Dan Mitchell discusses the current tax code and offers solutions for fundamental tax reform.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, April 15th, 2008 at 12:34 pm and is filed under Taxes.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Giving money to the government is like giving booze to an alcoholic. They will consume all of it. The next day they won’t remember what they did with it and then they’ll demand more. We need to cut spending dramatically. Once that is done then any type of tax reform becomes much easier.
Yea, boy I hope I never become rich so that those nasty “high” tax rates kick in…I’ll be sure to under-achieve so that doesn’t happen…right…
I agree that taxes on savings that most people have access to (like savings accounts, CDs, etc.) should be reduced or eliminated though. The problem with reducing all “capital gains” taxes is that a lot of rich people make their money primarily through this method, and they would get off easier as a result while the “little guy” gets screwed, again. Oh, everyone hates the tax man…but how are we gonna fund all these wars without him??
I can’t believe we forced the Iraqis to take a flat tax. By that aside, oh I can’t wait for our economy to race ahead, like the countries of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, Slovakia, the Ukraine, Romania, Georgia, Iceland, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Kazakhstan…if it’s good enuff for Borat, it’s good enuff for us!
A number of years ago a CPA friend of mine talked about flat tax to me. At the time he said the putting a 5 percentfederal tax on everything but food would give the government more money the the would need to run things,also nobody could cheat if you spend a dollar or a million you would pay your fair share. Besides operating a vechicle in the US is a necessity,not a luxuary,right! Thanks for the ear. Bill
Billy, I believe your friend was talking about the “fair tax” (a national sales tax), not the “flat tax” (a single flat tax rate for everyone). The flat tax has obvious deficiencies, but also has some attractive components as well.
For me, the flat tax fails because it is centered around the individual actor, not families. Let’s say Bob and Alex both make $50k per year. But Alex has three kids. So they both pay exactly the same in taxes, but Alex has a much harder time making end meets because he has to pay for more food, medical care, additional housing, etc. So Alex is basically penalized for being married and having children. I don’t that’s a particularly American or Judeo-Christian value, do you? But that’s one of the consequences of the flat tax. It’s an economic incentive to not marry and to not have children, among other things.
The current tax system is not without its problems, no doubt. But ostensibly it was designed with American family values in mind at its inception. In other words, American tax policy (at least in theory) had a guiding philosophy behind it—a philosophy that takes into account the kinds of lives we believed Americans are entitled to lead, and balances individual responsibility with collective action on behalf of those who are suffering or struggling. Those are American values, and it’s important the tax system reflect all of those values.
The flat tax satisfies a visceral want for so-called “fairness,” that I believe arises out of a complex, confusing tax regime, as well as a distrust of government born in the last few decades. In the face of this kind of arcanery and bamboozlement, the simplicity of the “flat tax” is very attractive. But when we apply the concept to our own values, to the rest of the morals we hold dear, it’s harder to support. Since we believe that all were created equal, deserve happiness, and can and should live their lives to the fullest, it would be incongruous indeed to penalize working families with children, for example.
What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.
Both flat tax and “fair tax” are bad taxes that are regressive. Payroll, self-employment, and gas taxes should be eliminated by the federal government. However, taxes on corporate profits need to be increased and all loopholes eliminated. Capital gains tax need to be increased targeting wealthy investors. Federal estate tax needs to be increased also on rich people’s estates. At the state level property taxes should be eliminated and replaced with an intangible tax like the one Florida used to have. General sales tax should be eliminated and be replaced with a luxury tax that taxes only luxuries like boats, yachts, luxury cars, expensive jewelry, expensive art. Basically things primarily bought by wealthy people. Tax on alcohol and cigarettes should be increased also to discourage people from buying these harmful substances.
How can either be regressive when they affect everyone the same way. Flat tax hits all payors at the same rate, and the fair tax is a user by choice tax. If you use you pay, if you don’t you won’t.
We need no increases to any current tax, but instead we need to eliminate the “death tax”, eliminate capital gains taxes, and reduce the rate on everyone. Like at no time in my lifetime do we need the economic stimulous this would provide as now.
Congress should act quickly to make permanent the “Bush” tax cuts and eliminate the “death” tax so that money can be put back into our economy, rather than giving it to government. If it is true that government is the people who work and pay taxes, we should all be outraged at what is happening, and stand up and say, we ‘re mad and we aren’t going to take it anymore!
To make April 15 just another day should be the goal of every true American.
Income vs. sales tax doesn’t make much difference. How much money the government takes, how much burden to manage taxes, and how visible your taxes are do. Flat tax and ‘fair tax’ are both a massive improvement by these measures.
Re: Ty
Both flat and ‘fair’ tax proposals are strongly ‘progressive’ at low income levels, the ‘fair’ tax more so. They become flat at higher income levels, derided as ‘regressive’ in the politics of envy.
Raising corporate, capitol gains, estate, and ‘luxury’ taxes would be economically ruinous.
I favor a tax code where corporate and income tax are both covered by the same simple rules and low rates, and estates are untaxed.
Mister Guy Said, “I can’t believe we forced the Iraqis to take a flat tax.”
First I’ve heard of a flat tax being forced on the Iraqis. My impression is their government chose that tax structure.
My impression is their government chose that tax structure.
That was a mind-numbingly silly thing to say… No wonder you never blog about the war.
How can either be regressive when they affect everyone the same way. Flat tax hits all payors at the same rate, and the fair tax is a user by choice tax. If you use you pay, if you don’t you won’t.
Perhaps you’d like to read my post above:
Let’s say Bob and Alex both make $50k per year. But Alex has three kids. So they both pay exactly the same in taxes, but Alex has a much harder time making end meets because he has to pay for more food, medical care, additional housing, etc. So Alex is basically penalized for being married and having children.
You see, the flat tax does not “affect everyone the same way.” It affects families more than single people. Same with the “Fair Tax.” Why must I be penalized simply for having children?
I hope Ty is being facetious. Sickle i think you ignore that a flax tax would effectively mandate a decrease in federal spending, immediately, given the entire population would be under the same tax structure. This would mean a much greater share of revenue in the hands of people (families included) than ever before. Thats practicality, not principle. The current system is written with hundreds of tax credits, exemptions, and subsidies for people with homes, marriages, families ect. Would you suggest a flat tax with tax exemptions? It seems fair tax would better serve the interests of all people, if it were at all feasible that is. Mister guy, what “little guy” are you talking about and how the hell would reducing capital gains taxes screw him? By giving him better wages with greater revenue share, or how bout a better pension plan with the higher returns of capital investment? These were the results of lower capital gains taxes during the 80’s and into the 90’s. Tell me how your assessment makes any sense given tax structure is not and never has been a zero sum game (thus a deficit) nor a simple re-distributive system. Also, although you’re just being clever, war spending is one of the off the budget expenditures and does not come into revenue allocation accounting for the government. We’re running a huge deficit through uncontrolled spending alone. War spending is simply a lagniappe.
Would you suggest a flat tax with tax exemptions? It seems fair tax would better serve the interests of all people, if it were at all feasible that is.
The “Fair Tax” on purchases has the same problems as the “Flat Tax.” A family of four is going to be taxed more because they need more resources, even if food is exempted. Anyone who has children or dependents is going to have a higher tax burden (”burden” being the key word here), regardless of income. So when we as Americans claim to want people to get married and have families, I believe our tax code should represent those values as well, rather than discourage that behavior.
Before I address your question, I had to comment on this:
Also, although you’re just being clever, war spending is one of the off the budget expenditures and does not come into revenue allocation accounting for the government.
In fact, we’re not “just being clever.” Anyone who is truly interested in fiscal responsibility cares about War spending, how that money is allocated, where it goes, where the waste happens, etc. Regardless of whether the government is “accounting” the war, it’s still taxpayer money being spent, and the waste and loss of taxpayer money has been widely reported-upon. To say that spending on Iraq “is simply a lagniappe” either means you have no idea how much money we’re spending, or that you don’t know the meaning of the word lagniappe. You are willfully sticking your head in the sand here, which makes me think you’re not really being honest about this debate.
So, on to your question: Would I suggest a flat tax with tax exemptions, therefore?
I answered this best above, so I’m just gonna quote myself:
What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.
The FairTax is a progressive consumption tax. Currently the working poor have “Income Tax” and “Payroll” (Social Security & Medicare tax) removed from their paycheck before they get it. The FairTax eliminates the Federal Income Tax and Payroll tax, so you get all your money up front! In addition you will get a monthly prebate (amount is dependent on number of members in the family) to pay the tax on necessities up to the poverty level. Don’t forget, with the Income Tax every products price has the embedded cost of complying with the Income Tax. That goes away with the FairTax, therefore reducing the cost of products. This concept untaxes the working poor, promotes savings and stimulates the economy. The FairTax is a progressive tax rate is based on lifestyle and spending choices rather than earnings, which all too often penalizes hard work and provides a disincentive for achievement.Further, the FairTax is an actual bill before congress, H.R. 25 with over 70 co-sponsors. See a comparison at http://www.pafairtax.org/resrcs/FlatTaxFairTaxComparison.pdf
Sickle, you didn’t answer my question. And in terms of accounting, war spending is indeed just an add on. Your twisting my argument into a semantics debate while i was simply pointing out the illegitimacy of Mr. Guy’s claims. I’m not arguing whether or not war spending is wasteful, thats a whole other issue, but whether its included in “deficit spending” debates. Clearly, given the way it is accounted it cannot be. Don’t generalize my claims and answer my question without using “principles” in place of logic.
@ Cguy. I have no idea where you believe this turned into a discussion about the deficit. It’s not. It’s about how taxpayer’s money is spent and tax codes. You cannot just pick and choose what spending you want to include in a debate about that. Moving the goalposts like you’re doing is dishonest. If we want to discuss deficit spending, fine, let’s do it. But this thread has been about a wider issue.
And again, whether or not it’s ultimately “accounted,” it’s still taxpayer money that will have to be paid so that we can pay back our loans to China. You are the one having a semantic debate over what we can count as “spending” or not. The truth is that it’s all spending, at it’s all funded by our tax dollars. So let’s stop playing Arthur Andersen here.
Since you don’t seem to understand my answer to your question, I’ll try again. I didn’t want to specifically call out the serious flaw in your logic that your question demonstrated. I hoped instead my answer would allow you to see it for yourself. But since that failed, I have no choice but to continue:
Put simply: a “flat tax with exemptions” isn’t a flat tax anymore. I don’t know what you’d want to call it, but the moment you start heading down that slippery slope, you’ve abandoned the simplicity of the flat tax for something more akin to what we have now. So, logically, there really is no such thing as a flat tax “with exemptions.” Nor can there be.
Which is why I am arguing a more holistic approach to the problem, which is, again:
What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.
The falt and fair taxes are regressive because they hit poorer people more disproportionaly than rich people, period. How can the fair tax be a “choice tax”?? Can we just *choose* not to buy anything ever? I think not…
We didn’t hand over the Iraqi economy until after Bremmer made it over into a Right-wingers wet dream…give me a break.
“a flax tax would effectively mandate a decrease in federal spending”
Exactly!!! This is what these kind of proposals are really all about…starving the federal govt. of revenue so that, through the back door, “smaller govt.” can be achieved. Reducing capital gains taxes predominately benefits the rich, which means that the poor will ultimately have to take up the slack.
“war spending is one of the off the budget expenditures and does not come into revenue allocation accounting for the government. We’re running a huge deficit through uncontrolled spending alone. War spending is simply a lagniappe.”
You’ve got to be kidding me…war spending is an unexpected gift or benefit?!?! Sure, the Bush Regime has continually dodged going to Congress and the American people with the real cost of the War by constantly asking for supplemental after supplemental spending bill(s). It’s cowardly IMO. Bush’s supply-side debacle and endless War is rapidly bankrupting this country, period…wake up…
It doesn’t look like any one has looked at HR1040 that is proposed. It does take into account marriage and children. And, Sickle, Your artsy fartsy semantic hand-waving
“What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.”
doesn’t give any specifics and is open to interpretation by each as to what it would mean in the way of specifics. I can imagine that your interpretation is to give everything to the government and then let “them” give us back what “they” think we need. Good solid Marxism.
Let’s first simplify the current tax code with an Optional Flat Tax (which will work to all you critics, because if the tax rate is low enough, even if it is an income tax it won’t really “hurt” a person’s income). Then we can start talking about repealing the 16th amendment and implementing the Fair Tax.
I could personally agree with a combination of both fair tax and flat tax, I would not support a full “fair tax” we are all ultimately taxed on our incomes anyway, (you can only spend what you make or are given). I personally spend about 80% of my income on neccesities @ $30,000/yr. therefor I would be taxed on 80% of my income, whereas someone making $200,000/yr. living in proportion with me would only be taxed on 12% of thier income. Goods cost the same no matter what your income. But if a proportion of this could be offset with a combination flat tax it might ease the burden, while makiing sure illegals, drug dealers, etc. paid at least some tax ie; fair tax. ( 10% flat / 10% fair ).
And, Sickle, Your artsy fartsy semantic hand-waving
That’s easy to say, but you’re wrong. This is not a question of semantics. The flat tax rate isn’t particularly meaningful when combined with a series of so-called “exemptions.” What is to stop later politicians from including further “exemptions” for, say, capital gains, or charitable contributions, or automobile taxes, or business expenses, or…etc. etc.?? Surely you see where this could head.
Unless you have a governing philosophy regarding taxes and the role of government (preferably one that shares American values), there will be nothing to stop politicians from taking your “flat tax” and corrupting it just like they have with the present tax system.
I do not understand these attacks on me. Seriously, I’m not saying anything radical or liberal or anything. I’m saying things that are just common sense: the tax code is wack and needs to be scrapped entirely, exemptions are a slippery slope no matter what kind of tax rate system you use (progressive or flat), and that we need an underlying tax philosophy that all Americans can grasp and (hopefully) a majority can agree with that will allow us to call our elected reps on their bullsh!t. Why do you guys have such a problem with that?
Taxes need to be left up to the individual states, the Federal government should only collect taxes from the State government, based on population and per capita income, (not individual citizens), States should have the choice how and where to raise this money, (Geogia is a lot different than California). Some States are more suited to one form of taxation over another, even on the city and town levels industry and economics differ in this way, big industry areas might favor a higher fair tax while areas with large tourism markets might favor a lower sales tax to encourage their market, while having a higher flat tax on people who can afford to live in these resort / tourist areas. This whould eliminate pork spending because the state whould be spending its own money on its own prodjects, and we could hold our local officials accountable for abuse of this system a lot easier than the Fed.
Look…the Articles of Confederation are long since over & done with, and they didn’t work out too well BTW. This states-rights-limited-federal-govt. stuff is a load of baloney IMO.
I’ve only read a few of these posts and one thing is apparent. The same thing that always arises with a discussion of the Flat Tax versus the FairTax. First of all either would be better than the current system. However we had a Flat tax in 1986. Many deductions were eliminated and two tax brackets were installed. Simple, clean. Yet amendments were made to this within weeks. Now we have incurred 16,000 amendments to the tax code since then. So much for a Flat Tax.
If people will research the FairTax with an open serious mind and come away opposed to it, so be it. Lets remember that in 1776 only about 30 % of the population wanted to throw off the shackles of England and unfair taxation. The Founding Fathers distain for a tax on income is well documented. Looking at this a different way, if we had the FairTax for the last 95 years, would you support creating IRS and our current system? I think not.
For all who have posted here, I thing there’s one thing we could agree on, that being an open and honest debate on this subject on national TV during primetime.
A 10% flat tax ($25,000 floor for the poor) on EVERYONE, BUSINESS included would be fair. We’d all be paying the same, “10%”. Forget the dollar amount, you would be paying the same as your neighbor, 10%, no deductions. The Country would be in the black in no time.
10%, no deductions!
5% is all that is needed! No deductions and the 5% is invested in the S&P500 in a retirement savings account. Retirees live on interest only payments each month, the principal is never spent. After death the balance in the IRA is converted to cash and paid to the U.S. Treasury!
This concept will produce more money to the U.S.Treasury than the present income tax system.
The “necessary and proper” clause (also known as the Elastic Clause) refers to the provision in Article One of the United States Constitution, section 8, clause 18, that “The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” This clause, along with the Commerce Clause, provides the constitutional basis for a wide variety of federal laws, including criminal laws, which were not considered implied powers of a power to regulate by the old Anti-Federalists.
“Forget the dollar amount”
Sure, the rich pay some miniscule amount in taxes and that’s no big deal…sure…
No tax until death?? Motivating the federal govt. to benefit monetarily ONLY when people die could lead to some nasty actions on the part of the govt. IMO…no thanx there.
I could personally agree with a combination of both fair tax and flat tax, I would not support a full “fair tax” as we are all ultimately taxed on our incomes anyway. I don’t know anyone who makes over $100k sho didn’t give up most of their 20’s in school or working 80+ hours a week. They invested in their future and should not be penalized to subsidize those who made their 20’s a big party. This is like the current mortgage crisis. Why should those who were honest, conservative and hard working subsidze those who weren’t
I live in Canada and there is a reason why Canadians go to America for critical health care. It is because Canada is a prime example of what happens to an economy and its services when financial incentive for hard work is removed. People make decisions and need to live with ther ramifications.
Dear Joan Loof,
Lose the income tax! Do you realize that the Federal Government has a record of every dollar that I have ever earned? You, too, probably, unless you chose not to report it. Do you realize that in a country where you are “innocent until proven guilty”, and you are protected from testifying against yourself, that if you do not report your income, you will be penalized and may be criminally prosecuted? Any kind of income tax is contrary to the premises that our Constitution is based on.
Dear Paul,
A 10% flat tax sounds good, but not on business. You forget that any tax on business is just passed on to consumers (that’s me!) as a hidden tax. I would rather see all of the tax I pay, nothing hidden. Better yet, do away with the income tax altogether. The Fair Tax sales tax taxes “resources” rather than income. If multi-billionaire Joe Schmoo relaxes this year, he may have no income whatsoever, especially with the current hit the stock market is suffering (Poor Bill Gates!). But if he is charged a sales tax, he still pays, because he still consumes! Please see my response to Joan for the rest of my tirade.
By the way, breathe deep. The spring air is incredible. I think I will walk the dog!
Whoops! Couldn’t stay away.
Mr. Guy, neither the flat nor the FairTax is “regressive”. That’s a term that was invented to build support for more taxes on the rich. A regressive tax would be a tax that is the same for everyone regardless of income or resources. “Each of our citizens will pay $1000 per year to enjoy the benefits of our government!” That’s regressive! If everyone pays according to their ability (Where have we heard that before?), then that’s progressive. A flat tax is progressive and the FairTax is progressive. In fact, the FairTax is designed to be more progressive than the current tax code through the application of the “prebate”.
Under the Fairtax proposal, you can choose how much tax you pay by the way you spend your money. If you buy a new car, you pay the tax. If you buy a used car, you don’t! What could be clearer?
I choose a tax system that does not require me to report income or file tax papers and allows me to control the amount by which I participate and let’s me invest my money without considering the effect of taxes. Give me the FairTax system or give me . . . help! (You thought I was going to say something else, didn’t you? Remember what happened to that guy!)
Got to walk that dog!
Casey, go read some of the earlier posts in this thread that clearly explain why and under what circumstances both the flat and fair taxes are actually regressive. Think about it just for a second. A single man and the head of a family of four both make $40k per year. Who’s going to pay FAR MORE under a Fair Tax regime, simply because he has a family to feed? Casey, do agree that having children and a stay-at-home parent are things for which we should be financially punished? At least the flat tax has the option for some kind of exemption system, even though it suffers from the same limitations.
This should be obvious, too. It often amazes me that both the Flat and Fair Tax advocates fail to see this very apparent flaw in their systems…
If I understand the FairTax correctly, the single man will get a prebate of $500 per month whereas the family of four will get a prebate of $2000 per month.
“Do you realize that the Federal Government has a record of every dollar that I have ever earned?”
So?? BTW, I guess you think Al Capone got a raw deal then, eh?
Why in the world we would want to base a HUGE amount of our tax structure on a regressive sales tax that actually discourages people from consuming (hello, that’s what the VAST majority of our economy is now based on!) is really, honestly beyond me. Maybe you guys want to re-institute tarrifs on incoming goods too…just like the “good ole days” before the Constitution was amended to allow for a national income tax?
“If everyone pays according to their ability (Where have we heard that before?), then that’s progressive.”
The word is FAIR…learn it and live it. How on earth would buying a used car be exempt from a sales tax??
Every chart I’ve ever seen which attempts to compare how much people in different income tax brackets would pay in taxes under the FairTax have always assumed 100% spending. In reality, everyone is going to save something. The FairTax creates an incentive for people to save. We all bring home our full paychecks and we all control how much we actually pay in taxes by controlling how much we spend.
The FairTax bill (HR 25) specifically repeals the U.S. Codes for income, payroll, and gift and estate taxes. So there is ZERO chance they we could end up with the FairTax and federal income taxes at the same time. State income taxes is a different issue entirely.
The reason many federal officials, Republicans and Democrats, don’t like the FairTax is because they know it’s good for the people and bad for the special interests. They being the special interests.
In the explaination about the elastic clause one paragraph was used from the constitution. This paragraph, when speaking of taxes refers to the uniformity of taxes throughou the U.S. This issue was brought up when the income tax was first proposed and shot down by the Supreme Court. The sixteenth amendment was just a sneaky way of getting around the original wording and intent of the constitution. There was no mass communication in 1913. I doubt that the 16th amendment could pass today.
I have to say this is one of the best threads that FW has had so far. Sickle, don’t take things so personally, its deliberation after all. However, I’ll ask you for a more concrete answer as to what type of tax structure you would advocate. Give specifics rather than answers about “principle’s of American lifestyles” and creating something “a majority of Americans can agree on.” Who would be taxed? Would the structure be progressive? Income vs. sales? Estate and Death taxes? Corporate gains? All of these things are real debatable structures of tax codes.
“What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear”
Your numbers on the prebate are quite off. Have you gone on the website http://www.fairtax.org yet? You’ll get more correct information there then what will ever appear on this blog. You’ll also get quite an education.
That’s not a typo that’s a view of your logic. Since you semi quote Karl Marx and appear to be so against the FairTax and so in love with the income tax, I must assume you are either a socialist or you have a vested interest in the current system.
Under the current tax codes I pay under 20%, I use the long form, write offs etc. Im just wandering how these proposed changes, Fair or flat. whould effect me. I am very open minded to any ideas that would improve life in America, but what about people on assisted living incomes do we just up their hand outs 29% to cope with the fair tax (sales tax) increase, or would they be flat taxed on their current benifits. I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ Ive allready paid income tax on this money. I really dont want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it. It seems to me we need to gain control of wastful spending, ear marks, pork, etc. before we can judge how much taxation we actually require.
Why would you ever consider the Fair of Flat Tax” if there is a tax concept that will:
1. Lower Individual Income Taxes to Zero.
2. Lower Employment Taxes to 2%.
3. Lower State Income Taxes to Zero.
4. Lower Corporation Taxes to Zero.
5. Lower Estate and Excise Taxes to Zero.
6. Give retirees more money each month than Social Security.
7. Allow “stay at home” moms to have a retirement account.
8. Raise the minimum wage.
9. Lower the trade deficit.
10. Simplify the IRS tax code.
11. Lower the cost of goods and services.
12. Provide money to:
Pay for health care.
Buy a home.
Send our children to college.
Investment in business.
I wouldn’t try to prove you wrong. I’d just like to see you create that kind of plan. Good Luck !
AND TO ALL:
The FairTax has 72 co-sponsors in the House. 11 years of research and $22 million put into it, and millions of volunteers nationwide. We should unite to pass the FairTax first. Once We The People show Congress that we indeed can unite they will be far more concerned with us as opposed to their self serving interests. For far too long the people of this country have ignored what goes on in Washington. As long as Billy Bob has his six pack on Friday night and Sally Short Skirt gets her nails done, the world is right. Every four years there’s a big clammier about electing a President. Yet the people who make the laws get elected and reelected over and over and over again. Congress continuously plays the general public for fools. They want the public divided, and we’ve played right into their hands. The posts here reflect the thoughts of some very intelligent people. Yet will the words written here mean anything if they’re not backed up with action. If we can’t unite in changing this horrible tax code and getting the IRS out of our personal lives we will continue to get just what we deserve. This should be our first step in setting this country right.
I went to the website. Instead of wishing you luck to create this plan, I say Wish you luck in getting it passed.
This is another example of why we must first pass the FairTax. Then move to the next level. We can’t strip congress of it’s power over night. They didn’t take it over night.
“State income taxes is a different issue entirely.”
LOL…right…shifting the tax bruden to states and localities…well, don’t bother us with that fact either.
The point of the Elastic Clause discussion is to put to bed this baloney issue that the federal govt. only enjoys very limited powers…it doesn’t…wake up…the States Rights issue has eventually been defeated everytime that it has come up…pro-slavery, anti-Civil Rights, etc.. The phrase States Rights (and all variants of the words and the phrase) does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or its amendments, period.
I’m a progressive BTW…red herrings don’t work anymore thanx.
Wrong again…being a progressive means that you are an advocate for the advancement of workers’ rights & social justice…being a proponent of anti-trust laws, regulation of large corporations & monopolies, as well as government-funded environmentalism, democracy, making governmental operations & services more efficient & rational, the highly-successful New Deal, campaign finance reform, civil liberties, a living wage, universal health care…and you believe that war is LAST resort.
Our right to vote in the USA is administered by the individual states, but what do you think the 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th Amendments were all about? I also feel that we need one, national standard for what constitutes a legal ballot and the ways that ballot can be counted in elections.
Excluding “used” items from a sales tax is a HUGE loophole that can easily be exploited IMO.
The amendments you mention all have to do with eligibility, not the right to vote. As far as the progressive/ socialist thing goes , you are a progressive who used to be a liberal I assume.It is a label based on one’s beliefs. Your beliefs seem to center on government being the solution to all problems, with little or no personal responsibility or accountability. Do you believe this country was founded as a democracy?
The FairTax was crafted to be revenue neutral. Also, it encompasses every segment of society. Poor people buy more used cars than the well to do. Also there is no need to tax something 2,3, or four times. Untaxing used items will create a large loophole in your opinion. In my opinion NOTHING about the FairTax is as bad as the present system
“Your beliefs seem to center on government being the solution to all problems, with little or no personal responsibility or accountability.”
This is the way that you “conservatives” always try to label your opposition. As if the last 7+ years have been all about taking “personal repsonsibility” for the massive failures that have occured. Would getting rid of all school boards in the country be relying on govt. to be “the solution to all problems”?? This country was founded as a representative democracy, which I strongly believe in.
First I am Not a conservative. Second we are a Republic, third we have found common ground, Our school system. The sooner the idea of government schools is trashed the better. I am not happy about the last 7 1/2 years either, in particular the last 16 months. I am not the least bit happy with the current Preidential Candidates. I believe both parties had better people to offer but the media pre-determined who the cadidates would be.
As far as the FairTax goes, it would most likely be the biggest transfer of power back to the people since 1776. When the policitians divide us we are at their mercy. When we unite we are in control. The Amnesty Bill that McCain co-authored died a quick death when our voices were raised in mass.
The same thing is going to happen with the FairTax. Everyday thousands are added to the list of supporters. A little education goes a long way. Opposition to our tax code and the IRS goes back way further than any other issue seen on the nightly news. Hell we fought a revolution over unjust taxes.
Tom Krop
“The FairTax has 72 co-sponsors in the House. 11 years of research and $22 million put into it, and millions of volunteers nationwide.”
Huckabee was a big supporter of the FairTax and there was very little support for him or the FairTax. If a 29% tax is so great and has all of the support you claim why is it no candidate left standing will promote it???? Could it be that it is too complicated? Or maybe bad research?
Man…it’s nothing but the standard party line from you guys eh?
Yea, a “Republic”…meaning a representative democracy, period.
Hold on just a minute…who said anything about getting rid of the idea of “government schools”?? Getting rid of school boards, consoldating school districts, etc. is merely all part of making governmental operations & services more efficient & rational IMO. Yea, it was a shame that the voices of bigotry and intolerance killed the chances for immigration reform IMO.
The FairTax rate is 23% not 29%. Huckabee had tremendous support from the FairTax. The media simply did not report this. They always talked about his religious support
Why don’t the Candidate’s left support it? Simple all three are Senators. They rely too heavily on the present tax code and it’s social engineering aspects. However, don’t be surprised if McCain comes out in support. Not because he’s a Republican but win or lose he’s at the end of his career.
Also don’t forget, all Tax bills originate in the House not the Senate.
The FairTax is not perfect for everyone. It’s just the best at the moment, and has the best chance of getting passed. I like your plan, and I think that is something we should pursue after the FairTax is passed. As I’ve posted before if the people of this country unite when can get congress to listen. If we stay divided they’ll play us like a fiddle.
What ever you want to call it, the taxes paid by a employee for the right to have a job would be 14.2% and to purchase NEW items would be 23%. I still think zero% taxes after 40 years is better!
i AGREE THAT 0 TAX WOULD BE CORRECT AFTER TIME. WHAT THE FAIRTAX WOULD DO IS HOLD THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE. ONCE THE THE ECONOMY GETS REVAMPED AND SUPER CHARGED THE PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DEMAND MORE AND MORE REDUCTIONS. EVENTUALLY GETTING BAC TO 0 TAX.
Tom,
treewrestler says:
“I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ I’ve allready paid income tax on this money. I really don’t want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it.”
What would happen to savings that have been taxed in prior years? Would there be rebates? How would you seperate current income dollars from from saved income dollars? Color code it with some sort of disapearing ink that is applied when you draw it out of the bank and it changes color when it put into a cash register? I quess a special kind of debit card could be used! That be a great way to do it!!!!
First remember the rate is 23% not 29%. Secondly the FairTax would replace the embedded taxes that already exist in the price of goods. It is not in addition to the price of an item. People like yourself and everyone else would no longer be bothered filing tax returns. You will also be receiving the monthly prebate. Therefore if the FairTax is never passed you’ll still be paying the embedded taxes and not receiving the monthly prebate. If you haven’t done so yet, please long onto http://www.fairtax.org. Much of the knowledge you seek can be found there. Far more then I can list here.
In VT, we have a highly convoluted system of a statewide property tax that is used to fund our education system here. The localties have some leeway on setting the local property tax rate (which is a regressive system for sure), but the state will adjust/normalize the property tax assement rates based on a Common Level of Appraisal that applies to the entire state. Then, for the vast majority of people, the amount of income that they make is taken into account and yearly prebates or rebates are issued based on that. What it all boils down to is that most people here pay their property taxes not necessarily on how much property they have or how much that property is worth, but on how much income they have (a progresisve system of taxation). There is a LOT of factoring that goes into these caluculations…so much so that few people understand exactly why they are paying the tax rates that they are paying. It would seem to many here that just scraping the property tax in favor a simple income tax would be a more efficient and fairer way to do things.
My point in bringing all that up is that it seems that the FairTax merely replaces a highly convoluted tax system with a slightly less convoluted tax system…with monthly prebates and exclusions on certain items, which are basically loopholes like the current system has right now.
treewrestler says:
“I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ I’ve allready paid income tax on this money. I really don’t want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it.”
The fair tax won’t add an additional 29% to current prices, it just replaces the 29% of hidden taxes that are already included in current prices. Even if we don’t pass the fair tax, you’ll still end up paying that 29%.
However, under the fair tax, your savings balance and interest income are tax free.
I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth, but I don’t think that’s what he wants to know about. We’ve all already paid taxes on the money that we’ve saved somehow under the current system. Under the FairTax, if we spend this money, we will be taxed again apparently. How do you (if you do at all) deal with that inconsistency? I understand that once you get your lil scheme in place (which is never BTW) that savings will not be taxed from then on out.
I started reading several of the replies to the video and then realized that most of you have never read the “Fair Tax” book written by Congressman John Linderman (R-Ga.) and Neal Boortz. You need to read this and especially the latest addition just out. It takes care of the poor people with a pre-bate check. $12 trillion off shore will come back to America when the corporate tax is no longer. All taxes are eliminated! Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, income tax, property tax, and the list goes on and on. Wouldn’t you like to take home your FULL paycheck for a change, without all the withholdings? How about you phone bill or cable bill ? All those local, state, federal and county taxes that are added to every bill! The greatest thing about the “Fair Tax” is that it eliminates the IRS….period.
Well that’s great…. but http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com gets rid of all of those taxes too and your 23% sales tax!
???? property tax, Mediicare??? How is that possiable?
Dan Mitchell’s political implementation strategy for the flat tax seems more practical than that which would initiate meaningful tax reform by targeting the 16th Amendment for repeal. International competitive pressures from globalization require the United States gets its tax policy house in order, and fast.
The government can only tax us in one of two ways- income or spending (or both). Your money is your property. Taxing your income is a direct violation of our property rights. How can we expect our government to protect our rights if it has to violate them in the process? It conflicts with every principle our Constitution was found on. Taxing trade is the only fair way to tax because it doesn’t violate our property rights and it gives people some control over how much tax they pay.
The problem with any kind of broad tax that applies to both businesses and consumers is that they are applied at every stage of production. They compound upon themselves and cascade though the economy adding a lot of hidden costs to the retail prices of all goods and services. Consumers ultimately pay for all the costs of production so, we might as well just replace these hidden taxes with a single honest and transparent tax on retail sales- a sales taxes.
Sales taxes are flat taxes. All flat taxes are inherently regressive because they burden the poor more than anyone else. To make a flat tax progressive it is necessary to refund the tax for everyone up to the poverty level and the easiest and least intrusive way of do this is by issuing a prebate.
When we combine a sales tax with a prebate, we get the Fair Tax. That’s why they call it the ‘fair’ tax, it is by far the fairest of any tax scheme.
I strongly disagree! The fairest of any tax scheme (I call it a concept) is http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com It will replace ALL taxes on income, WITHOUT lowering the revenue going to the U.S. Treasury!
Eliminating State sales taxes I’m working on but the elimination of State income taxes is the second step in my concept, then Federal income taxes, then ALL taxes collected by the IRS!
“Taxing your income is a direct violation of our property rights.”
Ever hear of property taxes then? I’m in favor of lowering or eliminating the current taxes on the common types of savings that most regular people can use. We need to encourage more people to save.
“Do you really need to ask that question…isn’t it obvious why?”
I support the Fair tax because I oppose income taxes and I oppose any kind of tax on businesses since consumers end up paying them anyway. The only thing left is retail sales. The Fair tax isn’t just a sales tax either, it’s a major transfer of power and freedom from the government to the people. It taxes the rich, untaxes the poor and the elderly and it untaxes American producers so they can compete in the global economy.
I came here looking for info on Flat vs Fair tax systems, but found a mess. I now understand the difference between the two and if fgiven a choice would support the Fair Tax, but it is not an either or choice. Until the people in this discusion board (BLOG) can agree, how can Congress? There appears to be no real way to fix the current tax problem. Maybe we should just leave it alone and have a balanced budget?
If don’t like the “Fair” or “Flat’ tax and want to learn how it is possiable to have “Life Without Invome Tax”.. checkout http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com
The best way to finance government in the history of mankind!
April 15th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Go to work get it passed. What can I do to help?
April 15th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Flat Tax
April 15th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
How can I help get it passed?
April 15th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
The flat tax is working in many countries and can be implemented immediately.
April 15th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
The Fair tax is the best way to go stimulate the economy. The Flat tax retains the anchor on production by taxing income.
April 15th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
Giving money to the government is like giving booze to an alcoholic. They will consume all of it. The next day they won’t remember what they did with it and then they’ll demand more. We need to cut spending dramatically. Once that is done then any type of tax reform becomes much easier.
April 15th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Yea, boy I hope I never become rich so that those nasty “high” tax rates kick in…I’ll be sure to under-achieve so that doesn’t happen…right…
I agree that taxes on savings that most people have access to (like savings accounts, CDs, etc.) should be reduced or eliminated though. The problem with reducing all “capital gains” taxes is that a lot of rich people make their money primarily through this method, and they would get off easier as a result while the “little guy” gets screwed, again. Oh, everyone hates the tax man…but how are we gonna fund all these wars without him??
I can’t believe we forced the Iraqis to take a flat tax. By that aside, oh I can’t wait for our economy to race ahead, like the countries of Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Russia, Slovakia, the Ukraine, Romania, Georgia, Iceland, Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, and Kazakhstan…if it’s good enuff for Borat, it’s good enuff for us!
April 15th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
A number of years ago a CPA friend of mine talked about flat tax to me. At the time he said the putting a 5 percentfederal tax on everything but food would give the government more money the the would need to run things,also nobody could cheat if you spend a dollar or a million you would pay your fair share. Besides operating a vechicle in the US is a necessity,not a luxuary,right! Thanks for the ear. Bill
April 15th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Billy, I believe your friend was talking about the “fair tax” (a national sales tax), not the “flat tax” (a single flat tax rate for everyone). The flat tax has obvious deficiencies, but also has some attractive components as well.
For me, the flat tax fails because it is centered around the individual actor, not families. Let’s say Bob and Alex both make $50k per year. But Alex has three kids. So they both pay exactly the same in taxes, but Alex has a much harder time making end meets because he has to pay for more food, medical care, additional housing, etc. So Alex is basically penalized for being married and having children. I don’t that’s a particularly American or Judeo-Christian value, do you? But that’s one of the consequences of the flat tax. It’s an economic incentive to not marry and to not have children, among other things.
The current tax system is not without its problems, no doubt. But ostensibly it was designed with American family values in mind at its inception. In other words, American tax policy (at least in theory) had a guiding philosophy behind it—a philosophy that takes into account the kinds of lives we believed Americans are entitled to lead, and balances individual responsibility with collective action on behalf of those who are suffering or struggling. Those are American values, and it’s important the tax system reflect all of those values.
The flat tax satisfies a visceral want for so-called “fairness,” that I believe arises out of a complex, confusing tax regime, as well as a distrust of government born in the last few decades. In the face of this kind of arcanery and bamboozlement, the simplicity of the “flat tax” is very attractive. But when we apply the concept to our own values, to the rest of the morals we hold dear, it’s harder to support. Since we believe that all were created equal, deserve happiness, and can and should live their lives to the fullest, it would be incongruous indeed to penalize working families with children, for example.
What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.
April 16th, 2008 at 8:23 am
Both flat tax and “fair tax” are bad taxes that are regressive. Payroll, self-employment, and gas taxes should be eliminated by the federal government. However, taxes on corporate profits need to be increased and all loopholes eliminated. Capital gains tax need to be increased targeting wealthy investors. Federal estate tax needs to be increased also on rich people’s estates. At the state level property taxes should be eliminated and replaced with an intangible tax like the one Florida used to have. General sales tax should be eliminated and be replaced with a luxury tax that taxes only luxuries like boats, yachts, luxury cars, expensive jewelry, expensive art. Basically things primarily bought by wealthy people. Tax on alcohol and cigarettes should be increased also to discourage people from buying these harmful substances.
April 16th, 2008 at 11:18 am
WHOA UP thar’ Ty!
How can either be regressive when they affect everyone the same way. Flat tax hits all payors at the same rate, and the fair tax is a user by choice tax. If you use you pay, if you don’t you won’t.
We need no increases to any current tax, but instead we need to eliminate the “death tax”, eliminate capital gains taxes, and reduce the rate on everyone. Like at no time in my lifetime do we need the economic stimulous this would provide as now.
Congress should act quickly to make permanent the “Bush” tax cuts and eliminate the “death” tax so that money can be put back into our economy, rather than giving it to government. If it is true that government is the people who work and pay taxes, we should all be outraged at what is happening, and stand up and say, we ‘re mad and we aren’t going to take it anymore!
To make April 15 just another day should be the goal of every true American.
April 16th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Income vs. sales tax doesn’t make much difference. How much money the government takes, how much burden to manage taxes, and how visible your taxes are do. Flat tax and ‘fair tax’ are both a massive improvement by these measures.
Re: Ty
Both flat and ‘fair’ tax proposals are strongly ‘progressive’ at low income levels, the ‘fair’ tax more so. They become flat at higher income levels, derided as ‘regressive’ in the politics of envy.
Raising corporate, capitol gains, estate, and ‘luxury’ taxes would be economically ruinous.
I favor a tax code where corporate and income tax are both covered by the same simple rules and low rates, and estates are untaxed.
Mister Guy Said, “I can’t believe we forced the Iraqis to take a flat tax.”
First I’ve heard of a flat tax being forced on the Iraqis. My impression is their government chose that tax structure.
April 16th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
That was a mind-numbingly silly thing to say… No wonder you never blog about the war.
Perhaps you’d like to read my post above:
You see, the flat tax does not “affect everyone the same way.” It affects families more than single people. Same with the “Fair Tax.” Why must I be penalized simply for having children?
April 16th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
I hope Ty is being facetious. Sickle i think you ignore that a flax tax would effectively mandate a decrease in federal spending, immediately, given the entire population would be under the same tax structure. This would mean a much greater share of revenue in the hands of people (families included) than ever before. Thats practicality, not principle. The current system is written with hundreds of tax credits, exemptions, and subsidies for people with homes, marriages, families ect. Would you suggest a flat tax with tax exemptions? It seems fair tax would better serve the interests of all people, if it were at all feasible that is. Mister guy, what “little guy” are you talking about and how the hell would reducing capital gains taxes screw him? By giving him better wages with greater revenue share, or how bout a better pension plan with the higher returns of capital investment? These were the results of lower capital gains taxes during the 80’s and into the 90’s. Tell me how your assessment makes any sense given tax structure is not and never has been a zero sum game (thus a deficit) nor a simple re-distributive system. Also, although you’re just being clever, war spending is one of the off the budget expenditures and does not come into revenue allocation accounting for the government. We’re running a huge deficit through uncontrolled spending alone. War spending is simply a lagniappe.
April 16th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
The “Fair Tax” on purchases has the same problems as the “Flat Tax.” A family of four is going to be taxed more because they need more resources, even if food is exempted. Anyone who has children or dependents is going to have a higher tax burden (”burden” being the key word here), regardless of income. So when we as Americans claim to want people to get married and have families, I believe our tax code should represent those values as well, rather than discourage that behavior.
Before I address your question, I had to comment on this:
In fact, we’re not “just being clever.” Anyone who is truly interested in fiscal responsibility cares about War spending, how that money is allocated, where it goes, where the waste happens, etc. Regardless of whether the government is “accounting” the war, it’s still taxpayer money being spent, and the waste and loss of taxpayer money has been widely reported-upon. To say that spending on Iraq “is simply a lagniappe” either means you have no idea how much money we’re spending, or that you don’t know the meaning of the word lagniappe. You are willfully sticking your head in the sand here, which makes me think you’re not really being honest about this debate.
So, on to your question: Would I suggest a flat tax with tax exemptions, therefore?
I answered this best above, so I’m just gonna quote myself:
April 16th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
The FairTax is a progressive consumption tax. Currently the working poor have “Income Tax” and “Payroll” (Social Security & Medicare tax) removed from their paycheck before they get it. The FairTax eliminates the Federal Income Tax and Payroll tax, so you get all your money up front! In addition you will get a monthly prebate (amount is dependent on number of members in the family) to pay the tax on necessities up to the poverty level. Don’t forget, with the Income Tax every products price has the embedded cost of complying with the Income Tax. That goes away with the FairTax, therefore reducing the cost of products. This concept untaxes the working poor, promotes savings and stimulates the economy. The FairTax is a progressive tax rate is based on lifestyle and spending choices rather than earnings, which all too often penalizes hard work and provides a disincentive for achievement.Further, the FairTax is an actual bill before congress, H.R. 25 with over 70 co-sponsors. See a comparison at http://www.pafairtax.org/resrcs/FlatTaxFairTaxComparison.pdf
April 16th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Not if you have children it’s not.
April 16th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Sickle, you didn’t answer my question. And in terms of accounting, war spending is indeed just an add on. Your twisting my argument into a semantics debate while i was simply pointing out the illegitimacy of Mr. Guy’s claims. I’m not arguing whether or not war spending is wasteful, thats a whole other issue, but whether its included in “deficit spending” debates. Clearly, given the way it is accounted it cannot be. Don’t generalize my claims and answer my question without using “principles” in place of logic.
April 16th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
@ Cguy. I have no idea where you believe this turned into a discussion about the deficit. It’s not. It’s about how taxpayer’s money is spent and tax codes. You cannot just pick and choose what spending you want to include in a debate about that. Moving the goalposts like you’re doing is dishonest. If we want to discuss deficit spending, fine, let’s do it. But this thread has been about a wider issue.
And again, whether or not it’s ultimately “accounted,” it’s still taxpayer money that will have to be paid so that we can pay back our loans to China. You are the one having a semantic debate over what we can count as “spending” or not. The truth is that it’s all spending, at it’s all funded by our tax dollars. So let’s stop playing Arthur Andersen here.
Since you don’t seem to understand my answer to your question, I’ll try again. I didn’t want to specifically call out the serious flaw in your logic that your question demonstrated. I hoped instead my answer would allow you to see it for yourself. But since that failed, I have no choice but to continue:
Put simply: a “flat tax with exemptions” isn’t a flat tax anymore. I don’t know what you’d want to call it, but the moment you start heading down that slippery slope, you’ve abandoned the simplicity of the flat tax for something more akin to what we have now. So, logically, there really is no such thing as a flat tax “with exemptions.” Nor can there be.
Which is why I am arguing a more holistic approach to the problem, which is, again:
April 16th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
The falt and fair taxes are regressive because they hit poorer people more disproportionaly than rich people, period. How can the fair tax be a “choice tax”?? Can we just *choose* not to buy anything ever? I think not…
We didn’t hand over the Iraqi economy until after Bremmer made it over into a Right-wingers wet dream…give me a break.
“a flax tax would effectively mandate a decrease in federal spending”
Exactly!!! This is what these kind of proposals are really all about…starving the federal govt. of revenue so that, through the back door, “smaller govt.” can be achieved. Reducing capital gains taxes predominately benefits the rich, which means that the poor will ultimately have to take up the slack.
“war spending is one of the off the budget expenditures and does not come into revenue allocation accounting for the government. We’re running a huge deficit through uncontrolled spending alone. War spending is simply a lagniappe.”
You’ve got to be kidding me…war spending is an unexpected gift or benefit?!?! Sure, the Bush Regime has continually dodged going to Congress and the American people with the real cost of the War by constantly asking for supplemental after supplemental spending bill(s). It’s cowardly IMO. Bush’s supply-side debacle and endless War is rapidly bankrupting this country, period…wake up…
April 16th, 2008 at 7:40 pm
It doesn’t look like any one has looked at HR1040 that is proposed. It does take into account marriage and children. And, Sickle, Your artsy fartsy semantic hand-waving
“What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear, and none to the exclusion of others. America does not just mean “free markets” or “free worship” or “free speech.” It means the harmony between all those things at once. It’s a balance of many principles, not blind devotion to one or two.”
doesn’t give any specifics and is open to interpretation by each as to what it would mean in the way of specifics. I can imagine that your interpretation is to give everything to the government and then let “them” give us back what “they” think we need. Good solid Marxism.
April 16th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Let’s first simplify the current tax code with an Optional Flat Tax (which will work to all you critics, because if the tax rate is low enough, even if it is an income tax it won’t really “hurt” a person’s income). Then we can start talking about repealing the 16th amendment and implementing the Fair Tax.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:44 am
I could personally agree with a combination of both fair tax and flat tax, I would not support a full “fair tax” we are all ultimately taxed on our incomes anyway, (you can only spend what you make or are given). I personally spend about 80% of my income on neccesities @ $30,000/yr. therefor I would be taxed on 80% of my income, whereas someone making $200,000/yr. living in proportion with me would only be taxed on 12% of thier income. Goods cost the same no matter what your income. But if a proportion of this could be offset with a combination flat tax it might ease the burden, while makiing sure illegals, drug dealers, etc. paid at least some tax ie; fair tax. ( 10% flat / 10% fair ).
April 17th, 2008 at 11:59 am
That’s easy to say, but you’re wrong. This is not a question of semantics. The flat tax rate isn’t particularly meaningful when combined with a series of so-called “exemptions.” What is to stop later politicians from including further “exemptions” for, say, capital gains, or charitable contributions, or automobile taxes, or business expenses, or…etc. etc.?? Surely you see where this could head.
Unless you have a governing philosophy regarding taxes and the role of government (preferably one that shares American values), there will be nothing to stop politicians from taking your “flat tax” and corrupting it just like they have with the present tax system.
I do not understand these attacks on me. Seriously, I’m not saying anything radical or liberal or anything. I’m saying things that are just common sense: the tax code is wack and needs to be scrapped entirely, exemptions are a slippery slope no matter what kind of tax rate system you use (progressive or flat), and that we need an underlying tax philosophy that all Americans can grasp and (hopefully) a majority can agree with that will allow us to call our elected reps on their bullsh!t. Why do you guys have such a problem with that?
April 17th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Taxes need to be left up to the individual states, the Federal government should only collect taxes from the State government, based on population and per capita income, (not individual citizens), States should have the choice how and where to raise this money, (Geogia is a lot different than California). Some States are more suited to one form of taxation over another, even on the city and town levels industry and economics differ in this way, big industry areas might favor a higher fair tax while areas with large tourism markets might favor a lower sales tax to encourage their market, while having a higher flat tax on people who can afford to live in these resort / tourist areas. This whould eliminate pork spending because the state whould be spending its own money on its own prodjects, and we could hold our local officials accountable for abuse of this system a lot easier than the Fed.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Look…the Articles of Confederation are long since over & done with, and they didn’t work out too well BTW. This states-rights-limited-federal-govt. stuff is a load of baloney IMO.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:19 am
I’ve only read a few of these posts and one thing is apparent. The same thing that always arises with a discussion of the Flat Tax versus the FairTax. First of all either would be better than the current system. However we had a Flat tax in 1986. Many deductions were eliminated and two tax brackets were installed. Simple, clean. Yet amendments were made to this within weeks. Now we have incurred 16,000 amendments to the tax code since then. So much for a Flat Tax.
If people will research the FairTax with an open serious mind and come away opposed to it, so be it. Lets remember that in 1776 only about 30 % of the population wanted to throw off the shackles of England and unfair taxation. The Founding Fathers distain for a tax on income is well documented. Looking at this a different way, if we had the FairTax for the last 95 years, would you support creating IRS and our current system? I think not.
April 18th, 2008 at 9:22 am
For Mr. Guy,
The X amendment has not been repealed.
April 18th, 2008 at 11:19 am
For all who have posted here, I thing there’s one thing we could agree on, that being an open and honest debate on this subject on national TV during primetime.
April 18th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Ever hear of the Elastic Clause?? Guess not…
April 19th, 2008 at 6:03 am
A 10% flat tax ($25,000 floor for the poor) on EVERYONE, BUSINESS included would be fair. We’d all be paying the same, “10%”. Forget the dollar amount, you would be paying the same as your neighbor, 10%, no deductions. The Country would be in the black in no time.
10%, no deductions!
April 19th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I haven’t heard of the elastic clause, please explain.
April 19th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
5% is all that is needed! No deductions and the 5% is invested in the S&P500 in a retirement savings account. Retirees live on interest only payments each month, the principal is never spent. After death the balance in the IRA is converted to cash and paid to the U.S. Treasury!
This concept will produce more money to the U.S.Treasury than the present income tax system.
For more information please visit my website http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com
Thanks, Don Lloyd (concept author)
April 19th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
The “necessary and proper” clause (also known as the Elastic Clause) refers to the provision in Article One of the United States Constitution, section 8, clause 18, that “The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” This clause, along with the Commerce Clause, provides the constitutional basis for a wide variety of federal laws, including criminal laws, which were not considered implied powers of a power to regulate by the old Anti-Federalists.
“Forget the dollar amount”
Sure, the rich pay some miniscule amount in taxes and that’s no big deal…sure…
No tax until death?? Motivating the federal govt. to benefit monetarily ONLY when people die could lead to some nasty actions on the part of the govt. IMO…no thanx there.
April 19th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
I will take the chance that the goverment of the people for the people and by the people will not kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
April 20th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Maybe I chould change the website to Life Without Income Tax.
April 20th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
I could personally agree with a combination of both fair tax and flat tax, I would not support a full “fair tax” as we are all ultimately taxed on our incomes anyway. I don’t know anyone who makes over $100k sho didn’t give up most of their 20’s in school or working 80+ hours a week. They invested in their future and should not be penalized to subsidize those who made their 20’s a big party. This is like the current mortgage crisis. Why should those who were honest, conservative and hard working subsidze those who weren’t
April 20th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I live in Canada and there is a reason why Canadians go to America for critical health care. It is because Canada is a prime example of what happens to an economy and its services when financial incentive for hard work is removed. People make decisions and need to live with ther ramifications.
April 20th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Dear Joan Loof,
Lose the income tax! Do you realize that the Federal Government has a record of every dollar that I have ever earned? You, too, probably, unless you chose not to report it. Do you realize that in a country where you are “innocent until proven guilty”, and you are protected from testifying against yourself, that if you do not report your income, you will be penalized and may be criminally prosecuted? Any kind of income tax is contrary to the premises that our Constitution is based on.
April 20th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Dear Paul,
A 10% flat tax sounds good, but not on business. You forget that any tax on business is just passed on to consumers (that’s me!) as a hidden tax. I would rather see all of the tax I pay, nothing hidden. Better yet, do away with the income tax altogether. The Fair Tax sales tax taxes “resources” rather than income. If multi-billionaire Joe Schmoo relaxes this year, he may have no income whatsoever, especially with the current hit the stock market is suffering (Poor Bill Gates!). But if he is charged a sales tax, he still pays, because he still consumes! Please see my response to Joan for the rest of my tirade.
By the way, breathe deep. The spring air is incredible. I think I will walk the dog!
April 20th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
Whoops! Couldn’t stay away.
Mr. Guy, neither the flat nor the FairTax is “regressive”. That’s a term that was invented to build support for more taxes on the rich. A regressive tax would be a tax that is the same for everyone regardless of income or resources. “Each of our citizens will pay $1000 per year to enjoy the benefits of our government!” That’s regressive! If everyone pays according to their ability (Where have we heard that before?), then that’s progressive. A flat tax is progressive and the FairTax is progressive. In fact, the FairTax is designed to be more progressive than the current tax code through the application of the “prebate”.
Under the Fairtax proposal, you can choose how much tax you pay by the way you spend your money. If you buy a new car, you pay the tax. If you buy a used car, you don’t! What could be clearer?
I choose a tax system that does not require me to report income or file tax papers and allows me to control the amount by which I participate and let’s me invest my money without considering the effect of taxes. Give me the FairTax system or give me . . . help! (You thought I was going to say something else, didn’t you? Remember what happened to that guy!)
Got to walk that dog!
April 20th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Casey, go read some of the earlier posts in this thread that clearly explain why and under what circumstances both the flat and fair taxes are actually regressive. Think about it just for a second. A single man and the head of a family of four both make $40k per year. Who’s going to pay FAR MORE under a Fair Tax regime, simply because he has a family to feed? Casey, do agree that having children and a stay-at-home parent are things for which we should be financially punished? At least the flat tax has the option for some kind of exemption system, even though it suffers from the same limitations.
This should be obvious, too. It often amazes me that both the Flat and Fair Tax advocates fail to see this very apparent flaw in their systems…
April 20th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
If I understand the FairTax correctly, the single man will get a prebate of $500 per month whereas the family of four will get a prebate of $2000 per month.
April 20th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
“Do you realize that the Federal Government has a record of every dollar that I have ever earned?”
So?? BTW, I guess you think Al Capone got a raw deal then, eh?
Why in the world we would want to base a HUGE amount of our tax structure on a regressive sales tax that actually discourages people from consuming (hello, that’s what the VAST majority of our economy is now based on!) is really, honestly beyond me. Maybe you guys want to re-institute tarrifs on incoming goods too…just like the “good ole days” before the Constitution was amended to allow for a national income tax?
“If everyone pays according to their ability (Where have we heard that before?), then that’s progressive.”
The word is FAIR…learn it and live it. How on earth would buying a used car be exempt from a sales tax??
April 20th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Every chart I’ve ever seen which attempts to compare how much people in different income tax brackets would pay in taxes under the FairTax have always assumed 100% spending. In reality, everyone is going to save something. The FairTax creates an incentive for people to save. We all bring home our full paychecks and we all control how much we actually pay in taxes by controlling how much we spend.
The FairTax bill (HR 25) specifically repeals the U.S. Codes for income, payroll, and gift and estate taxes. So there is ZERO chance they we could end up with the FairTax and federal income taxes at the same time. State income taxes is a different issue entirely.
The reason many federal officials, Republicans and Democrats, don’t like the FairTax is because they know it’s good for the people and bad for the special interests. They being the special interests.
April 21st, 2008 at 8:33 am
In the explaination about the elastic clause one paragraph was used from the constitution. This paragraph, when speaking of taxes refers to the uniformity of taxes throughou the U.S. This issue was brought up when the income tax was first proposed and shot down by the Supreme Court. The sixteenth amendment was just a sneaky way of getting around the original wording and intent of the constitution. There was no mass communication in 1913. I doubt that the 16th amendment could pass today.
April 21st, 2008 at 9:48 am
I have to say this is one of the best threads that FW has had so far. Sickle, don’t take things so personally, its deliberation after all. However, I’ll ask you for a more concrete answer as to what type of tax structure you would advocate. Give specifics rather than answers about “principle’s of American lifestyles” and creating something “a majority of Americans can agree on.” Who would be taxed? Would the structure be progressive? Income vs. sales? Estate and Death taxes? Corporate gains? All of these things are real debatable structures of tax codes.
“What we need to do is scrap the tax code and create a new one that reflects our common philosophy and the perennial values we hold dear”
That is not a useful answer.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:14 pm
To Waka,
Your numbers on the prebate are quite off. Have you gone on the website
http://www.fairtax.org yet? You’ll get more correct information there then what will ever appear on this blog. You’ll also get quite an education.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:20 pm
mR.gUY,,
That’s not a typo that’s a view of your logic. Since you semi quote Karl Marx and appear to be so against the FairTax and so in love with the income tax, I must assume you are either a socialist or you have a vested interest in the current system.
April 21st, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Under the current tax codes I pay under 20%, I use the long form, write offs etc. Im just wandering how these proposed changes, Fair or flat. whould effect me. I am very open minded to any ideas that would improve life in America, but what about people on assisted living incomes do we just up their hand outs 29% to cope with the fair tax (sales tax) increase, or would they be flat taxed on their current benifits. I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ Ive allready paid income tax on this money. I really dont want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it. It seems to me we need to gain control of wastful spending, ear marks, pork, etc. before we can judge how much taxation we actually require.
April 21st, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Why would you ever consider the Fair of Flat Tax” if there is a tax concept that will:
1. Lower Individual Income Taxes to Zero.
2. Lower Employment Taxes to 2%.
3. Lower State Income Taxes to Zero.
4. Lower Corporation Taxes to Zero.
5. Lower Estate and Excise Taxes to Zero.
6. Give retirees more money each month than Social Security.
7. Allow “stay at home” moms to have a retirement account.
8. Raise the minimum wage.
9. Lower the trade deficit.
10. Simplify the IRS tax code.
11. Lower the cost of goods and services.
12. Provide money to:
Pay for health care.
Buy a home.
Send our children to college.
Investment in business.
Anybody want to prove me wrong???
http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com
April 21st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
NiftyTax,
I wouldn’t try to prove you wrong. I’d just like to see you create that kind of plan. Good Luck !
AND TO ALL:
The FairTax has 72 co-sponsors in the House. 11 years of research and $22 million put into it, and millions of volunteers nationwide. We should unite to pass the FairTax first. Once We The People show Congress that we indeed can unite they will be far more concerned with us as opposed to their self serving interests. For far too long the people of this country have ignored what goes on in Washington. As long as Billy Bob has his six pack on Friday night and Sally Short Skirt gets her nails done, the world is right. Every four years there’s a big clammier about electing a President. Yet the people who make the laws get elected and reelected over and over and over again. Congress continuously plays the general public for fools. They want the public divided, and we’ve played right into their hands. The posts here reflect the thoughts of some very intelligent people. Yet will the words written here mean anything if they’re not backed up with action. If we can’t unite in changing this horrible tax code and getting the IRS out of our personal lives we will continue to get just what we deserve. This should be our first step in setting this country right.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:37 pm
NityTax sorry,
I went to the website. Instead of wishing you luck to create this plan, I say Wish you luck in getting it passed.
This is another example of why we must first pass the FairTax. Then move to the next level. We can’t strip congress of it’s power over night. They didn’t take it over night.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:41 pm
“State income taxes is a different issue entirely.”
LOL…right…shifting the tax bruden to states and localities…well, don’t bother us with that fact either.
The point of the Elastic Clause discussion is to put to bed this baloney issue that the federal govt. only enjoys very limited powers…it doesn’t…wake up…the States Rights issue has eventually been defeated everytime that it has come up…pro-slavery, anti-Civil Rights, etc.. The phrase States Rights (and all variants of the words and the phrase) does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or its amendments, period.
I’m a progressive BTW…red herrings don’t work anymore thanx.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Mr. Guy
I was right a progressive is a socialist.
April 21st, 2008 at 4:48 pm
As far as the Constitution is concerned there is nothing in it that guarantees a person’s right to vote either.
Just thought I’d throw that in.
April 21st, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Is it true that the Fair Tax only taxes new items?……. If so I guess there will be a big demand for pawn shops and second hand stores! LOL
April 21st, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Yes only new items are taxed. Not like now where something is taxed for eternity. Currently S.S. is taxed 3 times.
April 21st, 2008 at 8:12 pm
“a progressive is a socialist”
Wrong again…being a progressive means that you are an advocate for the advancement of workers’ rights & social justice…being a proponent of anti-trust laws, regulation of large corporations & monopolies, as well as government-funded environmentalism, democracy, making governmental operations & services more efficient & rational, the highly-successful New Deal, campaign finance reform, civil liberties, a living wage, universal health care…and you believe that war is LAST resort.
Our right to vote in the USA is administered by the individual states, but what do you think the 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th, and 26th Amendments were all about? I also feel that we need one, national standard for what constitutes a legal ballot and the ways that ballot can be counted in elections.
Excluding “used” items from a sales tax is a HUGE loophole that can easily be exploited IMO.
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:20 pm
The amendments you mention all have to do with eligibility, not the right to vote. As far as the progressive/ socialist thing goes , you are a progressive who used to be a liberal I assume.It is a label based on one’s beliefs. Your beliefs seem to center on government being the solution to all problems, with little or no personal responsibility or accountability. Do you believe this country was founded as a democracy?
The FairTax was crafted to be revenue neutral. Also, it encompasses every segment of society. Poor people buy more used cars than the well to do. Also there is no need to tax something 2,3, or four times. Untaxing used items will create a large loophole in your opinion. In my opinion NOTHING about the FairTax is as bad as the present system
April 22nd, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Progressives and liberals have a lot in common.
“Your beliefs seem to center on government being the solution to all problems, with little or no personal responsibility or accountability.”
This is the way that you “conservatives” always try to label your opposition. As if the last 7+ years have been all about taking “personal repsonsibility” for the massive failures that have occured. Would getting rid of all school boards in the country be relying on govt. to be “the solution to all problems”?? This country was founded as a representative democracy, which I strongly believe in.
April 22nd, 2008 at 4:17 pm
First I am Not a conservative. Second we are a Republic, third we have found common ground, Our school system. The sooner the idea of government schools is trashed the better. I am not happy about the last 7 1/2 years either, in particular the last 16 months. I am not the least bit happy with the current Preidential Candidates. I believe both parties had better people to offer but the media pre-determined who the cadidates would be.
As far as the FairTax goes, it would most likely be the biggest transfer of power back to the people since 1776. When the policitians divide us we are at their mercy. When we unite we are in control. The Amnesty Bill that McCain co-authored died a quick death when our voices were raised in mass.
The same thing is going to happen with the FairTax. Everyday thousands are added to the list of supporters. A little education goes a long way. Opposition to our tax code and the IRS goes back way further than any other issue seen on the nightly news. Hell we fought a revolution over unjust taxes.
April 22nd, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Tom Krop
“The FairTax has 72 co-sponsors in the House. 11 years of research and $22 million put into it, and millions of volunteers nationwide.”
Huckabee was a big supporter of the FairTax and there was very little support for him or the FairTax. If a 29% tax is so great and has all of the support you claim why is it no candidate left standing will promote it???? Could it be that it is too complicated? Or maybe bad research?
April 22nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Man…it’s nothing but the standard party line from you guys eh?
Yea, a “Republic”…meaning a representative democracy, period.
Hold on just a minute…who said anything about getting rid of the idea of “government schools”?? Getting rid of school boards, consoldating school districts, etc. is merely all part of making governmental operations & services more efficient & rational IMO. Yea, it was a shame that the voices of bigotry and intolerance killed the chances for immigration reform IMO.
April 23rd, 2008 at 9:41 am
NiftyTax,
The FairTax rate is 23% not 29%. Huckabee had tremendous support from the FairTax. The media simply did not report this. They always talked about his religious support
Why don’t the Candidate’s left support it? Simple all three are Senators. They rely too heavily on the present tax code and it’s social engineering aspects. However, don’t be surprised if McCain comes out in support. Not because he’s a Republican but win or lose he’s at the end of his career.
Also don’t forget, all Tax bills originate in the House not the Senate.
The FairTax is not perfect for everyone. It’s just the best at the moment, and has the best chance of getting passed. I like your plan, and I think that is something we should pursue after the FairTax is passed. As I’ve posted before if the people of this country unite when can get congress to listen. If we stay divided they’ll play us like a fiddle.
April 23rd, 2008 at 1:55 pm
What would happen to Employment Taxes with the FairTax?
April 23rd, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Nifty,
If you meant unemployment taxes they would remain the same.
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:02 pm
In the data set (04in14ar.xls) from the IRS they call it “Employment Tax”
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:10 pm
That is the wrong data set. I’ts from a IRS publication of ‘Table 7 — Internal Revenue Gross Collections, by Type of Tax, Fiscal Years 1960-2005
April 23rd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
What ever you want to call it, the taxes paid by a employee for the right to have a job would be 14.2% and to purchase NEW items would be 23%. I still think zero% taxes after 40 years is better!
April 24th, 2008 at 8:17 am
NIFTY,
i AGREE THAT 0 TAX WOULD BE CORRECT AFTER TIME. WHAT THE FAIRTAX WOULD DO IS HOLD THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE. ONCE THE THE ECONOMY GETS REVAMPED AND SUPER CHARGED THE PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DEMAND MORE AND MORE REDUCTIONS. EVENTUALLY GETTING BAC TO 0 TAX.
April 24th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Tom,
treewrestler says:
“I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ I’ve allready paid income tax on this money. I really don’t want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it.”
What would happen to savings that have been taxed in prior years? Would there be rebates? How would you seperate current income dollars from from saved income dollars? Color code it with some sort of disapearing ink that is applied when you draw it out of the bank and it changes color when it put into a cash register? I quess a special kind of debit card could be used! That be a great way to do it!!!!
April 24th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
Treewrestler,
First remember the rate is 23% not 29%. Secondly the FairTax would replace the embedded taxes that already exist in the price of goods. It is not in addition to the price of an item. People like yourself and everyone else would no longer be bothered filing tax returns. You will also be receiving the monthly prebate. Therefore if the FairTax is never passed you’ll still be paying the embedded taxes and not receiving the monthly prebate. If you haven’t done so yet, please long onto http://www.fairtax.org. Much of the knowledge you seek can be found there. Far more then I can list here.
Thanks for s respectful and good question.
April 24th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
But you didn’t answer the question though…???
In VT, we have a highly convoluted system of a statewide property tax that is used to fund our education system here. The localties have some leeway on setting the local property tax rate (which is a regressive system for sure), but the state will adjust/normalize the property tax assement rates based on a Common Level of Appraisal that applies to the entire state. Then, for the vast majority of people, the amount of income that they make is taken into account and yearly prebates or rebates are issued based on that. What it all boils down to is that most people here pay their property taxes not necessarily on how much property they have or how much that property is worth, but on how much income they have (a progresisve system of taxation). There is a LOT of factoring that goes into these caluculations…so much so that few people understand exactly why they are paying the tax rates that they are paying. It would seem to many here that just scraping the property tax in favor a simple income tax would be a more efficient and fairer way to do things.
My point in bringing all that up is that it seems that the FairTax merely replaces a highly convoluted tax system with a slightly less convoluted tax system…with monthly prebates and exclusions on certain items, which are basically loopholes like the current system has right now.
April 26th, 2008 at 3:04 am
treewrestler says:
“I currently have a fair amount of cash in the bank 100k+ I’ve allready paid income tax on this money. I really don’t want to be taxed an additional 29% sales tax on anything I purchase with it.”
The fair tax won’t add an additional 29% to current prices, it just replaces the 29% of hidden taxes that are already included in current prices. Even if we don’t pass the fair tax, you’ll still end up paying that 29%.
However, under the fair tax, your savings balance and interest income are tax free.
April 26th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
I don’t want to put words in anyone’s mouth, but I don’t think that’s what he wants to know about. We’ve all already paid taxes on the money that we’ve saved somehow under the current system. Under the FairTax, if we spend this money, we will be taxed again apparently. How do you (if you do at all) deal with that inconsistency? I understand that once you get your lil scheme in place (which is never BTW) that savings will not be taxed from then on out.
April 26th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
I started reading several of the replies to the video and then realized that most of you have never read the “Fair Tax” book written by Congressman John Linderman (R-Ga.) and Neal Boortz. You need to read this and especially the latest addition just out. It takes care of the poor people with a pre-bate check. $12 trillion off shore will come back to America when the corporate tax is no longer. All taxes are eliminated! Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, income tax, property tax, and the list goes on and on. Wouldn’t you like to take home your FULL paycheck for a change, without all the withholdings? How about you phone bill or cable bill ? All those local, state, federal and county taxes that are added to every bill! The greatest thing about the “Fair Tax” is that it eliminates the IRS….period.
April 27th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Well that’s great…. but http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com gets rid of all of those taxes too and your 23% sales tax!
???? property tax, Mediicare??? How is that possiable?
April 28th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Dan Mitchell’s political implementation strategy for the flat tax seems more practical than that which would initiate meaningful tax reform by targeting the 16th Amendment for repeal. International competitive pressures from globalization require the United States gets its tax policy house in order, and fast.
April 28th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
You’ll never be able to eliminate all taxes with one uber-tax…lol…
“International competitive pressures from globalization require the United States gets its tax policy house in order”
Just more of the race to the bottom…giddy-up!
April 30th, 2008 at 12:13 am
fair tax. because i don’t buy a lot of stuff
April 30th, 2008 at 7:34 am
The government can only tax us in one of two ways- income or spending (or both). Your money is your property. Taxing your income is a direct violation of our property rights. How can we expect our government to protect our rights if it has to violate them in the process? It conflicts with every principle our Constitution was found on. Taxing trade is the only fair way to tax because it doesn’t violate our property rights and it gives people some control over how much tax they pay.
The problem with any kind of broad tax that applies to both businesses and consumers is that they are applied at every stage of production. They compound upon themselves and cascade though the economy adding a lot of hidden costs to the retail prices of all goods and services. Consumers ultimately pay for all the costs of production so, we might as well just replace these hidden taxes with a single honest and transparent tax on retail sales- a sales taxes.
Sales taxes are flat taxes. All flat taxes are inherently regressive because they burden the poor more than anyone else. To make a flat tax progressive it is necessary to refund the tax for everyone up to the poverty level and the easiest and least intrusive way of do this is by issuing a prebate.
When we combine a sales tax with a prebate, we get the Fair Tax. That’s why they call it the ‘fair’ tax, it is by far the fairest of any tax scheme.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
I strongly disagree! The fairest of any tax scheme (I call it a concept) is http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com It will replace ALL taxes on income, WITHOUT lowering the revenue going to the U.S. Treasury!
Eliminating State sales taxes I’m working on but the elimination of State income taxes is the second step in my concept, then Federal income taxes, then ALL taxes collected by the IRS!
April 30th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
“Taxing your income is a direct violation of our property rights.”
Ever hear of property taxes then? I’m in favor of lowering or eliminating the current taxes on the common types of savings that most regular people can use. We need to encourage more people to save.
“it is by far the fairest of any tax scheme.”
Not by a long shot IMO.
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:57 am
If the FaitTax is so good for America then why is it that the only politicans co-sponsoring it are Republicans?
http://www.fairtax.org/cgi-bin/scorecard.cgi
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Do you really need to ask that question…isn’t it obvious why?
June 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I wholeheartedly support the flat tax..lets get it going!!!
June 10th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Flat Tax - Keep writing you representitives
June 11th, 2008 at 3:16 am
“Ever hear of property taxes then?”
Uh, ya. Doesn’t change my point though.
“If the FaitTax is so good for America then why is it that the only politicans co-sponsoring it are Republicans?”
What about rep. Dan Boren (D-OK)?
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_cosponsor
“Do you really need to ask that question…isn’t it obvious why?”
I support the Fair tax because I oppose income taxes and I oppose any kind of tax on businesses since consumers end up paying them anyway. The only thing left is retail sales. The Fair tax isn’t just a sales tax either, it’s a major transfer of power and freedom from the government to the people. It taxes the rich, untaxes the poor and the elderly and it untaxes American producers so they can compete in the global economy.
“Flat Tax - Keep writing you representitives”
If it’s an income tax, forget it!
June 30th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
I came here looking for info on Flat vs Fair tax systems, but found a mess. I now understand the difference between the two and if fgiven a choice would support the Fair Tax, but it is not an either or choice. Until the people in this discusion board (BLOG) can agree, how can Congress? There appears to be no real way to fix the current tax problem. Maybe we should just leave it alone and have a balanced budget?
July 1st, 2008 at 10:53 pm
If don’t like the “Fair” or “Flat’ tax and want to learn how it is possiable to have “Life Without Invome Tax”.. checkout http://www.NoTaxUntilDeath.com
The best way to finance government in the history of mankind!