[deks]

It’s late here in Virginia, so I don’t know how well I can focus on the concept of taxes apportioned according to a state’s population. . .

but wouldn’t the states with large populations already be paying a larger share of the tax collected by the Federal government? . . . unless there were a lot of people in the large population states that are not paying any income tax?

[JOHN W K]

This tax boils down to be an equal per capita tax if laid directly on the people of a state. For example, if a capitation tax were laid today and the people of New York each had to pay one dollar to meet New York’s apportioned share of the total sum being raised by Congress, the people of Idaho would likewise only have to pay one dollar each if the tax were shared evenly among the people living in Idaho. And, although New York’s total share of the tax would be far greater than that of Idaho because of New York’s larger population, New York is compensated by its larger representation in Congress, which is also part of our Constitution’s fair share formula!

JWK

[smokingfrog]

unless there were a lot of people in the large population states that are not paying any income tax?

That, my FRiend is a big part of the problem.