9.1 Introduction

Chapter 1 outlines the motivation of the research, and presents the main research questions and methodological approach to address those questions. Chapter 1 also argues the significance of the research, and sets out its limitations and structure. The main research questions, significance of the research, and methodological approach are briefly outlined here.

The questions central to this PhD research read:

For purposes of this research, well-being is used to describe that which is ultimately, or non-instrumentally, good for a person, and is about how the life of an individual is going for that individual. In comparison to other concepts, such as welfare, well-being is often considered a comprehensive concept, for instance involving ethical considerations and value judgments, and dependent also upon non-material aspects or upon non-scarce resources that determine the quality of our life.

Considering that policymakers are already using notions of well-being, also in relation to taxation, there is need for research determining more extensively and in more detail whether states should aim for well-being through taxation. The choice for well-being as the main topic of this research does however not mean that well-being is presumed to be the criterion by which taxation should be assessed. Rather, the intent is to scrutinise whether well-being, which has gained increasing attention also from a tax perspective, is a proper tax-related aim, and to determine a framework of assessment that contributes to decision making processes regarding taxation aimed at well-being.

The concepts of well-being and taxation, and their purposeful combination by states, raise many intricate and important issues linked to fundamental considerations of, for instance, law, economics, politics, and society. Part of the societal and scientific significance of this research is that it calls attention to, and addresses, these questions and issues. This research expands on the body of existing research, such as that on social choice theory, through an approach from multiple perspectives, in an effort to link perspectives of philosophy of law and of tax law with perspectives of economics, politics, and psychological and social science.

This research also serves as a demonstration of the possibility to work with different and sometimes competing normative viewpoints and to nevertheless establish useful and robust conclusions, whereby such different normative viewpoints are ultimately integrated in a proposed framework for assessment of tax measures undertaken by states in their aim for well-being through taxation. The approach used is pluralistic, or one of plural reasoning: the research questions are approached from different normative perspectives, to identify important issues and recommend broadly supported improvements. This methodological approach of plural reasoning allows working with different and sometimes competing viewpoints from the perspective of three main types of normative theories, namely consequential, deontological, and virtue ethics reasoning. In short, consequential normative theories consider that whether something is desirable or not depends only on consequences. Deontological normative theories instead determine right or wrong on the basis of certain duties or rights. Virtue ethics normative theories accord decisive normative weight to moral character. The consequential, deontological, and virtue ethics approaches to the question of whether states should aim for well-being through taxation each provide answers, oftentimes with some shared elements and some divergent ones. It is argued that these answers from different perspectives, and especially where those answers point in a similar direction or show ‘common ground’, can be used to improve the current state of affairs. Therefore, and notwithstanding that the approach of plural reasoning may not always produce clear, evident, or obvious answers, such an approach nevertheless fits well with approaching a concept as diverse and hotly debated as well-being, and is used in this research to aim for broadly supported improvements and recommendations.

Given that this research deals with state actions (often the result of a process aimed at achieving political compromise) regarding well-being within the sphere of the moving target that is the public interest, this research does not (and does not aspire to) definitively prescribe a certain direction, but rather provides tools to enhance the quality and acceptability of taxation aimed at well-being. Moreover, the chosen approach from multiple perspectives brings with it that this research cannot, and does not set out to be, all encompassing or exhaustive when it comes to the discussion of the different perspectives included and their application to the three case studies of topics that may attract states to aim for well-being through taxation.