VOMIT!
Posted on 02/28/2005 4:49:42 PM PST by groanup
The President has clearly outlined the mission of this Advisory Panel in Executive Order No. 13369. During this process of examination, the Advisory Panel is committed to ensuring that all interested parties have an opportunity to share views and concerns. Throughout the course of the Panel's work, comments will be solicited on specific matters. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to submit comments within the scope of these questions.
To facilitate the Advisory Panel's consideration and review, we have established two methods by which statements can be submitted. Please use only one of the methods when submitting comments.
1. Transmission by Email as a MS Word attachment to comments@taxreformpanel.gov.
2. Typewritten statements may be mailed to the panel at:
The President's Advisory
Panel on Federal Tax Reform
1440 New York Avenue NW
Suite 2100
Washington, DC 20220
(Excerpt) Read more at taxreformpanel.gov ...
Federal income and payroll taxes either are or are not incorporated into the prices of goods and services. If they are embedded in prices, their removal will reduce prices. If they are not, then their removal will not reduce prices but instead returns to labor and capital will go up. If returns to labor go up, people will see their after-tax wages increase and asset values will increase since the present discounted value of the new, higher returns will be higher.
The replacement sales tax could be incident on the factors of production or it could be incident on consumers through higher prices. It cannot be both. If it is incident on the factors of production, then wages and the return to capital will fall but sales tax inclusive prices will not be any higher, on average, than they are today. If the sales tax is fully incident on consumers, then prices will increase by the amount of the sales tax but returns to labor and capital will be higher.
"namely that the FairTax would be fully passed forward" part. You do know what that means, don't you?
Yep. the fair tax is a retail sales tax that is paid by the purchaser of consumption goods and services. Just as the legislation provides for, that legal incidence equals economic incidence on the purchaser of the product.
With the repeal of federal income and payroll taxes businesses at all levels , businesses are no longer asaddled with planning, accounting/reporting, litigation or losses do to misdirection of business cash flow from productive use into non-productive tax sheltering and avoidence endevours.
With no tax on business to business sales, and no federal income/payroll tax related burdens on any business whether retail or otherwise the base taxfree price of products fall substantially at all business levels upstream from the retail sale.
The NRST is imposed only at consumption level, as a consequence the lower base price from lower costs and higher productivity the producer receives funds the same level of wages to employees and capital returns to the business.
When the NRST is fully passed forword to the customer, the tax inclusive price is higher by the amount of the NRST added to the lower base price the producer receives. That tax inclusive price paid by the consumer, will the same or lower on average than overall price paid for a fixed basket of consumption products under the current federal income/payroll tax system today.
Well, maybe you don't.
It is pretty apparent that either you don't, or at least pretend to something other than the obvious.
Are you serious?...Few people could hold a straight face while writing stupidity like that.
lewislynn's idea of a debate. Who does that remind me of? Wait! Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Barbara Boxer.
What are you 12?...That reminds me of the "I know you are but what am I?" grade school defense.
Hopefuly any, if any, new proposals are brought forward it will be presented straight forward without the deceit, lies, and distortions we've heard from a completely disjointed group of fairtax supporters, including Linder himself. It's just way too important for that kind of nonsense.
Why such bitterness LL? What are you so afraid of?
Here's a quote from the same Mastromarco & Burton source that sounds exactly like what I've been say for a long time:
Yep, you have been saying something like it for along time.
It is even more instructive to see the comment in full context however:
Response to William Galeby Dan Mastromarco and David Burton PDF Page 14 J. Gail Perspective: Consumer Pricing: Up, Down and Sideways Simultaneously
Gale’s analysis of the impact on prices and assets levels is contradictory and confused. He is right, however, that the analysis of the impact on prices, nominal wages, and asset prices should be divided into two questions: (1) the impact of the repeal of the income and payroll tax and (2) the impacts of the replacement sales tax. Monetary policy, of course, will affect prices. Other things being held constant, an increase in the money supply will, after distortions caused by it introduction into the economy, increase prices since “more money is chasing the same amount of goods.” Of course, all other things are not equal. Gale fails to express his opinion about whether the change from an income tax to a sales tax warrants a monetary expansion (accommodation) or not and why. |
It is also interesting what Mastromarko and Burton have to say regards overhead compliance costs separately from the federal taxes taxes collected per-se:
Response to William Galeby Dan Mastromarco and David Burton PDF Page 10 F. Gail Perspective: The Sales Tax Would Cascade Imposing Tax on a Tax
The only problem with this analysis is that neither the FairTax proposal nor the Schaefer-Tauzin proposal, the two national sales tax plans supposedly analyzed in the Gale papers, cascades. Both plans fully exempt intermediate business to business transaction because of the inappropriateness of doing so. We would note that this is, of course, not true with respect to the current system, which cascades both tax and compliance costs, a significant omission by Gale. PDF Page 28 II Lessor Points: *** Referring to a burden to retailers, Gale says, “several problems arise.” One is the need to verify that taxes were remitted appropriately by retailers. This would require record-keeping by, and auditing of, all business.” (Policy Paper, 2/17/98, page 22). Gale’s concern for businesses compliance costs under the sales tax is curious in that he seems utterly unaware of the huge burden that the present system imposes on business. The sales tax would require little more record keeping than any business has to keep in the ordinary course of business, to wit, its gross receipts. It would require vastly less record keeping than the present tax system. Businesses would have to fill out a simple monthly form reporting their sales and remitting their taxes. There would be no more uniform inventory capitalization requirements, no more complex rules governing employee benefits and retirement plans, no more tax depreciation schedules, no more capital gains tax and depreciation recapture, no more alternative minimum tax, no more payroll and income tax withholding requirements, no more 1099s, W-2s and the like, and no more tax rules governing mergers and acquisitions, no more complex international tax provisions. Firm’s accounting, tax and personnel (human resources) departments will shrink dramatically. The Tax Foundation has estimated that compliance costs would drop more than 90 percent. |
In contrast, I do not appreciate the dishonesty coming from Your Nightmare. This is by no means the first time he has posted an excerpt that, when taken in total, does not convey the message which he asserts it conveys. Indeed, the message in total has been shown to be in support of the nrst, not against.
Your Nightmare has also been dishonest about his reasons for rejecting the nrst. First, it was because of details in the bill (which he misrepresented), then it was because he thought a VAT was better, then it was because he thought a Flat Income tax was better, now we're back to misrepresenting by excerpting. If he were being truthful, it would be clear why he opposes the nrst. He's just not owning up to the truth - is he a liberal operative receiving talking points from Durbin and Conyers? This is just the type of propoganda I'd expect from the likes of them.
While not always easy to identify, having Your Nightmare masquerading as an information provider has been useful to me (and many others I'm sure). I have learned a lot about the nrst AND I have learned that there really are some people who will reject something good for America.
Geez, I appreciate your willingness to share your resources, time, and knowledge for the benifit of the USA.
You're a great American.
"Congratulations! Now try getting a few Senators."
Post #74
"You're a funny guy. You keep trying to make the fact that you have a bill matter. It doesn't. But you are welcome to keep trying."
So let me see if I have this right. Whether or not you have a bill in congress or even a documented proposal isn't relevant "at this stage in the process". However, the number of sponsors you have IS relevant. LOL
Whether or not you have a bill in congress or even a documented proposal isn't relevant "at this stage in the process". However, the number of sponsors you have IS relevant.The fact that you don't have any support in the Senate (and not much in the House) shows that a "documented proposal" isn't relevant at this stage in the game. You can get a couple dozen congressmen to sign on to anything. Not too many senators are going to support any particular proposal "at this stage in the game." Which is why you only have 1 senator.
It is even more instructive to see the comment in full context however:I don't see where the additional text adds anything. It seems to me you are just adding on to what I posted so you can say I posted out of context. I do see where Mastromarco and Burton talk about monetary policy and prices. I seem to recall you rejected that idea when I posted it. So you disagree with the authors of the FairTax.
We would note that this is, of course, not true with respect to the current system, which cascades both tax and compliance costs, a significant omission by Gale.But they also state later that income and payroll taxes might not be incorporated into prices. If they aren't in prices, how do they "cascade." They don't really know because nobody does, including you.
Gale’s concern for businesses compliance costs under the sales tax is curious in that he seems utterly unaware of the huge burden that the present system imposes on business.Yup, that's why we need to change it.
VOMIT!
Not the VAT, which you sometimes say is your choice for tax reform....
Nor the flat income tax, which you sometimes also say is your choice for tax reform.
In contrast, I do not appreciate the dishonesty coming from Your Nightmare.Dishonest? You're one to talk. Let's do a test: With the FairTax, will tax inclusive prices stay the same and will I take home what my nominal wages are now?
First, it was because of details in the bill (which he misrepresented),How about giving me a specific example of where I misrepresented the details of the bill. Or are you just making stuff up again?
then it was because he thought a VAT was better, then it was because he thought a Flat Income tax was better,I support a VAT or a flat tax over the FairTax. I misspeak once and you guys go off. Y'all are really living up to your nut job reputations.
If he were being truthful, it would be clear why he opposes the nrst.It is clear. I've stated it many times.
He's just not owning up to the truth - is he a liberal operative receiving talking points from Durbin and Conyers?Talking points? What are talking points?
You're a great American.LOL! I just got this image of y'all sitting around in lawn chairs with your "No IRS" t-shirts and hats on patting each other on the back. Y'all really are just anti-IRS kooks.
he he he
he he heYou have a "No IRS" t-shirt?
No.
"Testimony of the Honorable Mark W. Everson Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service."
"VOMIT!"
Perhaps you will like this testimony a little better.
"Greenspan Touts Idea of a Consumption Tax"
I'll post that separately .... if noone has beaten me to it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.