What reasons could (in theory) cause the CGT regime to produce micro-level outcomes that fail to satisfy horizontal equity? Online publication date: Sun, 03-May-2009
by Maheswaran Sridaran
International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry (IJLSE), Vol. 2, No. 3, 2009
Abstract: This paper addresses the question of what reasons could (in theory) cause the Australian regime of income tax on capital gains ('the CGT regime') to produce micro-level outcomes that fail to satisfy the macro-level policy objective of horizontal equity. In answering that question, this paper argues that any of the four reasons (and only one of those four reasons and no other) can (in theory) cause the CGT regime to potentially produce micro-level outcomes that violate horizontal equity. Those four reasons are described in this paper. That description is followed by the articulation of an argument that the most practicable means to address those four reasons is through a 'consequentialist' approach to interpreting the legislative provisions imposing CGT, buttressed by legislative directives to the Australian judiciary and other measures necessary for making such a consequentialist approach practicable.
Existing subscribers:
Go to Inderscience Online Journals to access the Full Text of this article.
If you are not a subscriber and you just want to read the full contents of this article, buy online access here.Complimentary Subscribers, Editors or Members of the Editorial Board of the International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry (IJLSE):
Login with your Inderscience username and password:
Want to subscribe?
A subscription gives you complete access to all articles in the current issue, as well as to all articles in the previous three years (where applicable). See our Orders page to subscribe.
If you still need assistance, please email subs@inderscience.com
Our Blog 
Follow us on Twitter 
Visit us on Facebook