Yes he was. That is why he took part in the Peasants Revolt in 1381. If he was a royal or if he was rich then he would be okay with the taxes (which were a problem at the time after the black death) and would be able to pay them.
Peasant
Wat Tyler was the leader of the Peasant's Revolt in 1381 against King Richard II.
Wat Tyler started the peasant revolt in 1381.
Wat Tyler may have been a hero to his followers in the Peasant's Rebellion, but would have appeared to be a traitor to his king.
Wat Tyler-he started the peasants' revolt and marched to London to rebel however he was beheaded!
If you're referring to The Peasant's Revolt, aka; Wat Tyler's Rebellion, that was in June of 1381.
He was hung, drawn and quartered in the same manner as William Wallace of "Braveheart " fame. Tyler was the leader of the "Peasant Rebellion" that occurred during the reign of Richard the Second of England in about the year 1381
Wat Tyler and John Ball were involved in the peasants revolt of 1381 .But the person who started was actually Wat TylerWat Tyler (pronounced = What Tiler)
It ended during the end of the summer of 1381
In most cases a peasant became a peasant by default. If the parents where peasants the child was also a peasant.
A peasant
King Richard II was 14 years old at the time and had little involvement with the policy measures that led to the peasant revolt of 1381. The leader of the revolt - Wat Tyler - was however killed by his courtiers during a meeting with Richard. Richard II then allowed the othe peasant leaders to be pursued and executed. That ended the revolt and Richard during his lifetime did nothing to address the peasant's existing situation. The so-called Poll Tax - the reason for the revolt - had its name changed afterwards, but was not abolished.