining that we should obey government and as a side note that government does the things mentioned) rather than primarily prescriptive (seeing passages like Romans 13:3-4 as describing what a righteous government looks like, and commanding that such a thing should be submitted to because it is righteous.)
A minority of Christians take the opposite approach, appealing to the universality of ethics and commands against stealing to say that all compulsory taxation is immoral. I understand their view but I believe it is an overreaction to the more statist crowd described in the first paragraph. I believe there is a middle ground between the majority opinion that effectively gives the State immunity from the eighth commandment (as most do today), and the flawed minortiy opinion which denies the State any right to collect money compulsory.
I believe in contrast to both of these views that the Bible does speak directly to this issue. When I say that the Bible speaks directly to this issue, I do not claim that the Bible tells us precisely how to tax in every situation. Certainly, for instance, a leader who is facing invasion by a hostile foreign power would need to tax more than a leader during peacetime, all other things being equal. I also do not claim that the Bible tells us exactly what methods of collection are allowed (ie. an income tax vs a head tax vs a property tax), though there are some who I understand believe the Old Testament commands a head tax.
Nevertheless, there are two passages that I believe clearly have general equity for modern governments, and thus are binding as moral law on all governments. The first is Romans 13:3-7
3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
Many people read verses 1-2 in isolation from the rest of the passage and so conclude that Christians are to obey nearly all commands of all governments (most would admit from Acts 5:29 that they need not obey when government commands disobedience to God.) However if you look more carefully, this passage really cant be commanding submission to just any government you find yourself under. The passage commands to Christian submit because the rulers are a terror to the wicked, but if you do what is good you will have no fear of him. The magistrate punishes the wicked and protects the righteous. That is his role. And for that reason taxes are to be paid. So that the rulers can devote themselves to this very thing, that is the reason we pay them taxes. Contrary to what many think, I don’t think this is a blanket authorization for governments to just pass laws demanding you to pay them money for just any reason. I’m sure the reader has heard the statist cry before “Romans 13 means that what we advocate is OK”. But Romans 13 does not teach taxation for things like public schools, infrastructure, social security, military interventionism, an arbitrary and extensive prison system, and many other things that many just take for granted are funded by taxes today. Rather the Bible advocates a minimal state that suppresses the most heinous violations of the ten commandments (as revealed in the Law of God) and otherwise leaves the people alone.
However, while this passage does not allow taxation for just any purpose, it does speak positively of it for a particular purpose (punishing the wicked and rewarding the righteous.) Thus those who say the government cannot compel the payment of any taxes are also incorrect, because the Bible does prescribe them for one particular purpose.
But how much can government take for that purpose? Well, if government limited itself to that role, the tax rates would already be very low by comparison. However, there is another passage that I believe is insightful on this issue: 1 Samuel 8:4-22.
4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel atRamah 5 and said to him, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.” 6 But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. 8 According to all the deeds that they have done, from the day I brought them up out of Egypt even to this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are also doing to you. 9 Now then, obey their voice; only you shall solemnly warn them and show them the ways of the king who shall reign over them.”
10 So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. 11 He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots.12 And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. 15 He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. 16 He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men[a] and your donkeys, and put them to his work. 17 He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. 18 And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.
19 But the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel. And they said, “No! But there shall be a king over us, 20 that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles.” 21 And when Samuel had heard all the words of the people, he repeated them in the ears of the Lord. 22 And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey their voice and make them a king.” Samuel then said to the men of Israel, “Go every man to his city.”
I have seen even some who understand that Romans 13 is prescriptive in the manner described earlier see this passage as primarily descriptive, and thus not prescribing limits on government directly. However I would ask the reader that thinks that, in what other situation would we see a prophet of God warning of curses on a nation if it does a particular thing, and see the warnings he gives as optional? The warnings are clear in this passage, having a government that takes a tenth of everything (equivalent to a 10% wealth tax one time, or a 10% income tax each year, or equivalent) is a sign of tyranny, as is the government forcing people to serve the king either in the army or other capacity. Thus it seems to me that this passage would set an absolute maximum on taxation at 9% of GDP, and even then that would be pushing very close to the line, trying to see just how much they could get away with rather than following the spirit of the law and taking as little as possible to administer the duties necessary for the State, by a Biblical definition.
Some would appeal to examples like Joseph taxing 20% and not being condemned for it to allow a Christian magistrate to take more than 10% without necessarily being a thief. Without exhaustively getting into this argument I will simply say two things about it. 1: Joseph had access to a unique form of divine revelation from which he discerned that what he did was wise for his circumstance and for the benefit of his people. No Christian magistrate has access to this kind of specific data, instead he has access to the Word of God, which teaches a normative principle that tax rates of 10% or higher are tyranny, and he should go with the revelation he has. 2: Even if Joseph is precedent for raising above 10%, this would be only in the most extraordinary circumstances. Ordinarily rulers would still need to look to 1 Samuel 8 and see that for them to take 10% of income would be tyrannical.
Thus the Christian view of taxation as it pertains to western liberal democracies is that it should be dramatically reduced and the role of government cut back dramatically. To do anything else is, in the way the Bible presents things, tyrannical.
reconvenantersassanach 