As to the revenue neutral feature of H.R. 25 which you boast about, that revenue feature is nothing more than a provision to insure the continuance of existing big government without any of the checks and balances our founding fathers intended when granting power to tax consumption as is explained above [see post 435]. Truth is, your tax idea is a welcomed plan by socialists and the friends of big government.
As to H.R. 25 being constitutional, sorry pal, you are wrong again because Congress does not have authority to tax property unless the tax is apportioned among the states and that is what is being taxed under your proposal . . .property, and , the value of the property being sold determines the amount of tax to be paid, which contravenes the constitutional requirement that direct taxes are to be apportioned among the states.
JWK
ACRS
The only stinking tax reform we need is for the American People to demand their employees in Washington add the following words to our Constitution, bringing us back to our founding father‘s original tax plan:
“The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay “any” tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.”
The FairTax is both constitutional - and probsably more so that even your tariff-heavy and apportionment schemes - and revenue neutral.
The President has stated that revenue neutrality is one of the things he requires and I've asked you several times to show us your detailed economic presentation that shows your notions to be revenue neutral.
Also, the FairTax does not tax property, but sales to the final consumer. No apportionment is required which, despite your misinformation, did not well in the early history of the country.