Joseph Cardinal Höffner CHRISTIAN SOCIAL ... - Ordo Socialis

§ 3 Rights and Duties of Governmental Authority
The field of the governmental authority’s duties in legislation, administration, and dispensation
of justice is defined by the end of the state, which consists in the creation of the presuppositions
for a prosperous development of the individual, smaller social circles, and society as
a whole. The following belong to the essential tasks of the governmental authority: external
defense and, in general, an honest and just foreign policy; the construction and preservation of
a legal system, which must take shape in the state constitution, in the economic constitution,
in private law, in penal law, and so on; a just administration and dispensation of justice, as
well as care for the public welfare. With respect to the lattermost, it must be emphasized that
not only must material welfare be fostered through economic and social policy, but that immaterial
welfare is to be cared for also, the characteristics which are above all the realization
of social justice, a popular education building on moral values, a superior culture and science,
a model health system, as well as the preservation of the freedoms of conscience and religion.
Today, terrorism, which fights against the ‘prevailing system’ with fanatical zeal, threatens
the security of states. It ruthlessly seeks to realize the ideology of a ‘new society’. But it is
easier to say how things should not be in a social order than to say how they should be.
In the following, three important problems are to be treated which are the subject of lively
discussion today: the right of the state to levy taxes, the right of the state to impose the death
penalty, and the right of the state to wage war.
1. The right to levy taxes,
Concerning the right to levy taxes, Christian social teaching advances three principles:
a) The right of the state to impose taxes is grounded in the common good, which cannot be
realized without the citizens’ willingness to sacrifice. The closely intertwined nature of modern
society and the critical development of social and political conditions since the beginning
of the industrial age have caused the financial needs of the state to increase enormously. Different
theories have been advanced on the highest limit of taxation permissible. Some take the
view that the only justified tax rate is the biblical tithe; others assert that a tax rate of fourteen
per cent such as was in force in Italy before the First World War is „almost excessive“ (Arthur
Vermeersch, S.J.); still others declare that the limit of an economically bearable tax burden
lies at twenty-five per cent of the social product (Colin Clark). All these statements are disputable,
since it is impossible to fix a maximum figure for taxes a priori. According to the
principles of social justice, the extent of the tax burden is determined by the current requirements
of the common good. The effects of very high taxes must, of course, be taken into consideration
in the process. Confiscatory taxes which seize all rewards of business initiative
have a paralyzing effect, inhibit capital formation, and discourage foreign capital. Demoralization
also becomes a threat, since very high taxes lead to falsifications and lies (tax evasion).
b) The tax burden is to be distributed according to the citizens’ ability to pay. It corresponds
to the principle of distributive justice that the tax rate increase in a greater proportion than the
increasing value of the taxable object in accordance with the principle of tax progression. But
care must be taken here that personal initiative is not undermined. However, experience
teaches that, in view of the complicated market conditions in modern society, it is not easy to
realize the principle of distributive justice in the tax system. On the one hand, the different
strata of the population are not taxable in the same way; it is easier, for example, to collect
taxes from real estate property and from wage and salary earners than from the self-employed.
On the other hand, the intended burden is more or less frustrated through the passing on of
taxes. For whether taxes are passed on depends not only on the legislator, but also on those
who currently hold positions of power in the markets. There are, of course, taxes which, in
139