DOĞAL HAKLAR LİBERTERYENİZMİNDE VERGİLENDİRME: BİR VERGİ SİSTEMİ İÇERİSİNDE LİBERTERYEN VERGİ NASIL OLMALI?

Yıl 2026, Sayı: 65, 67 - 94, 20.01.2026

Mustafa Karataş , Tuba Dilşat Karataş

https://doi.org/10.54049/taad.1846830

Öz

Liberteryenizm, bireysel özgürlüklere, öz-sahiplik ve mülkiyet haklarına dayanan, devletin müdahalesinin asgari düzeyde tutulması gerektiğini savunan kapsamlı bir siyasal düşünce geleneğidir. Bu gelenek, anarko-kapitalizm, minimal devlet liberteryenizmi (minarşizm) ve liberteryen klasik liberalizm gibi farklı yaklaşımları bünyesinde barındırmaktadır. Her bir yaklaşım, bireysel hakların önceliğini tanımakla beraber, özellikle devletin kapsamı ve meşruiyeti, vergilendirme gibi konularda önemli ölçüde farklılaşmaktadır. Bu farklı yaklaşımların ortak teorik zemini ise doğal haklar doktrinidir. Doğal haklar liberteryenizmi, bireyin bedenine ve emeğine ilişkin öz-sahiplik hakkı ile bu emeğin ürünü olan mülkiyet hakkını dokunulmaz ve öncelikli olarak kabul eder. Devletin varlığını ancak bu haklara saygı gösterildiği ve bunlar güvence altına alındığı ölçüde meşru sayar. Bu çerçevede vergilendirme konusu, liberteryen düşünce içerisinde önemli bir tartışma konusunu oluşturur. Zira vergilendirme, birçok liberteryen için bireysel mülkiyet hakkına yapılan bir müdahale anlamına gelir. Anarko-kapitalistler, bu müdahaleyi kategorik olarak reddeder ve her türlü vergilendirme biçimini mülkiyet hakkının ihlali olarak görür. Minimal devlet liberteryenleri yalnızca bireylerin haklarını dış tehditlere karşı korumak amacıyla sınırlı bir devletin varlığını ve bu devlete yönelik asgari vergilendirmeyi meşru kabul eder. Öte yandan, liberteryen klasik liberaller ise daha pragmatik bir yaklaşım benimseyerek sınırlı düzeyde yeniden dağıtımı içeren vergilendirme biçimlerini, sosyal adaleti ve toplumsal istikrarı gözeten çerçevede kabul eder. Bu çalışma, doğal haklar liberteryenizmi ekseninde vergilendirmenin hangi sınırlar dahilinde meşru kabul edilebileceğini tartışmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda öz-sahiplik ve mülkiyet haklarının dokunulmazlığı ilkesi göz önünde bulundurularak vergilendirmenin, zorlayıcı niteliğine rağmen, bireysel haklarla çelişmeden nasıl yapılandırılabileceği sorusu ele alınacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Doğal haklar , mülkiyet hakları , liberteryenizm , vergilendirme , liberteryen vergi

Etik Beyan

Bu makale Etik Kurul iznine tabi değildir/This article is not subject to Ethics Committee permission.

Destekleyen Kurum

Atatürk Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri (BAP) Birimi

Proje Numarası

SBA-2024-13478

Taxation in Natural Rights Libertarianism: How Should Libertarian Taxation Work in a Tax System?

Öz

Libertarianism is a political philosophy grounded in individual liberty, self-ownership, and property rights, advocating for minimal state intervention. It encompasses various strands such as anarcho-capitalism, minarchism, and classical liberalism. Natural rights libertarianism constitutes the common foundation of these approaches, emphasizing property rights and self-ownership as natural rights. These approaches diverge in terms of the scope and legitimacy of the state, particularly regarding taxation. While anarcho-capitalists reject all forms of taxation as illegitimate, minarchists view taxation as justifiable solely for protective functions; classical liberals, on the other hand, accept broader taxation and limited redistribution. This study aims to explore how a libertarian tax should be structured within the framework of natural rights libertarianism. Libertarianism is a comprehensive political philosophy grounded in individual liberties, self-ownership, and property rights, asserting for minimal state intervention. This philosophy encompasses various approaches, including anarcho-capitalism, minimal state libertarianism (minarchism), and libertarian classical liberalism. While each of these approaches recognizes the primacy of individual rights, they diverge significantly on key issues such as the scope and legitimacy of the state and taxation. The common theoretical background uniting these differing perspectives is the doctrine of natural rights. Natural rights libertarianism treats the right to self-ownership and the right to property as inviolable and fundamental. Within this framework, the legitimacy of the state is contingent upon its recognition and protection of these rights. Consequently, taxation emerges as a central point of contention within libertarian thought, as it is often perceived by many libertarians as an infringement upon individual property rights. Anarcho-capitalists categorically reject such interference and view all forms of taxation as violations of property rights. Minimal state libertarians, by contrast, justify the existence of a limited state and accept minimal taxation solely for that purpose. On the other hand, libertarian classical liberals adopt a more pragmatic stance, allowing for limited taxation that involves a degree of redistribution. This study aims to explore the question of under what conditions taxation can be considered legitimate within the framework of natural rights libertarianism.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Natural rights , property rights , libertarianism , taxation , libertarian tax

Etik Beyan

This article is not subject to Ethics Committee permission

Destekleyen Kurum

Atatürk University Scientific Research Projects Unit (BAP)

Proje Numarası

SBA-2024-13478

Kaynakça

• Aktaş S, ‘Bir Değer Olarak Adalet Kavramının Tahlili’ in Muzaffer Elmas vd. (Eds.), Sosyal Bilimlerle Çağı Yorumlamak: Fikirler Düşünceler-2 (Mahya Yayınları 2018)
• Akdoğan A, Kamu Maliyesi (Gazi Kitabevi 1999)
• Andrews WD, ‘A Consumption-Type of Cash Flow Personal Income Tax’ (1974) 87 (6), Harvard Law Review 116
• Aydın A, ‘Rawls ve Nozick: Bireysel Haklar, Tercihler ve Yetenekler Üzerine’ (2020) 7 (2) Kilikya Felsefe Dergisi 253
• Beriş HE, ‘Çağdaş Liberalizmde Farklı Yönelimler’ (2002) 28 Liberal Düşünce Dergisi 206
• Bird-Pollan J, ‘Death, Taxes and Property (Rights): Nozick, Libertarianism, and the Estate Tax’ (2013) 66 (1) Maine Law Review 12
• Blum WJ ve Kalven H, ‘The Uneasy Case for Progressive Taxation’ (1952) 19 (3) The University of Chicago Law Review 417
• Braun S, ‘Historical Entitlement and the Practice of Bequest: Is There a Moral Right to Bequest?’ (2010) 29 Law and Philosophy 713
• Brennan G ve Buchanan JM, The Power to Tax: Analytical Foundations of a Fiscal Constitution (Liberty Fund 2000)
• Cockfield AJ, ’Income Taxes and Individual Liberty: A Lockean Perspective on Radical Consumption Tax Reform’ (2001) 46 South Dakota Law Review 23
• Cooper GS, ‘The Benefit Theory of Taxation’ (1994) 11 Australian Tax Forum 493
• Demir A, Türkiye’de Gelir Üzerinden Alınan Vergilere Yönelik Vergi Reformu Önerileri (Yetkin Yayınları 2025)
• Duff DG, ‘Benefit Taxes and User Fees in Theory and Practice’ (2004) 54 University of Toronto Law Journal 391
• Çağan N, Vergilendirme Yetkisi (Kazancı Hukuk Yayınları 1982)
• Duff DG, ‘Private Property and Tax Policy in a Libertarian World: A Critical Review’ (2005) 17 (1) Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 29
• Edizdoğan N Çetinkaya Ö ve Gümüş E, Kamu Maliyesi (Ekin Basım Yayın Dağıtım 2023)
• Epstein RA, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain (Harvard University Press 1985)
• Epstein RA, Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain (Harvard University Press 1986)
• Epstein RA, ‘Can Anyone Beat the Flat Tax?’ (2002) 19 (1) Social Philosophy and Policy 143
• Erdem M Şenyüz D ve Tatlıoğlu İ, Kamu Maliyesi (Ekin Basım Yayın Dağıtım 2023)
• Erginay A, Kamu Maliyesi (Savaş Yayınevi 2010)
• Feser E, ’Taxation, Forced Labor and Theft’ (2000) 5 (2) The Independent Review 220
• Fisher J, ‘Is Consumption Tax Regressive? A Libertarian Perspective’ (2017) 33rd International Academic Conference Vienna
• Fleischer MP, ‘Libertarianism and the Charitable Tax Subsidies’ (2015) 56 (4) Boston College Law Review 1359.
• Fleischer PM ve Hemel D, ‘Atlas Nods: The Libertarian Case for a Basic Income’ (2017) Wisconsin Law Review 1205
• Fleischer MP, ‘Death and Taxes: A Libertarian Reappraisal’, (2022) 22-029 Legal Studies Research Paper Series, University of San Diego School of Law 1
• Fried BH, ‘The Case for a Progressive Benefits Tax’ in Martin O’Neill ve Shepley Orr (Eds.), Taxation: Philosophical Perspectives (Oxford University Press 2018)
• Friedman M, Capitalism and Freedom (University of Chicago Press 2002)
• Gaus G, Social Philosophy (Routledge 1999)
• Gaus G, ‘Coercion, Ownership, and the Redistributive State: Justificatory Liberalism’s Classical Tilt’ (2010) 27 (1) Social Philosophy and Policy 234
• Hall RE ve Rabushka A, ‘The Route to a Progressive Flat Tax’ (1985) Cato Journal 465
• Hayek FA, The Constitution of Liberty (University of Chicago Press 1960)
• Hayek FA, Law, Legislation and Liberty (University of Chicago Press 1979)
• Hobbes T, Leviathan in C. B. Macpherson (Eds.), (Penguin 1985)
• Hoppe HH, The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (Ludwig von Mises Institute 2006)
• Karakoç Y, Kamu Maliyesi Ders Notları, (Yetkin Yayınları 2020)
• Karataş TD, ‘Robert Nozick’in Adalet Teorisi: John Rawls’un Hakkaniyet Olarak Adaleti Karşısında Yetkilendirme Teorisi’ (2023) 11 (1) Kadir Has Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 212
• Kırlı Ö, Liberteryenizm (Liberte Yayınları 2023)
• Locke J, Second Treatise of Government in C. B. Macpherson (Eds.), (Hackett Publishing Company 1980)
• Lomasky LE, Persons, Rights and Moral Community (Oxford University Press 1990)
• Mack E, ‘Liberty and Justice’ in John Arthur ve William H Shaw (Eds.), Justice and Economic Distribution (Prentice-Hall Inc 1978)
• Mack E, ‘Self-Ownership, Taxation, and Democracy: A Philosophical-Constitutional Perspective’ in Donald B Racheter (Eds.), Politics, Taxation, and the Rule of Law (Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002)
• Mack E, ‘Non-Absolute Rights and Libertarian Taxation’ (2006) 23 (2) Social Philosophy and Policy 109
• McGee RW ve Block WE, ‘Taxation: The Libertarian View’ in Robert F. van Brederode (Eds.), Political Philosophy and Taxation (Springer Nature 2022)
• Mises L, Planning for Freedom (Libertarian Press 1974)
• Murphy L ve Nagel T, The Myth of Ownership (Oxford University Press 2004)
• Nozick R, Anarchy, State and Utopia (Basic Books Inc 1974)
• Schoenblum JA, ‘Tax Fairness or Unfairness?’ (1995) 12 The American Journal of Tax Policy 221
• Steiner H, ‘Original Rights and Just Redistribution’ in Peter Vallentyne ve Hillel Steiner (Eds.), Left-Libertarianism and Its Critics (Palgrave 2000)
• Sundberg JFW, ‘Revenue-only Taxes vs. Multipurpose Taxes: Philosophy and Implementation in Swedish High Tax Society’ in G. Radnitzky, ve H. Bouillon (Eds.), Government: Servant or Master? (Rodopi 1993)
• Turhan S, Vergi Teorisi ve Politikası (Filiz Kitabevi 2020)
• Twele M, ‘What Libertarians (Should) Think About Inheritance Taxation’ (2023) 29 Res Publica 90.
• Uslu C, ‘Robert Nozick: Anarko-kapitalizme Karşı Minarkizm’ (2007) 47 Liberal Düşünce Dergisi 145
• Vallentyne P, ‘Libertarianism and Taxation’ in Martin O’Neill ve Shepley Orr (Eds.), Taxation: Philosophical Perspectives (Oxford University Press 2018)
• Wicksell K, ‘A New Principle of Just Taxation’ in Richard A Musgrave ve Alan T Peacock (Eds.), Classics in the Theory of Public Finance (The Macmillan Press Ltd 1958)
• Widerquist, ‘A Dilemma for Libertarianism’, (2009) 8 (1) Politics, Philosophy & Economics 43
• Wolfram G, ‘Taxpayers Rights and the Fiscal Constitution’ in Donald P. Racheter ve Richard E. Wagner (Eds.), Politics, Taxation and the Rule of Law (Springer 2002)
• Yaman S ve Tarhan B, Liberteryenizmin Felsefi Temelleri (Liberus, 2021)
• Yılmaz Furtuna E, ‘Olağanüstü Yönetim Usullerinde Vergilendirme Yetkisinin Hukuki Sınırları ve Cumhurbaşkanlığı Kararnameleri’ (2021) 25 (3) Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 429-470