Taxation often gets labeled by its opponents as a form of theft. Even people who support taxation sometimes tend to think of taxation as justified theft rather than as non-theft. I would like to present a case that could be made against taxation being theft. It has to do with my understanding of what theft is and how theft works. Theft occurs when someone with a non-existent or a lesser entitlement to a property takes that property from someone who has a greater entitlement of that property. It’s worth noting that one piece of property can actually have multiple owners or multiple people who are entitled to that property to various degrees. A perfect example of this is when a father buys a video game console for one of his children. It makes sense to say that both the father and the child have some entitlement to the property. But, it’s intuitive for most people to think that the father has a greater entitlement to the property than the child. Given this, if the father were to take away his child’s console then this wouldn’t constitute theft. Even if the child was a legal adult and bought the console himself with the money that he earned, I think most people would not think that it would be theft if the father took the console as long as the child continues living under his roof. This is because the console can only provide utility for the child if that child also has access to electricity and the console would be worthless without the assistance that he is receiving from his father.

By analogy, our modern means of acquiring money and resources would also be worthless without the existence of a system that allows it to have worth. For example, a neurosurgeon has skills that can make him wealthy because he has access to the technology and infrastructure that allows him to practice his trade. In addition, he is rewarded with money which gets accepted in stores and allows him to buy things. Without the existence of a society, the neurosurgeon would live a life of destitute despite his talents. Given this, it can then be argued that society does have an entitlement to take a portion of his money. Thus, it seems that if society takes a reasonable portion of his money that it wouldn’t constitute theft. Though, it’s worth noting that just because society has an entitlement to a portion of his money, this doesn’t mean that the government is always justified in taking his money and it doesn’t mean that taxation is never theft. In order for taxation to not constitute theft, the money has to be used to serve the needs of the public and the amount taken has to be somewhat reasonable. Of course, there can also be some grey area situations where it is unclear if a particular taxation scenario constitutes theft but I don’t find it implausible that “grey area” theft scenarios or “kinda sorta” theft scenarios can exist. I think online piracy is an example of a grey area theft scenario. I think the vast majority of the money collected though taxation in developed countries is used for legitimate public good and the taxation doesn’t disrupt the natural wealth hierarchy too much. Given this, I don’t think taxation constitutes theft in democratic developed countries under most circumstances.