I agree with your implication that taxation is NOT a contribution but a liability. But, I do not agree with the idea that the tax liability should be focused entirely on either the producer or the consumer because, in general, there is no reasonable distinction.
It would be pointless discrimination. Everyone contributes to and benefits from the economy. How they contribute or benefit is a valid basis for portioning the burden of taxes.
Morally, taxation should be strictly voluntary. But, since we have no choice in the matter, the burden should be thinly distributed throughout the economy so as to have the least impact on the economy as a whole. It makes no sense to focus the tax burden on either the producer or the consumer since that would have the worst impact on the economy as a whole.
Morally, taxation should be strictly voluntary.
Agreed, even where taxes cannot be "strictly" voluntary the final excercise of when and how much tax is taken should be up to the discretion of payer of the tax whenever possible to arrange.
I submit that payment of taxes coincident with the purchase of retail goods provides the greater measure of control to the individual consumer/voter, who in the end is the final payer of all taxes as they cascade through the economy. Removing the excercise of that control from the individual by burying the tax in upstream transaction out of the view of the general electorate is a bad practice leading to expansion of government for lack of oversight.
Everyone contributes to and benefits from the economy. How they contribute or benefit is an invalid basis for portioning the burden of taxes.
In which case the primary distinction between producer and consumer is irrelavant and the distinctions should be based more with empowerment and convinience in favor of the individual as opposed to the efficiency or convenience of government.
Producer side taxes(payment on incomes prior to allocation for saving & expenditure) gives first allocation resources to government over the individual and tend to hide the burden of the tax from view of the electorate where the are collected upstream from the individual at business/corporate level.
OTOH consumer side tax payment ideally occurs with expenditure at the point most visible to the electorate where the measure of cost of government benefit is most easily made. The key is to assure the visiblity and perception of the tax imposed such that the electorate is fully appraised of the burden laid in respect to any benefit demanded of govenment.
Each time government is able to hide a large proportion of taxation behind the corporate veil not in direct view of the electorate government becomes less accountable to the electorate for largess and inefficiency of its activities.
It makes no sense to focus the tax burden on either the producer or the consumer since that would have the worst impact on the economy as a whole.
From my viewpoint that makes no sense at all, anytime government removes option and visibility from the electorate(i.e. individual consumers) as a whole it decreases the capacity for exercise of discretion on the part of the individual. Placing taxation on the producer side reduces the capacity of the individual to chose between investment/savings versus consumption.
The lack of invesment & saving places the individual in a position of greater dependancy upon government to provide for future benefit at the cost of the individual's independance and ownership of property which would provide for future retirment needs out of ones own resources.
Production side taxation increases the power of govenment over individual exercise of discretion and ablility to provide for his own future. Consumption side taxation allows the individual first option of where his dollars are best allocated for his individual circumstance whether that be savings/investment or consumption of goods and services. A consumption tax favors investment and savings from which people can be indendent of government largess.