The DOI matches its Crossref record; 41 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice
Abstract
In a capitalist economy, taxes are the most significant instrument by which the political system can put into practice a conception of economic justice. But conventional ideas about what constitutes tax fairness--found in the vigorous debates about tax policy going on in political and public policy circles, in economics and law--are misguided. In particular, the emphasis on distributing the tax burden relative to pretax income is a fundamental mistake. Taxation does not take from people what they already own. Property rights are the product of a set of laws and conventions, of which the tax system forms a central part, so the fairness of taxes can’t be evaluated by their impact on preexisting entitlements. Pretax income has no independent moral significance. Standards of justice should be applied not to the distribution of tax burdens but to the operation and results of the entire framework of economic institutions. The result is an entirely different understanding of a host of controversial issues, such as the estate tax, the tax treatment of marriage, “flat” versus progressive taxes, consumption versus income taxes, tax cuts for the wealthy, and negative income taxes for the poor.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Johnson, K., & Nozick, R. (1975) · The Western Political Quarterly · doi:10.2307/447864 · Cited by 7,692
The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure
Samuelson, P. A. (1954) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.2307/1925895 · Cited by 7,458
An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation
Mirrlees, J. A. (1971) · The Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.2307/2296779 · Cited by 4,375
Jackson, P. M., Atkinson, A. B., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1981) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232622 · Cited by 1,626
Public Finance in Theory and Practice.
Prest, A. R., Musgrave, R. A., & Musgrave, P. B. (1974) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2231053 · Cited by 1,604
Cosmopolitanism and Sovereignty
Pogge, T. W. (1992) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/293470 · Cited by 1,307
If You're an Egalitarian, How Come You’re So Rich?
Cohen, G. A. (2001) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.4159/9780674029668 · Cited by 1,053
Precautionary Saving and Social Insurance
Hubbard, R. G., Skinner, J., & Zeldes, S. P. (1995) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261987 · Cited by 1,051
Political Theory and International Relations: Revised Edition
Beitz, C. R. (1999) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctvcm4hkf · Cited by 969
The Effect of Marginal Tax Rates on Taxable Income: A Panel Study of the 1986 Tax Reform Act
Feldstein, M. (1995) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/261994 · Cited by 881
Cited by
Justice without Borders: Cosmopolitanism, Nationalism, and Patriotism
Tan, K.-C. (2004) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511490385 · Cited by 587
(2011) · Cited by 295
Central banking and inequalities: Taking off the blinders
Fontan, C., Claveau, F., & Dietsch, P. (2016) · Politics, Philosophy & Economics · doi:10.1177/1470594x16651056 · Cited by 62
Metadata
- Authors
- Murphy, L., & Nagel, T.
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressNew York
- Published
- 2002-04-25
- OpenAlex
- W2489309746
- Cited by
- 768
- References
- 41
- FWCI
- 25.36
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/0195150163.001.0001
- The paper
- Murphy, L., & Nagel, T. (2002). The Myth of Ownership: Taxes and Justice. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195150163.001.0001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.