Tax Justice - Justice of Taxation

This research into the interaction of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) and Ignatian spirituality within the praxis of the Jesuit Conference Asia Pacific Social Apostolate Network (the Network) in relation to vulnerable migrants in or from Asia in the period 2008–2012 adopts a community engagement approach, partnering with the Network to generate emergent knowledge and transformative action. The research design consciously engages synergies between CST, Ignatian spirituality and a praxis approach to theology. The tools of grounded theory are used to analyse data gathered via semi-structured in-depth interviews with members of the Network. The data are then placed in dialogue with CST, Ignatian spirituality and contemporary theologies of migration. The subsequent theological reflection offered is informed by the theological framework of the pastoral spiral. CST and Ignatian spirituality are found to interact within the Network’s approach to action; however, research participants understand Ignatian spirituality to be their “way of proceeding” and CST is often mediated by it. Sophisticated, holistic reflexivity and knowledge of CST appear to be required for Ignatian spirituality to inform the development of CST as a source of the Network’s praxis. CST, however, may inform the development of members of the Network’s Ignatian spirituality regardless of their focus of reflexivity or awareness of CST. The two sources interact in a mutual and generative way for most of those who display a holistic focus of reflexivity, whereas for those whose reflexivity is one- or two-dimensional, they are merely consistent or complementary. The theologising of the Network and its members is performative and not always explicitly articulated; however, their core practices embody and reveal theological insight. Reflecting on these core practices in dialogue with CST, Ignatian spirituality and recent theologies of migration, the research proposes a number of elements of a practical theology of reflexive praxis in relation to vulnerable migrants in and from Asia. More specifically, the research enters into dialogue with the theological works of Susanna Snyder, Joshua Ralston, and Erin Wilson on the engagement of faith-based organisations with refugees and migrants, with John Swinton on practical theodicity, with Agnes Brazal concerning the concept of the habitus, with Luke Bretherton regarding hospitality as holiness, with Gemma Cruz’s theological exploration of the gendered experience of Asian women migrants, and with Michael Amaladoss concerning an option for the poor in Asia.1 It proposes that such a practical theology of reflexive praxis would be incarnational, starting from complex, plural and multidimensional experience. It would be holistic, considering motivations, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, values and practices, and would embrace the spiritual dimension of experience. It would also be dialogical, placing faith sources in conversation with experience and with one another, placing the experiences of different groups in conversation with one another, and exploring the interaction of different dimensions of experience. Finally, it would be transformative, seeking more faithful practice that transforms both realities and faith traditions. The research identifies ways in which the experience of the Network may contribute to the development of CST and Ignatian spirituality as sources of praxis, and some ways in which the praxis of the Network may be further developed. It sheds light on and raises questions for the social apostolate action of other faith-based organisations.

Catholic Social Teaching and the Allocation of Scarce Resources John Langan S.J. (bio) I shall approach the issue of justice in the allocation of scarce resources from the viewpoint of Catholic social teaching, as developed over the last century. This teaching is found primarily in the social encyclicals issued by popes from Leo XIII (1878–1903) to John Paul II (1978- ), but also in the pastoral letters of the various bishops’ conferences, especially in the United States and in Latin America. These documents, which enjoy a high standing in Catholic teaching but which are not taken as binding in all their particulars, form part of a tradition of moral and social theorizing that a contemporary American would regard as “communitarian.” On social questions, this tradition also has shown itself to be historicist in that it is capable of modifying itself in significant ways in response to changing political and economic situations. It normally approaches issues from a universalist perspective, though it has shifted from a preoccupation with the concerns of the industrial societies of Europe to an advocacy of much of the reform agenda of the Third World. Rooted in classical and biblical sources and modified in the course of the last [End Page 401] century to include a principled acceptance of religious freedom, of human rights, and of democratic political institutions, the Catholic social tradition proposes a number of ideas that can serve as the basis for significant criticism of currently dominant liberal modes of organizing and interpreting advanced industrial societies. These ideas do not form a countertheory to liberalism so much as they indicate ways in which a religious organization that includes both hierarchical and egalitarian elements in its structure and that has both moral commitments and practical responsibilities with regard to health care can draw on its intellectual resources to develop alternative strategies for the reform of health care. I shall survey six ideas that figure prominently in Catholic social teaching and that are relevant to the allocation of scare resources in American health care. Space constraints require that I present them in a very condensed fashion, without tracing the complex development they have undergone in the internal Catholic debate or subjecting them to much criticism. First, Catholic social teaching, especially the great encyclical of John XXIII, Pacem In Terris (PT 1963), affirms the full range of human rights recognized in such modern documents as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1949). In addition to the civil and political rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights added to the original U.S. Constitution (1791), the Universal Declaration includes rights “to life, to bodily integrity, and to the means which are suitable for the proper development of life; these are primarily food, clothing, shelter, rest, medical care, and finally the necessary social services” (PT 11). Catholic social teaching has not committed itself to one particular way of institutionalizing these rights, but it effectively endorses the comprehensive West European welfare states that the Christian Democratic political parties helped to construct in the period after 1945. Second, Catholic social teaching has accorded a central organizing role to the notion of the common good, the realization of which “is the whole reason for the existence of civil authorities” (PT 54). The common good, however, is not to be understood as identical with the interest or the power of the state; rather, it “embraces the sum total of those conditions of social living whereby men are enabled to achieve their own integral perfection more fully and more easily” (PT 58; quoting Mater et Magistra). John XXIII is particularly anxious to affirm that the common good cannot be construed so as to exclude some groups or to violate the rights of individuals and that it must include both physical and spiritual goods (PT 55–61). The notion of the common good has both an inherent attractiveness and a vagueness that cries out for specification and clarification. But in the contemporary situation it serves to remind us that “individual citizens and intermediate groups are obliged to make their specific contributions to the common welfare” (PT 53). Third, while an insistence on the primacy of the common good and on the [End Page 402...

In recent years, greater attention has been paid to the influence of Catholic social teaching as a contributor to legal debates in American society. As it has developed, Catholic social teaching clearly envisions a role for the Church to play in shaping society. The interplay between Catholic social teaching and American law is a fascinating, complex, and, at times, tense relationship. That relationship is the subject of these observations and reflections. The first part of this discussion explores how leading Church documents define the proper scope of influence for Catholic social teaching. After this brief background, the discussion will turn to reflection on the impact that Catholic social teaching has had on American law and politics. It will then explore in more depth three obstacles that have been barriers to a greater role for Catholic social thought in American legal and political discourse.

Este artículo expone que la doctrina chilena aborda la cuestión de la justicia tributaria desde una triple perspectiva, económica, filosófica y jurídica. Con todo, desconfía de las posibilidades de esta última, para desarrollar soluciones genuinas de los complejos problemas que enfrenta la justicia tributaria. A partir de dicha evidencia, el autor indaga el desarrollo de este asunto en el mundo anglosajón, especialmente de inglaterra. El autor recorre el camino que filósofos, economistas y juristas efectúan acerca de los elementos más determinantes de la justicia tributaria. Para tales efectos, luego de plantear el problema y la perspectiva analítica del artículo, revisa la idea de justicia tributaria en las doctrinas liberales clásicas, la justificación de la imposición de tributos y los fines del Estado, el concepto de tributo, la justicia conmutativa y la justicia distributiva, las finalidades extra fiscales del tributo, el principio de igualdad como expresión normativa de la justicia en la tributación. El autor concluye que no obstante que el mundo anglosajón se aborda esta cuestión desde esta triple perspectiva, y de un modo muy diferente al del Derecho Continental, la doctrina jurídica ha sido capaz de discutir acerca de estos complejos problemas jurídicos con éxito.

The author considers the capacity of Catholic Social Teaching (CST) to contribute to the public debate about health care and then remarks on the capacity of CST to assist in the formation of “intentionally Christian institutions.” The author argues for two main points. First, there are some serious obscurities in CST's account of the derivation and interrelation of various rights. Hence, it is not altogether clear what ideal CST is seeking to promote in the public order. Second, the author argues that there is a serious political conflict in CST's commitment to both subsidiarity and the preferential option for the poor. He also claims that it does not follow from these criticisms that CST is useless as a guide for the formation of “intentionally Christian institutions.” Reflection on financing in the light of subsidiarity and the preferential option suggests that there is a need for Christian wealth-producing institutions and schemes of investment that will provide subsidium for healthcare enterprises. In the final portion of the paper, the author sketches out a few dimensions of that sort of vision.

In these three reflections by Srs. Charity Bbalo, Lucy Kimaro, and Jane Frances Mulongo they discuss how they developed greater knowledge and practical investment in Catholic social teaching (CST) in their own contexts. Each essay offers a window into translating (literally and figuratively) CST for concrete applications in practical ecologically-focused interventions in Zambia, small group formation in CST with Small Christian Communities in Kenya, and enriching community engagement at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa. With roots in the women’s own study of CST at the Loyola Institute for Ministry (Loyola University New Orleans), the fruits of their material and spiritual labor with their communities to make CST a reality is inspiring and instructive. These essays illustrate how CST pedagogy can offer a culturally-sensitive invitation to deepen our walk in faith together and pursue integral human development in our communities.

In the context of digital globalization, while digital technologies have improved tax collection efficiency and optimized taxpayer services, they have also exacerbated international and domestic tax inequalities, creating a "digital divide" and impacting traditional tax rules. The concept of digital tax fairness and justice has emerged in response, its core being to ensure that all members of society can effectively access, use, and benefit from digital technologies to achieve equitable tax rights. Adam Smith's view of tax justice provides a legitimate basis for digital tax justice. By analyzing its inheritance from the natural law tradition and its utilitarian aspects, as well as its relevance and development potential in the digital age, we can clarify the political foundation and institutional requirements for achieving digital tax fairness and justice. Then, we construct diversified pathways to achieve digital tax fairness and justice, encompassing four pillars: institutional design, technology governance, capacity building, and social collaboration. This involves a coordinated approach from theoretical understanding, institutional construction, and data element innovation to achieve a leap from "technology empowerment" to "value reshaping," providing fiscal and ethical support for digital tax justice.

Summary: Purpose – The purpose of this article is to show the essence of the vertical and horizontal tax justice in the context of the linear and progressive rate of taxation of individual income. Study Methodology – To achieve the objective of this article implementation of descriptive methods was required, in particular, the analysis of the concept of vertical and horizontal justice in relation to the rate of personal income tax. In addition, the forms of personal income taxations was discussed adopted by Poland and other selected countries. A direct method was also used – questionnaires. In this article fragments of self-conducted study were quoted, from the years 2007–2017, to make a qualitative attempt to assess vertical and horizontal tax justice. Results – The results of the empirical study conducted on entrepreneurs and households appear to indicate that progressive tax system is more responsive to tax justice in respondents’ perceptions. The widespread acceptance of progress taxation indicates a strong sense of vertical justice in the Polish society, according to which higher taxes should be paid by the by the wealthier, and the income of the less prosperous should be taxed at a lower rate. Originality/value – The fundamental value of this publication is the analysis of personal income tax for vertical and horizontal justice. The originality is presented thanks empirical research conducted among economic entities and households.

This Article addresses two related first-order questions about morality that enable us to discern solutions that address second-order questions in the specific policy context of regulation of tax competition and BEPS: (1) what kind of justice conception has sufficient normative support to undergird regulation attempts of this global phenomenon to ensure cosmopolitan tax rights? (the global tax justice question); and (2) what are the pre-conditions of effective cooperation, not based on immediate self-interest, that eschew a market-based approach to tax competition, enabling background conditions for the morality of multilateral cooperation? (the morality of cooperation question). The Article addresses the global tax justice question by discussing the Rawlsian premises to the concept of tax justice and its developments within the internationalist approach; the Article then shifts the focus on the cosmopolitan challenge to Rawls, which introduces, atleast theoretically, the possibility of fundamental rights of global tax justice to then draw conclusions about three available normative options for the governance of tax competition and BEPS, which can be derived from the previous analysis. The Article then addresses the morality of cooperation question by examining current literature about non-self-interested cooperation, extending this analysis to the social sanctioning of tax competition, and concludes by proposing a broad first-order framework for second-order policy decisions.

Reviewed by: Working Alternatives: American and Catholic Experiments in Work and Economy ed. by John C. Seitz and Christine Firer Hinze Nathan Schneider Working Alternatives: American and Catholic Experiments in Work and Economy. Edited by John C. Seitz and Christine Firer Hinze. New York, NY: Fordham University Press, 2020. 304 pp. $35.00. "There are years that ask questions and years that answer," Zora Neale Hurston once wrote. Although applying those words to Catholic social teaching (CST) requires dispatching them far from the context of the novel in which they appear, they are apt. Working Alternatives is a volume that grew out of a 2016 Fordham University conference on "Building Good Economies," a theme that echoes the ambition of Pope Leo XIII in Rerum Novarm (1891), the founding document of the modern CST tradition. Yet while Leo chiefly sought to present a distinctly Catholic answer to the period's conflicts of labor and capital, Working Alternatives dwells more among questions. The book contains frequent nods to the writings of recent popes, but these passages bear less of the thrill evident around insights coming from such less-Catholic realms as domestic-worker organizing, Tesla Motors, "regenerative capitalism," the New Age philosopher Ken Wilber, shamanism, and Patagonia (the company, not the place). There are stirring historical portraits, such as of 1940s interracial Christian communities in the U.S. South and a 1950s Catholic midwifery practice. But the more recent points of inspiration come largely from outside church settings—particularly if one recognizes the degree to which Pope Francis's Laudato Si' draws from the largely secular environmental-justice movement that long preceded it. [End Page 79] This is an observation, not a complaint. The editors organized the book around Father Joseph Carijn's "see, judge, act" method—also an influence on Francis—that privileges questioning and listening. The strongest chapters are those that seek to pull CST in new directions, to point to where the church should be looking. Sandra Sillivan-Dunbar puts Pope Benedict XVI into conversation with the discourse of the "care economy," while Kirsten Swinth reveals the violence of regarding women's work as non-economic, as Catholic understandings of gender complementarity tend to do. Michael Naughton, Nicholas Rademacher, Sandra Waddock, Michael Pirson, and Vincent Stanley point to examples of "social enterprise" (and other bywords for do-good firms)—manifestations, perhaps, of Pope Leo's hope for achieving an economic common good through virtuous leadership more than combative labor relations. While some chapters helpfully illustrate how Catholic concepts offer answers for contemporary dilemmas around work and education, the originality appears most in the passages that turn outward. Like Thomas Aquinas pouring over Greek, Muslim, and Jewish outsiders on behalf of the medieval church, Working Alternatives portrays present-day CST as busy with the task of absorption—although not yet the synthesis. How, then, might the church be called to act, to answer? Except in passing, the book largely bypasses one remarkable legacy of Catholics "building good economies": that of cooperative business. Catholics didn't invent cooperativism, but they saw others doing it, judged it good, and acted decisively to advance it. Responding to Pope Leo's call, twentieth-century Catholics seeded the North American credit union movement, the massive Mondragon worker cooperatives in Basque Country, the Italian social cooperative model, and countless agricultural and credit co-ops across the global south. Mondragon, for instance, has been widely studied and copied but never replicated at anything like its scale; the religious tradition behind it seems to have not only spiritual force but unique entrepreneurial powers as well. When CST is ready again for years that answer, it can be a dynamo. Between seeing and acting, the church must also judge. Beware when elevating a company like Tesla—which, despite its success in promoting electric vehicles, has undermined unionization drives and behaved callously regarding worker safety. Even the most shining social enterprise, anyway, might be an exception that serves to justify an unjust system and culture. There are few radical, systemic alternatives offered here that are equal to recent popes' withering critiques of capitalism and consumerism. Despite excellent chapters on New Deal-era racial exclusions and early experiments in integration, the...

This chapter explores EU law on worker participation through the lens of Catholic Social Teaching (CST). It begins by explaining the ethical justification for worker participation found in CST. The dignity of the human person means that workers should not be treated as mere commodities by their employers. Businesses are regarded as communities of persons, and workers should have a say in their organizations. Reflecting the principle of subsidiarity, participation will often be via intermediate associations, namely trade unions. EU law also upholds the idea that workers have a right to participate in the life of the undertaking. The chapter identifies the main instruments through which EU law has sought to substantiate worker participation. This has often taken the form of rights to be consulted and, for certain transnational companies, the creation of European Works Councils. CST does not propose a specific model of worker participation. Its values can, though, be used to scrutinize the sufficiency of existing laws. To that end, the chapter takes a critical perspective on EU law’s approach to the purpose of participation, the meaning of participation, and which workers are participating. In various ways, it finds that EU law falls short of the aspiration for participation found in CST. The latter prompts consideration of whether there is a need for the Union to strengthen its existing instruments.

Since the promulgation of the encyclical Pacem in Terris in 1963, Catholic social teaching has recommended the ongoing strengthening of institutions of global government. As political experience limits the idealistic prospects which motivated the postwar project of global government, the Church’s social teaching may appear committed in principle to a dubious policy. Engaging the encyclical’s invocation of the principle of subsidiarity, this article shows that the relationship of global government to the nation-state laid out in Pacem in Terris suffers from an inattention to questions of political form. I argue that through his “science of political forms,” Pierre Manent both provides an account of what social teaching would call the propria of the nation-state, and shows why these propria cannot be maintained within global dimensions. Turning to the inter-war encyclicals of Pius XI and Pius XII, I then retrieve an earlier strand of social teaching which, instead of proposing an ambiguous revision of the nation form, offered points of moral orientation for politics by defending a proper love of nation within the structure of what Augustine calls the ordo amoris. The paper thus shows how political philosophy enables a coherent application of the principle of subsidiarity to the nation-state, and why theological insights present within the tradition of social teaching can support the preservation of the valuable propria of the nation form.

This paper highlights the relationship between economic science and Christian moral in order to analyze the idea of socioeconomic development promoted by the Catholic Social Teaching (CST). In the first period leading up to the Second Vatican Council (1891-1962), from Pope Leo XIII to Pope John XXIII, the idea of development was connected both to technical and industrial progress, and to the universal values of justice, charity, and truth, which national communities were asked to follow. During the Conciliar period (1962-1979), the concept of development assumes a social and economic dimension, and so it becomes one of the main pillars of Catholic Social Teaching, which introduces the earliest definition of integral human development. Ultimately, in the post-Conciliar phase (1979-2009) including Benedict XVI's pontificate, the idea of integral human development reaches its maturity by incorporating the complexity of real-world economic interactions. Finally, this paper shows how the ethics bolstered by the Catholic Social Teaching is characterized by two distinct but complementary lines of thought: moral rules for both political action, and for socioeconomic issues.

Human rights are understood today as one of the foundational elements of Catholic social teaching. The official positions of the Catholic doctrinal statements have, however, undergone a remarkable development since the 18th century, when the modern conception of human rights was formulated. This essay deals with the theme of “Human Rights and Catholic Social Teaching” from both historical and systematic-theological perspectives. First, an overview of the historical reception of human rights within Catholic social teaching (and primarily within the papal pronouncements) will be provided. Then, basic guidelines for the theological interpretation of this historical development will be presented. In conclusion, the specific understanding of human rights in Catholic social teaching will be systematically considered.

John Paul II’s encyclical Fides et Ratio is of astonishing importance for the methodology of Catholic social teaching. This article highlights three points that emerged as contributions of Fides et Ratio to the epistemology and methodology of the social magisterium. According to Gaudium et Spes, Catholic social teaching is essentially a service of the Church that affects social life indirectly by making a free offer of sense and faith. Fides et Ratio reinforces this paradigm shift by rejecting fideism also in matters of social morality. In this, it goes beyond Vatican I, Dei Filius. The encyclical further clarifies that the method of Catholic social teaching is tripartite and requires the cooperation of at least three disciplines: theology, philosophy, and social sciences. Because of the shifting character of history, Catholic social teaching too fluctuates. It is sensitive to time and place, to history and culture.