The literature devoted to the study of the phenomenon of property recognizes the fact that, from a theoretical point of view, the simultaneous existence of both the concept of property and the concept of taxes is impossible. They cannot be combined without damaging one of them. Moreover, if taxation is considered as an attribute of statehood, then a theoretical situation arises in which it turns out that the very presence of a state excludes the existence of the institution of property in society. And vice versa, the establishment of a full-fledged institution of property would entail the abolition of the institution of statehood. The contradiction between property and tax is thus a fundamental problem in theoretical economics. And this problem has not yet found a solution. Even its origin is not explained. In this article, this problem is examined using the methodology of studying the logical structures of scientific theory on the basis of a materialist interpretation of property as a social relationship that does not depend on the will of people, that develops spontaneously and, – in contrast to “volitional”, as K. Marx defined them, relations regarding taxes – acting as a basic social relationship. This approach does not contain any assessment, neither negative nor positive, of tax practice, and does not imply any options for improving the tax system, which distinguishes it from the vast majority of works on this topic. It leads to the conclusion that the institution of taxation is inevitable and will be replaced by a tax-free mechanism for financing the state budget. One of the variants of a tax-free model that meets this task is proposed.
Property, labor, property rights, tax system, entrepreneurship, state power, democracy, the future.
1. Marks K. K kritike politicheskoy ekonomii // K. Marks, F. Engel's. Soch. 2-e izd. T. 13.
2. Marks K. O Prudone. // K. Marks, F. Engel's. Soch. 2-e izd. T. 16.
3. Marks K. Kapital // K. Marks, F. Engel's. Soch. 2-e izd. T. 23.
4. Mercalov V. L. «Sobstvennost' (Obraz buduschego)» // Zhurnal filosofskih issledovaniy, t. 6, № 4, Infra-M, 2020 g.
5. Epshteyn R. Vyruchka. Kembridzh, Massachusets, 1985
6. Lenin V.I. Gosudarstvo i revolyuciya. // PSS, t. 33. M.: «Politizdat», 1969.
7. Adams Ch. Vliyanie nalogov na stanovlenie civilizacii. M.: «Intermediator», 2018.
8. Jean-Paul Gagnon (2018). 2,234 Descriptions of Democracy. Democratic Theory, 2018, 5 (1). Pp. 92-113.
9. Tolstoy L. N. Pis'mo N. Strahovu, 5 sentyabrya 1878 g. // Tolstoy L. N. Polnoe sobranie sochineniy. Tom 62. Pis'ma 1873–1879 Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo hudozhestvennoy literatury, 1953.
10. Ekklesiast 1.9. Bibliya. M.: Moskovskaya patriarhiya, 1988.
11. Geraklit. Antologiya mirovoy filosofii. V chetyreh tomah. T. 1. Filosofiya drevnosti i srednevekov'ya. Ch.1. M.: «Mysl'», 1969.
12. Payps R. Sobstvennost' i svoboda. M.; «Moskovskaya shkola politicheskih issledovaniy», 2000.
13. Rotbard M. Oppengeymer «Gosudarstvo». Anatomiya gosudarstva. M.: «RUSTATE.ORG», 2019.
14. Hodorov F. Nalog: koren' zla. M.: «RUSTATE.ORG», 2019.
15. Prudon P. Chto takoe sobstvennost'? M.: «Respublika», 1998.
