Editing Poll tax

{{Short description|Fixed tax paid by every liable individual}}
{{Other uses}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2019}}
{{Taxation}}

A '''poll tax''', also known as '''head tax''' or '''capitation''', is a [[lump-sum tax|tax levied as a fixed sum]] on every liable individual (typically every adult), without reference to income or resources.<!-- A poll tax based on the modern meaning of "poll" is a tax levied as a precondition for registering to vote.<ref>{{cite book | title= The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics | authors= Iain McLean, Alistair McMillan | url= https://books.google.com/books?id=8JkyAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT609 | page= 609 | publisher = OUP | year= 2009}}</ref>--><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title= poll tax |encyclopedia = Oxford World Encyclopedia |url= https://archive.org/details/worldencyclopedi00oxfo |publisher= Philip's |year= 2004 |url-access= registration |isbn= 9780199546091}}</ref> ''Poll'' is an archaic term for "head" or "top of the head". The sense of "counting heads" is found in phrases like [[polling place]] and [[opinion poll]].<ref>{{cite book |first=Nick |last=Moon |title=Opinion Polls: History, Theory and Practice |publisher=Manchester University Press |year=1999 |page=2 |isbn=0-7190-4224-0 }}</ref>

Head taxes were important sources of revenue for many governments from ancient times until the 19th century. In the United Kingdom, poll taxes were levied by the governments of [[John of Gaunt]]{{where?|date=October 2024}} in the 14th century, [[Charles II of England|Charles II]] in the 17th and [[Margaret Thatcher]] in the 20th century. In the United States, voting poll taxes (whose payment was a precondition to voting in an election) have been used to [[Disenfranchisement after the Reconstruction Era|disenfranchise]] impoverished and minority voters (especially after [[Reconstruction Era|Reconstruction]]).<ref>{{cite book |title=Reconstruction After the Civil War |first=John Hope |last=Franklin |publisher=U. of Chicago Press |year=1961 |pages=127–151 |oclc=5845934 }}</ref>

Poll taxes are [[Regressive tax|regressive]], meaning the higher someone's income is, the lower the tax is as a proportion of income: for example, a $100 tax on an income of $10,000 is a 1% tax rate, while $100 tax on a $500 income is 20%. Its acceptance or "neutrality" depends on the balance between the tax demanded and the resources of the population. Low amounts generally go unnoticed, while high amounts may generate tax revolts such as the 1381 [[Peasants' Revolt]] in England and the 1906 [[Bambatha Rebellion]] against colonial rule in South Africa.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Peasants' Revolt|url=https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/citizenship/citizen_subject/peasant.htm|access-date=2021-11-07|website=The National Archives|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Hennop |first=Jan |date=9 June 2006 |url=http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?art_id=qw1149861062181B224 |title=SA to mark historic Zulu rebellion |publisher=Independent Online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060712082059/http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?art_id=qw1149861062181B224 |archive-date=12 July 2006}}</ref> However, both of those cases were additional taxation, and not a substitute for other taxes being lowered.

==Religious law==

===Mosaic law===
As prescribed in [[Book of Exodus|Exodus]], [[Jewish law]] imposed a poll tax of a half-[[shekel]], payable by every man above the age of twenty.

{{Blockquote|{{sup|11}}And the {{LORD}} spake unto Moses, saying,

{{sup|12}}When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the {{LORD}}, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them.

{{sup|13}}This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty [[gerah]]s:) an half shekel shall be the offering of the {{LORD}}.

{{sup|14}}Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the {{LORD}}.

{{sup|15}}The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the {{LORD}}, to make an atonement for your souls.

{{sup|16}}And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the {{LORD}}, to make an atonement for your souls.|Exodus 30:11–16<ref>{{bibleverse|Exodus|30:11–16|AV}}</ref>}}

The money was designated for the [[Tabernacle]] in the Exodus narrative and later for the upkeep of the [[Temple of Jerusalem]]. Priests, women, slaves and minors were exempted, but could offer it voluntarily. Payment by [[Samaritans]] or [[Gentiles]] was rejected. It was collected yearly in the month of [[Adar]] at the Temple or provincial collection offices.

===Islamic law===
{{transliteration|ar|[[Zakat al-Fitr]]}} is an obligatory charity that must be given by every Muslim (or their guardian) near the end of every [[Ramadan]], except for those in dire poverty.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Sociology of Islam: Secularism, Economy and Politics|editor-first=Tugrul |editor-last=Keskin |page=449 |year=2012 |publisher=Ithaca Press |isbn=978-0-86372-425-1 }}</ref> The amount is {{cvt|2|kg}} of wheat or barley, or its cash equivalent, to be given to the poor.<ref>{{cite book|title=The Oxford Handbook of American Islam|author=Yvonne Yazbeck Haddad, Jane I. Smith|page=166|year=2014}}</ref>

{{transliteration|ar|[[Jizya]]}} is a land or poll tax decreed by the [[Quran]], paid annually by non-believers in Islam living under [[Islamic law]] (residents with {{transliteration|ar|[[dhimmi]]}} status). {{transliteration|ar|Jizya}} began during the reign of [[Muhammad]] (from 9 A.H.) in places like [[Yemen]], [[Bahrain]], and [[Jerash]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Duri |first='Abdal 'Aziz |date=1974 |title=Notes on Taxation in Early Islam |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3596329 |journal=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient |volume=17 |issue=2 |pages=136–144 |doi=10.2307/3596329 |jstor=3596329 |issn=0022-4995}}</ref> As a poll tax, the tax usually only applied to free, abled-bodied adult men. The {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} amount could also vary with the income of the individual. However, according to [[Shibli Nomani]], the word {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} is an Arabicised version of the Persian {{transliteration|fa|kizyat}}, the war tax levied by the Persian empire, which served as a model for the conquering Arabs. The [[Sasanian Empire|Sasanian Persian]] emperor Nawsherwan imposed a poll tax, termed {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} by Arab historians, varying between 12 and 2 dirhams, exempting officials, soldiers, and nobles.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=AHMED |first1=ZIAUDDIN |last2=Ahmad |first2=Ziauddin |title=The Concept of Jizya in Early Islam |date=1975 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20846971 |journal=Islamic Studies |volume=14 |issue=4 |pages=293–305 |jstor=20846971 |issn=0578-8072}}</ref> During the Islamic rule of [[Muhammad]], the [[magi]] of Iran and landowners of [[Bahrain]] paid {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} of 1 [[dinar]] or its equivalent in clothing, while the landless paid 4 [[dirham]] and a striped woolen cloak.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=AHMED |first1=ZIAUDDIN |last2=Ahmad |first2=Ziauddin |date=1975 |title=The Concept of Jizya in Early Islam |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20846971 |journal=Islamic Studies |volume=14 |issue=4 |pages=293–305 |issn=0578-8072 |jstor=20846971}}</ref> Elsewhere, the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} was graded according to three classes, e.g. 48 [[dirhams]] for the rich, 24 for the middle class, and 12 for the poor.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hassan |first1=Abul |title=Islamic Economics: Theory and Practice |last2=Choudhury |first2=M. A. |publisher=Routledge |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-138-36241-3 |location=London |page=247}}</ref>

Although the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} tax is interpreted by many as a financial humiliation on non-Muslims, others consider it a sign of due allegiance to the political authority of Islam: part of a social contract by which non-Muslims, especially the Jews of [[Medina]], were granted equal social and political rights, and protection of their life, property, and religion. According to some scholars, the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} paid by non-Muslims is parallel to the {{transliteration|ar|[[zakat]]}} charity obligation on Muslims.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=AHMED |first1=ZIAUDDIN |last2=Ahmad |first2=Ziauddin |title=The Concept of Jizya in Early Islam |date=1975 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20846971 |journal=Islamic Studies |volume=14 |issue=4 |pages=293–305 |jstor=20846971 |issn=0578-8072}}</ref> However, [[Umar]], the second Caliph, ordered a brand on the shoulder of {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} payers, as well as requiring a [[tonsure]] and [[Sumptuary law|sumptuary laws]] to distinguish them from Muslims. Uman distinguished between {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} and {{transliteration|ar|[[kharaj]]}}, where the former means the poll tax on non-Muslim individuals, and the latter means the land tax and sometimes the total sum of taxes paid by leaders of the non-Muslim community. Umar stressed that conversion to Islam provided exemption from {{transliteration|ar|jizya}}, though not from {{transliteration|ar|kharaj}}.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Duri |first='Abdal 'Aziz |date=1974 |title=Notes on Taxation in Early Islam |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3596329 |journal=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient |volume=17 |issue=2 |pages=136–144 |doi=10.2307/3596329 |jstor=3596329 |issn=0022-4995}}</ref>

[[Amr ibn al-As]], after conquering Egypt, made a census for the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} according to wealth classes, so that the rich paid more. [[Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan]] reformed taxes in Mesopotamia based on a calculation of the income and expenses of a typical man, determining that each adult could pay {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} of 4 [[dinar]]s, a 400% increase over the previous tax; however, this burden seemingly did not increase conversions to Islam.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Dennett |first=Daniel Clement |title=Conversion and the Poll Tax in Early Islam |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=1950 |edition=2nd |pages=44–48}}</ref>

The [[Cairo Geniza]] records demonstrate the poll tax collection becoming very strict and burdensome for the Jewish community in [[Egypt]] during the 12th century. Evidence suggests that the guardian of a minor was responsible to pay the full poll tax on his behalf until the age of ten. Even the very sick and poor widows were subject to the tax. [[Shelomo Dov Goitein]] concluded that the intolerable burden of the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} might have caused the mass conversion of Jews in [[Egypt]] to Islam, while more prominent Jews embraced Islam for the possibility of government positions.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Goitein |first=S. D. |date=1963 |title=Evidence on the Muslim Poll Tax from Non-Muslim Sources. A Geniza Study |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/3596268 |journal=Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient |volume=6 |issue=3 |pages=278–295 |doi=10.2307/3596268 |jstor=3596268 |issn=0022-4995}}</ref>

The treaty of 1535, known as [[Franco-Ottoman alliance|the Franco-Ottoman alliance]], revolutionized relations between the Christian and Islamic states, with the poll tax playing a significant role. Previously, a non-Muslim living in Muslim territory for more than a year became liable to the poll tax. Under the treaty, French Christians in [[Ottoman Empire|the Ottoman Empire]] were exempted from all {{transliteration|ar|jizya}}.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Khadduri |first=Majid |date=April 1956 |title=Islam and the Modern Law of Nations |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-international-law/article/abs/islam-and-the-modern-law-of-nations/2E11910FCFE00824657E5012A58FD485 |journal=American Journal of International Law |language=en |volume=50 |issue=2 |pages=358–372 |doi=10.2307/2194954 |jstor=2194954 |s2cid=147619365 |issn=0002-9300}}</ref> In 1855, the [[Ottoman Empire]] abolished the {{transliteration|ar|jizya}} tax as part of reforms to equalize the status of Muslims and non-Muslims. It was replaced by a military-exemption tax on non-Muslims, the {{lang|tr|bedel-i askeri}}. It was once believed that the Islamic poll tax derived from a previous Byzantine poll tax, but evidence for this tax has been re-dated to Islamic times.<ref>Roger Bagnall, ''Egypt in the Byzantine World, 300–700'', Cambridge 2007, pg. 445.</ref>

{{transliteration|ar|Jizya}} reemerged in 2014 after the [[Islamic State]] conquered some parts of [[Iraq]] and [[Syria]]. Its leader [[Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi]] declared that Christians would face the choice of conversion, {{transliteration|ar|jizya}}, or death. This ultimatum was read out in mosques.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2014-07-18 |title=Convert, pay tax, or die, Islamic State warns Christians |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-iraq-security-christians-idUKKBN0FN29N20140718 |access-date=2023-04-28}}</ref> Many Christians fled [[Mosul]], home to the ancient Christian communities of [[Iraq]], leading [[Louis Raphaël I Sako]] to say: "For the first time in the history of Iraq, Mosul is now empty of Christians." ISIS issued the same ultimatum in its capital of [[Raqqa]], Syria, demanding {{convert|0.5|oz|g}} of pure gold from Christians in exchange for their safety.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2014-07-18 |title=Iraqi Christians flee after Isis issue Mosul ultimatum |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28381455 |access-date=2023-04-28}}</ref>

==Canada==
{{Main|Chinese head tax in Canada}}
The [[Chinese head tax]] was a fixed fee charged to each [[China|Chinese]] person entering [[Canada]]. The [[tax per head|head tax]] was first levied after the [[Parliament of Canada|Canadian parliament]] passed the [[Chinese Immigration Act of 1885]] and was meant to discourage Chinese people from entering Canada after the completion of the [[Canadian Pacific Railway]]. The tax was abolished by the [[Chinese Immigration Act of 1923]], which stopped all Chinese immigration except for business people, clergy, educators, students, and other categories.<ref name="JamesMorton">James Morton. "[[In the Sea of Sterile Mountains: The Chinese in British Columbia]]". Vancouver, BC: J.J. Douglas, 1974.</ref> The 1923 act was repealed in 1947.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ng|first=Wing Chung |title=The Chinese in Vancouver, 1945–80: The Pursuit of Identity and Power|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zZ4GGTmJ26IC&pg=PA120|year=1999|publisher=UBC Press|isbn=978-0-7748-0733-3|pages=120–121}}</ref>

==Ceylon==
In Ceylon, a poll tax was levied by the British colonial government of Ceylon in 1920. The tax charged 2 rupees per year per male adult. Those who did not pay had to work on the roads for one day in lieu of the tax. The Young Lanka League protested the tax, led by [[A. Ekanayake Gunasinha]], and it was repealed by the [[Legislative Council of Ceylon]] in 1925 following a motion submitted by [[C. H. Z. Fernando]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Ekanayake Goonesinha |first1=Kesera |title=A. E. Goonesinha – May Day hero and Father of the Trade Union Movement |url=http://archives.dailynews.lk/2002/05/01/fea05.html |accessdate=6 August 2020 |agency=Daily News}}</ref>

==Great Britain==
The poll tax was essentially a lay subsidy, a tax on the [[movable property]] of most of the population, to help fund war. It had first been levied in 1275 and continued under different names until the 17th century. People were taxed a [[percentage]] of the assessed value of their movable goods. That percentage varied from year to year and place to place, and which goods could be taxed differed between [[urban area|urban]] and [[rural]] locations. [[Clergy|Churchmen]] were exempt, as were the poor, workers in the [[Royal Mint]], inhabitants of the [[Cinque Ports]], [[tin]] workers in [[Cornwall]] and [[Devon]], and those who lived in the [[County palatine|Palatinate counties]] of [[Cheshire]] and [[County Durham|Durham]].

===14th century===
{{Main|Poll Tax of 1379}}
The Hilary Parliament, held between January and March 1377, levied a poll tax in 1377 to finance the [[Hundred Years War|war against France]] at the request of [[John of Gaunt]] who, since [[King Edward III]] was mortally sick, was the de facto head of government at the time. This tax covered almost 60% of the population, far more than lay subsidies had earlier. It was levied two more times, in [[Poll Tax of 1379|1379]] and 1381. Each time the taxation basis was slightly different. In 1377, every lay person over the age of 14 years who was not a beggar had to pay a [[groat (coin)|groat]] (4d) to the Crown. By 1379 that had been graded by social class, with the lower age limit changed to 16, and to 15 two years later. The levy of 1381 operated under a combination of both flat rate and graduated assessments. The minimum amount payable was set at 4d, however tax collectors had to account for a 12d a head mean assessment. Payments were therefore variable; the poorest would theoretically pay the lowest rate, with the deficit being met by a higher payment from those able to afford it.<ref>See {{cite thesis |first=Carolyn Christine |last=Fenwick |title=The English Poll Taxes of 1377, 1379 and 1381: A Critical Examination of the Returns |publisher=London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London) |type=PhD thesis |year=1983 |url=https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.263359 |access-date=16 August 2020 |archive-date=4 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210204072031/https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.263359 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The 1381 tax has been credited as one of the main reasons behind the [[Peasants Revolt|Peasants' Revolt]] in that year, due in part to attempts to restore feudal conditions in rural areas.

===17th century{{anchor|Poll Tax Act 1660}}===
The poll tax was resurrected during the 17th century, usually related to a military emergency. It was imposed by [[Charles I of England|Charles I]] in 1641 to finance the raising of the army against the Scottish and Irish uprisings. With the [[Restoration (England)|Restoration]] of [[Charles II of England|Charles II]] in 1660, the [[Convention Parliament (1660)|Convention Parliament of 1660]] instituted a poll tax to finance the disbanding of the [[New Model Army]] (pay arrears, etc.) ([[12 Cha. 2]]. c. 9).<ref>''Statutes of the Realm'', vol. v, p.207-225</ref> The poll tax was assessed according to "rank", e.g. dukes paid £100, earls £60, knights £20, esquires £10. Eldest sons paid two-thirds of their father's rank, widows paid a third of their late husband's rank. The members of the [[livery companies]] paid according to company's rank (e.g. masters of first-tier guilds like the Mercers paid £10, whereas masters of fifth-tier guilds, like the Clerks, paid 5 shillings). Professionals also paid differing rates, e.g. physicians (£10), judges (£20), advocates (£5), attorneys (£3), and so on. Anyone with property (land, etc.) paid 40 shillings per £100 earned, anyone over the age of 16 and unmarried paid twelvepence and everyone else over 16 paid sixpence.

{{anchor|Poll Tax Act 1688|Poll Tax Act 1689|Poll Tax Act 1691|Poll Tax Act 1694|Poll Tax Act 1697}}
To finance the [[Nine Years' War]], a poll tax was imposed again by [[William III of England|William III]] and [[Mary II of England|Mary II]] in 1689 ([[1 Will. & Mar.]] c. 13), reassessed in 1690 adjusting rank for fortune ([[2 Will. & Mar.]] c. 2), and then again in 1691 back to rank irrespective of fortune ([[3 Will. & Mar.]] c. 6). The poll tax was imposed again in 1692 ([[5 & 6 Will. & Mar.]] c. 14), and one final time in 1698 ([[9 Will. 3]]. c. 38), the last poll tax in England until the 20th century.

A poll tax ("polemoney") was simultaneously imposed in [[Kingdom of Scotland|Scotland]] by the [[Parliament of Scotland|Edinburgh parliament]] in 1693, again in 1695, and two in 1698.

As the greater weight of the 17th century poll taxes fell primarily upon the wealthy and powerful, it was not too unpopular. There were grumblings within the taxed ranks about lack of differentiation by income within ranks. Ultimately, it was the inefficiency of their collection (what they brought in routinely fell far short of expected revenues) that prompted the government to abandon the poll tax after 1698.

Far more controversial was the [[hearth tax]] introduced by the [[Fire-Hearth and Stoves Taxation Act 1662]] ([[14 Cha. 2]]. c. 10), which imposed a hefty two shillings on every hearth in a family dwelling, which was easier to count than persons. Heavier, more permanent and more regressive than the poll tax proper, the intrusive entry of tax inspectors into private homes to count hearths was a very sore point, and it was promptly repealed with the [[Glorious Revolution]] in 1689. It was replaced with a "window tax" in 1695 since inspectors could count windows from outside homes.

===20th century===
{{Main|Poll tax (Great Britain)}}
<!-- This section is linked from [[Militant tendency]] -->
{{more citations needed section|date=June 2019}}
The Community Charge, popularly dubbed the "poll tax", was a tax to fund [[local government in the United Kingdom|local government]], instituted in 1989 by the government of [[Margaret Thatcher]]. It replaced the [[rates (tax)|rates]] that were based on the notional rental value of a house. The abolition of rates was in the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] manifesto for the [[1979 United Kingdom general election|1979 general election]]; the replacement was proposed in the Green Paper of 1986, ''Paying for Local Government'' based on ideas developed by Dr. [[Madsen Pirie]] and [[Douglas Mason]] of the [[Adam Smith Institute]].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Pearce |first1=Ed |title=The prophet of private profit |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/1993/apr/19/thinktanks.uk |work=The Guardian |date=19 April 1993}}</ref> It was a [[fixed tax]] per adult resident, but there was a reduction for those with lower household income. Each person was to pay for the services provided in their community. This proposal was contained in the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] [[manifesto]] for the [[1987 United Kingdom general election|1987 general election]]. The new tax replaced the rates in Scotland from the start of the 1988/89 financial year and in England and Wales from the start of the 1990/91 financial year.<ref name="TelegraphTimeline">{{cite news |last1=Collins |first1=Nick |title=Local government funding timeline: From rates to poll tax to council tax |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8370222/Local-government-funding-timeline-From-rates-to-poll-tax-to-council-tax.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8370222/Local-government-funding-timeline-From-rates-to-poll-tax-to-council-tax.html |archive-date=12 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |work=The Daily Telegraph|date=9 March 2011}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

The system was very unpopular since many thought it shifted the tax burden from the rich to the poor, as it was based on the number of occupants living in a house, rather than on the estimated market value of the house. Many tax rates set by local councils proved to be much higher than earlier predictions since the councils realized that not they, but the central government would be blamed for the tax, which led to resentment, even among some who had supported the introduction of it.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=Peter |title=Lessons From the British Poll Tax Disaster |journal=National Tax Journal |date=December 1991 |volume=44 |issue=4 |pages=421–436 |doi=10.1086/NTJ41788932 |s2cid=42053969 |url=https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d151/79e8204f875cfffcef9987f12326e85f2446.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191014184039/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d151/79e8204f875cfffcef9987f12326e85f2446.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=2019-10-14 |accessdate=14 October 2019 }}</ref> The tax in different boroughs differed because local taxes paid by businesses varied and grants by central government to local authorities sometimes varied capriciously.

Mass protests were called by the [[All Britain Anti-Poll Tax Federation]] with which the vast majority of local [[Anti-Poll Tax Unions]] (APTUs) were affiliated. In Scotland, the APTUs called for mass nonpayment, which rapidly gathered widespread support and spread as far as [[England and Wales]] even though non-payment meant that people could be prosecuted. In some areas, 30% of former ratepayers defaulted. While [[owner-occupier]]s were easy to tax, nonpayers who regularly changed accommodation were almost impossible to trace. The cost of collecting the tax rose steeply, and its returns fell. Unrest grew and resulted in a number of [[poll tax riots]]. The most serious was in a protest at [[Trafalgar Square]], London, on 31 March 1990, of more than 200,000 protesters. [[Terry Fields]], Labour MP for [[Liverpool Broadgreen (UK Parliament constituency)|Liverpool Broadgreen]], was jailed for 60 days for his refusal to pay the poll tax.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Chaplain |first1=Chloe |title=The biggest protests in recent history... and the impact they had |url=https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/brexit/peoples-vote-march-poll-tax-political-protest-impact-list-505974 |work=inews.co.uk |date=22 October 2018 |language=en |access-date=14 October 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191014184036/https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/brexit/peoples-vote-march-poll-tax-political-protest-impact-list-505974 |archive-date=14 October 2019 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Wheal|first1=Chris |title=Poll tax is history |url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/1999/apr/14/guardiansocietysupplement4 |work=The Guardian |date=14 April 1999}}</ref>

This unrest was a factor in the fall of Thatcher. Her successor, [[John Major]], replaced the Community Charge with the [[Council Tax]], similar to the rating system that preceded the Community Charge.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Higham |first1=Nick |title=Thatcher's Community Charge miscalculation |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38382416 |work=BBC News |date=30 December 2016}}</ref> The main differences were that it was levied on capital value rather than notional rental value of a property, and that it had a 25% discount for single-occupancy dwellings.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Waterhouse |first1=Rosie |title=Uproar predicted over council tax |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uproar-predicted-over-council-tax-1551107.html |work=The Independent |date=13 September 1992 |language=en |access-date=14 October 2019 |archive-date=14 October 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191014184035/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uproar-predicted-over-council-tax-1551107.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In 2015, [[William Arthur Waldegrave, Baron Waldegrave of North Hill|Lord Waldegrave]] reflected in his memoirs that the Community Charge was all his own work and that it was a serious mistake. Although he felt the policy looked like it would work, it was implemented differently from his predictions "They went gung-ho and introduced it overnight in one go, which was never my plan and I thought they must know what they were doing – but they didn't."<ref>{{Cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-33594395 | title=Poll tax a mistake, says Waldegrave| work=BBC News| date=20 July 2015}}</ref>

==France==
In France, a poll tax, the [[French Poll Tax of 1695|capitation of 1695]], was first imposed by King [[Louis XIV of France|Louis XIV]] in 1695 as a temporary measure to finance the [[War of the League of Augsburg]], and thus repealed in 1699.  It was resumed during the [[War of Spanish Succession]] and in 1704 set on a permanent basis, remaining until the end of the ''[[Ancien regime]]''.

Like the English poll tax, the French capitation tax was assessed on rank – for taxation persons, French society was divided in twenty-two "classes", with the [[Dauphin of France|Dauphin]] (a class by himself) paying 2,000 [[French livre|livres]], princes of the blood paying 1500 livres, and so on down to the lowest class, composed of day laborers and servants, who paid 1 livre each. The bulk of the common population was covered by four classes, paying 40, 30, 10 and 3 livres respectively. Unlike most other direct French taxes, nobles and clergy were not exempted from capitation taxes. It did, however, exempt the [[mendicant order]]s and the poor who contributed less than 40 sous.

The French clergy managed to temporarily escape capitation assessment by promising to pay a total sum of 4 million livres per annum in 1695, and then obtained permanent exemption in 1709 with a lump sum payment of 24 million livres. The ''[[Pays d'états]]'' (Brittany, Burgundy, etc.) and many towns also escaped assessment by promising annual fixed payments. The nobles did not escape assessment, but they obtained the right to appoint their own capitation tax assessors, which allowed them to escape most of the burden (in one calculation, they escaped {{frac|7|8}} of it).

Compounding the burden, the assessment on the capitation did not remain stable. The ''pays de taille personelle'' (basically, ''[[pays d'élection]]'', the bulk of France and Aquitaine) secured the ability to assess the capitation tax proportionally to the taille – which effectively meant adjusting the burden heavily against the lower classes. According to the estimates of [[Jacques Necker]] in 1788, the capitation tax was so riddled in practice, that the privileged classes (nobles and clergy and towns) were largely exempt, while the lower classes were heavily crushed: the lowest peasant class, originally assessed to pay 3 livres, were now paying 24, the second lowest, assessed at 10 livres, were now paying 60 and the third-lowest assessed at 30 were paying 180. The total collection from the capitation, according to Necker in 1788, was 41 million livres, well short of the 54 million estimate, and it was projected that the revenues could have doubled if the exemptions were revoked and the original 1695 assessment properly restored.

The old capitation tax was repealed with the [[French Revolution]] and replaced, on 13 January 1791,<ref>{{cite book|last=Jones|first=Colin|title=The Longman Companion to the French Revolution|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xcXKAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA15|year=2014|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-317-87080-7|page=15}}</ref> with a new poll tax as part of the ''contribution personnelle mobilière'', which lasted well into the late 19th century. It was fixed for every individual at "three days's labor" (assessed locally, but by statute, no less than 1 franc 50 centimes and no more than 4 francs 50 centimes, depending on the area). A dwelling tax (''impôt sur les portes et fenêtres'', similar to the English window-tax) was imposed in 1798.

==New Zealand==
{{Main|New Zealand head tax}}
New Zealand imposed a poll tax on Chinese immigrants during the 19th and early 20th centuries as part of their broader efforts to reduce the number of Chinese immigrants.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://natlib.govt.nz/events/the-poll-tax-on-chinese-in-new-zealand-what-s-it-all-about-november-06-2019|title=The Poll Tax on Chinese in New Zealand: what's it all about? &#124; Events &#124; National Library of New Zealand|website=natlib.govt.nz|access-date=20 November 2020|archive-date=28 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200728092420/https://natlib.govt.nz/events/the-poll-tax-on-chinese-in-new-zealand-what-s-it-all-about-november-06-2019|url-status=dead}}</ref> The poll tax was effectively lifted in the 1930s following the [[Second Sino-Japanese War|invasion of China by Japan]], and was finally repealed in 1944. Prime Minister [[Helen Clark]] offered New Zealand's Chinese community an official apology for the poll tax on 12 February 2002.<ref name="New Zealand Chinese Poll Tax Apology">{{cite web
 |last       = New Zealand Office of Ethnic Affairs
 |author-link = New Zealand Office of Ethnic Affairs
 |year       = 2002
 |url        = http://www.dia.govt.nz/oeawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/What-We-Do-Consultations-Formal-Apology
 |title      = Chinese Poll Tax in New Zealand – Formal Apology
 |publisher  = New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs
 |access-date = 18 August 2006
}}{{dead link|date=March 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Address to Chinese New Year celebrations|url=http://www.beehive.govt.nz/speech/address-chinese-new-year-celebrations|access-date=2021-08-26|website=The Beehive|language=en}}</ref>

==Poland–Lithuania==
{{Main|Jewish poll tax}}
The [[Jewish poll tax]] was a poll tax imposed on the [[Jews]] in [[Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth]]. It was later absorbed into the ''[[hiberna]]'' tax.<ref name=scep>''Scepter of Judah: The Jewish Autonomy in the Eighteenth-Century Crown Poland'', [https://books.google.com/books?id=1fGQfpMdp84C&pg=PA15 pp. 15–16]</ref><ref name=camb>The Cambridge Dictionary of Judaism and Jewish Culture, p. 118 ([https://www.scribd.com/document/245942663/The-Cambridge-Dictionary-of-Judaism-and-Jewish-Culture browse for "skhumot" online])</ref>

==Roman Empire==
{{See also|List of Roman taxes}}
The [[ancient Romans]] imposed a ''tributum capitis'' (poll tax) as one of the principal direct taxes on the peoples of the Roman provinces (''Digest'' 50, tit.15). In the Republican period, poll taxes were principally collected by private [[Tax farming|tax farmers]] (''[[publican]]i''), but from the time of Emperor [[Augustus]], the collections were gradually transferred to magistrates and the senates of provincial cities. The Roman [[census]] was conducted periodically in the provinces to draw up and update the poll tax register.

The Roman poll tax fell principally on Roman subjects in the provinces, but not on Roman citizens. Towns in the provinces who possessed the ''Jus Italicum'' (enjoying the "privileges of Italy") were exempted from the poll tax. The 212 edict of Emperor [[Caracalla]] (which formally conferred Roman citizenship on all residents of Roman provinces) did not, however, exempt them from the poll tax.

The Roman poll tax was deeply resented—[[Tertullian]] bewailed the poll tax as a "badge of slavery"—and it provoked numerous revolts in the provinces.{{Citation needed|date=March 2023}}
Perhaps most famous is the [[First Jewish Revolt|Zealot revolt]] in [[Judaea]] of 66 AD. After the [[destruction of the temple]] in 70 AD, the Emperor [[Vespasian]] imposed an extra poll tax on Jews throughout the empire, the ''[[Fiscus Judaicus|fiscus judaicus]]'', of two [[denarius|denarii]] each.

==Russia==
The [[Russian Empire]] imposed a poll tax in 1718.<ref>{{cite book
  | editor-last  = Vidal-Naquet
  | editor-first = Pierre
  | title        = The Collins Atlas of World History
  | date         = 1987
  | publisher    = William Collins Sons & Co Ltd
  | location     = Great Britain
  | isbn         = 978-0-00-217776-4
  | page         = 178
}}</ref> [[Nikolai Bunge|Nikolay Bunge]], [[Ministry of Finance of the Russian Empire|Finance Minister]] from 1881 to 1886 under Emperor [[Alexander III of Russia|Alexander III]], abolished it in 1886.<ref>
{{cite book
  | last      = Holland
  | first     = Andy
  | series    = Access to History
  | title     = Russia and its rulers 1855–1964
  | date      = 2010
  | publisher = Hodder Education
  | location  = Great Britain
  | isbn      = 978-0-340-98370-6
  | page      = 126
}}
</ref> Poll taxes in Imperial Russia were determined by [[revision list]] enumerations.

==United States==

===Poll tax===
{{main|Poll taxes in the United States}}
[[File:PollTaxRecieptJefferson1917.JPG|right|thumb|upright=1.15|Receipt for payment of poll tax, [[Jefferson Parish, Louisiana]], 1917 (the $1 tax has the purchasing power of ${{formatnum:{{Inflation|US|1|1917|r=0}}}} today)]]

Prior to the mid 20th century, a poll tax was implemented in some U.S. state and local jurisdictions and paying it was a requirement before one could exercise one's [[Voting rights in the United States|right to vote]]. After this right was extended to all races by the [[Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fifteenth Amendment]] to the Constitution, many Southern states enacted poll taxes as a means of excluding African-American voters, most of whom were poor and unable to pay a tax. So as not to disenfranchise many whites, such laws sometimes included a clause exempting any people who had voted prior to enactment of the laws.<ref>{{cite web |title=Guinn & Beal v. United States, 238 U.S. 347 (1915) |url=https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/238/347/ |website=Justia}}</ref> The poll tax, along with [[literacy tests]] and extra-legal intimidation,<ref>{{Cite web | url=http://www.crmvet.org/info/lithome.htm | title=Civil Rights Movement – Literacy Tests & Voter Applications | access-date=19 October 2014 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151116022837/http://www.crmvet.org/info/lithome.htm | archive-date=16 November 2015 | url-status=dead }}</ref> such as by the [[Ku Klux Klan]], achieved the desired effect of [[Disenfranchisement after the Reconstruction Era|disenfranchising African Americans]].

Generally, in the United States, the term "poll tax" is used to mean a tax that must be paid in order to vote, rather than a capitation tax simply. For example, a bill that passed the Florida House of Representatives in April 2019 has been compared to a poll tax because it requires former felons to pay all "financial obligations" related to their sentence, including court fines, fees, and judgments, before their voting rights will be restored as required by a referendum that passed with 64% of the vote in 2018.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theroot.com/is-this-the-new-poll-tax-florida-house-passes-bill-req-1834301084|title=Is This the New Poll Tax? Florida House Passes Bill Requiring Former Felons to Pay Up Before They Can Vote|last=Judge|first=Monique|website=The Root|date=25 April 2019 |language=en-US|access-date=2019-04-25}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.npr.org/2018/11/07/665031366/over-a-million-florida-ex-felons-win-right-to-vote-with-amendment-4|title=Over 1 Million Florida Felons Win Right To Vote With Amendment 4|website=NPR.org|date=7 November 2018|language=en|access-date=2019-04-25|last1=Mak|first1=Tim}}</ref>

The [[Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Twenty-fourth Amendment]], ratified in 1964, prohibits both [[US Congress|Congress]] and the [[State legislature (United States)|states]] from conditioning the right to vote in federal elections on payment of a poll tax or any other type of tax. Poll taxes for State and local elections were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in ''[[Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections]]''.

===Capitation and federal taxation===
{{Main|Taxation in the United States}}

The [[Article One of the United States Constitution#Limits on Congress|ninth section]] of Article One of the Constitution places several limits on Congress' powers. Among them: "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken". Capitation here means a tax of a uniform, fixed amount per taxpayer.<ref name="US State Dept constitution">{{cite web
 |last         = United States Department of State
 |author-link  = United States Department of State
 |year         = 2004
 |url          = http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/constitution/constitution.htm
 |title        = The Constitution of the United States of America with Explanatory Notes
 |work         = US Department of State web site
 |publisher    = United States
 |access-date  = 18 May 2008
 |archive-url  = https://web.archive.org/web/20080514004923/http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/constitution/constitution.htm
 |archive-date = 14 May 2008
 |url-status   = dead
}}</ref>  [[Direct tax]] means a tax levied directly by the United States [[Federal government of the United States|federal government]] on taxpayers, as opposed to a tax on events or transactions.<ref name="US Treasury Factsheet on Tax System">{{cite web
 |last        = United States Department of the Treasury
 |author-link  = United States Department of the Treasury
 |url         = http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml
 |title       = History of the U.S. Tax System
 |work        = US Treasury Department : Education : Fact Sheets : Taxes
 |publisher   = United States
 |access-date  = 4 August 2009
 |url-status     = dead
 |archive-url  = https://web.archive.org/web/20101127050245/http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml
 |archive-date = 27 November 2010
 |df          = dmy-all
}}</ref> The United States government levied direct taxes from time to time during the 18th and early 19th centuries. It levied direct taxes on the owners of houses, land, slaves and estates in the late 1790s but cancelled the taxes in 1802.{{citation needed|date=November 2016}}

An income tax is neither a poll tax nor a capitation, as the amount of tax will vary from person to person, depending on each person's income. Until a United States Supreme Court decision in 1895, all income taxes were deemed to be excises (i.e., indirect taxes). The [[Revenue Act of 1861]] established the first [[income tax]] in the United States, to pay for the cost of the [[American Civil War]]. This income tax was abolished after the war, in 1872. Another income tax statute in 1894 was overturned in ''[[Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.]]'' in 1895, where the [[United States Supreme Court|Supreme Court]] held that income taxes on income from property, such as rent income, interest income, and dividend income (however excepting income taxes on income from "occupations and labor" if only for the reason of not having been challenged in the case, "We have considered the act only in respect of the tax on income derived from real estate, and from invested personal property") were to be treated as direct taxes. Because the statute in question had not apportioned income taxes on income from property by population, the statute was ruled unconstitutional. Finally, [[ratification]] of the [[Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution]] in 1913 made possible modern income taxes, by limiting the Sixteenth Amendment income tax to the class of indirect excises (i.e. excises, duties, and imposts) – thus requiring no apportionment,<ref name="BRUSHABER v. UNION PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)">{{cite web
  | url       = http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=240&invol=1
  | title     = BRUSHABER v. UNION PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)
  | publisher = FindLaw
  | work      = FindLaw : Supreme Court
}}</ref>
<ref name="STANTON v. BALTIC MINING CO, 240 U.S. 103 (1916)">{{cite web
  | url       = http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=240&invol=103
  | title     = STANTON v. BALTIC MINING CO, 240 U.S. 103 (1916)
  | publisher = FindLaw
  | work      = FindLaw : Supreme Court
}}</ref> a practice that would remain unchanged into the 21st century.

===Employment-based head taxes===
Various cities, including [[Chicago]] and [[Denver]], have levied head taxes with a set rate per employee targeted at large employers.<ref>{{cite news |date=9 May 2018 |title=Seattle head tax: How 2 other big cities fared |url=https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/seattle/seattle-head-tax-how-2-other-big-cities-fared/281-550670446 |publisher=[[KING-TV|KING 5]] |access-date=12 June 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Seattle backs new tax on largest companies, including Amazon|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/14/seattle-city-councils-new-tax-on-companies-including-amazon.html|access-date=15 May 2018|work=CNBC|agency=Reuters|date=15 May 2018|quote=The head tax approved on Monday is not the first. Denver has enacted a similar tax, and Chicago had one but repealed it. Seattle itself had a head tax in effect from 2006 to 2009}}</ref> After Cupertino postponed head tax proposals to 2020, Mountain View became the only city in Silicon Valley to continue to pursue such type of taxes.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sarwari |first=Khalida |date=1 August 2018 |title=Cupertino shelves proposed 'head tax' on Apple employees for now |work=The Mercury News |url=https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/07/31/cupertino-shelves-proposed-head-tax-on-apple-employees-for-now/ |access-date=2 August 2018 |quote=The council's 4–0 decision to wait until 2020 before putting the tax proposal before voters leaves Mountain View as the only Silicon Valley city proceeding with the so-called head tax this year.}}</ref>

In 2018, the [[Seattle]] city council proposed a "[[Seattle head tax|head tax]]" of $500 per year per employee.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Lee |first=Jessica |date=10 May 2018 |title=How did we get here? A look back on Seattle's head-tax plan and Amazon's response |work=Seattle Times |url=https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/how-did-we-get-here-a-look-back-on-seattles-head-tax-plan-and-amazons-response/ |access-date=11 May 2018 |quote=The Seattle Times has reported on the so-called "head tax" proposal}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Seattle head tax 101: What to know about the proposal|url=http://mynorthwest.com/983563/seattle-head-tax-101/|access-date=11 May 2018|work=MyNorthwest|quote=The Seattle had tax proposal is an employee hours tax}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=NEW SEATTLE HEAD TAX PROPOSAL SETS UP POTENTIAL CLASH IN COUNCIL MEETING TODAY|url=https://www.king5.com/amp/article?section=news&subsection=politics&headline=new-seattle-head-tax-proposal-sets-up-potential-clash-in-council-meeting-today&contentId=281-551101996|access-date=11 May 2018|work=KING 5|date=11 May 2018|quote=A new proposal to Seattle City Council's controversial head tax legislation could bring a compromise}}</ref> The proposed tax was lowered to $275 per year per employee, was passed, and became "the biggest head tax in U.S. history,"<ref>{{cite news |last1=Daniels |first=Chris |last2=Brand |first2=Natalie |date=14 May 2018 |title=Seattle Mayor Durkan vows to sign head tax compromise |work=[[KGW]] |url=https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/seattle/seattle-mayor-durkan-vows-to-sign-head-tax-compromise/281-551930021 |access-date=15 May 2018 |quote=The head tax is the largest in U.S. history}}</ref> though it was repealed less than a month later.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Johnson |first=Eric M. |date=2018-06-12 |title=Seattle City Council repeals 'head tax' weeks after enactment |language= |work=Reuters |url=https://jp.reuters.com/article/us-seattle-tax-idUSKBN1J82UB |access-date=2023-06-23}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Corvée]]
* [[Fixed tax]]
* [[Hut tax]]
*[[Constrained equal losses]] – a similar rule in the context of bankruptcy problems.

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary|head tax}}
* {{cite EB1911|wstitle=Poll-tax|volume=22|pages=6–7}}
* [http://www.exploregenealogy.co.uk/PollTaxMiddleAges.html Middle Ages Poll Tax]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20041212022407/http://www.caliach.com/paulr/news/polltax/index.html Pictures by Paul Ross, who witnessed the riots]
* [http://www.militant.org.uk/PollTax.html The battle that brought down Thatcher] – a perspective by the [[Trotskyist]] [[Militant (Trotskyist group)|Militant]] group

{{Property navbox}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Taxation in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Taxation in the United States]]
[[Category:Poll taxes| ]]