Posted on 03/07/2014 11:58:34 AM PST by SoConPubbie
There will indeed always be taxes and tax collectors. But to conclude then that there must be an IRS is bogus man.
The obvious contradiction is state sales taxes. There a tax and there are tax collectors - but no IRS.
The method of tax collection matters greatly wrt freedom.
It’s a troll.
We need to end the Federal government’s independent tax collection completely, except for modest tariffs. Individual states should be billed for their share of federal spending, and the states should figure out how to collect it.
Politicians and their staffs get paid to put in all those exemptions. It's a huge industry.
-——but no IRS.-——
Actually there is a state equivalent. That would be in Tennessee the Department of Revenue. Individuals have little interaction with them, but businesses do. They receive the taxes and come after you if they suspect non payment.
If you are a Rush listener, you would know that the entity in NYC harasses him constantly even though he lives in Florida. They audit him every year even though it has been many years since he lived or worked in NYC
I stand by my statement. If the IRS has a name change, the new entity will still need to enforce what ever tax code comes about.
... the Department of Revenue. Individuals have little interact ion with them, but businesses do. They receive the taxes and come after you if they suspect non payment.
Yes the state sales tax people are good at what they do. that they do not harass individuals is a plus in my book.
It's much, much easier to track retail business than all individual income earners... obviously the universe that has to be monitored is 90% smaller.
Cash registers, cashier numbers, computer inventory tracking, state sales tax numbers - all make it hard to conceal the steal.
Sales tax agents harass rush? whaaa? Or is it income tax people that harass him? Sales tax agents monitor businesses...
I also need to make something clearer - there are substantial differences between the IRS and a state sales tax agency that make the IRS markedly worse.
So when I say there will not be an IRS with a retail sales tax, that’s true. When you say there will be a state sales tax agency to enforce the tax, that’s true.
But it will not be the IRS. No movee the goalpostees.
While you and your pig are singing, the adults around here are addressing the tax situation in the US. Let us know when you get the diapers off and the brain begins to work.
You know what...I am sorry for the snarky remarks I have made to you. These are not right and I should have never made them. You may have some great points to argue and I should listen. You have not wasted your time and maybe this pig can learn to sing.
With regard to the OP, Cruz’ idea of a “postcard” tax return will still require an “IRS” of some kind. That makes his argument ridiculous. His contention is that this is a “flat tax” idea. But, the problem (as you know if you are truly a “taxman”) is determining what “income” really is. That is what takes all the schedules (B, C, D, E, F, 4797, etc.). Even with just deducting a “standard amount” and taking home mortgage interest & donations (his view) there will still be cheating and the need for an “IRS”. And, I don’t work for them.
Your contention for the “fair tax” is really a move to a consumption based sales tax (far different from Cruz). It has its own problems of administration and would require an “IRS” to deal with all of the companies reporting. Do airlines file on their sales? Do service companies file on theirs? The states would have to double in size for their Revenue Depts. to handle audits, so now the cost is on the state. Additionally, the economy will collapse if everyone buys online offshore with a neighboring country sans tax. Help me understand how this is an improvement.
I see your point, but I don't agree.
While the complexity of tax filings may, as you say, motivate more intrusion by the IRS, I think other factors contribute much more significantly, particularly the magnitude of one's income. Targeting large income earners will yield more revenue for the effort needed to conduct the audits.
IRS intrusion could also be attributed to nefarious motives, e.g., political allegiance of the taxpayer, or targeting by political opponents, which have no relation to complexity of the tax form at all.
IETC fraud is a big problem. But, the IRS doesn't pursue it, IMO, because the taxpayers are at the lower end of the income scale, and because not pursuing it fits with the liberal/statist wealth redistribution agenda.
I don't think that "...IRS figures that each of us lies on our tax returns." Some people lie, others don't. The IRS just looks at the numbers and tries to maximize revenues.
I can't speak for all CPAs, but this one would be much happier with the FairTax.
I get a lot of pings from you about FairTax threads. Keep them coming. Do you do the ping list now? I thought it was Man50D at one time.
Thank you, foxfield, for your analysis of my thinking re: IRS intrusion.
Sorry for the delay in responding. I have had other priorities for the last couple of days.
I agree that one’s “liability” for an IRS audit is directly correlated to one’s income: the more money one earns, the more interest IRS has. IRS interest will, IMHO, significantly intensify when the Flat Tax and its paucity of supporting paperwork is put into play. I’d wager that you have actually strengthened my argument: many people whose income might cause IRS scrutiny provide supporting paperwork for their tax filing and avoid audits. Absent the supporting paperwork, IRS might have a lot more interest?
I also agree with the political motivations of the IRS, and, that reason alone is good and sufficient reason to replace the income tax with the FairTax and abolish the IRS.
The political aspect of the IRS not doing IETC “audits” also is grounds for FairTax, wouldn’t you say?
In my MBA program, we spent some time with MacGregor’s Theory “X” and Theory “Y,” which describe two contrasting models of workforce motivation. Without convening a seminar, a Theory “X” manager distrusts his subordinates and micromanages them with threats and coercion, whereas a Theory “Y” manager trusts his subordinates and leads them in positive ways.
I believe that the IRS (and many other government agencies, for that matter) is a Theory “X” organization, distrusting its “clients” (that would be us) and using all means at its disposal to intimidate them. IOW, IRS believes that we lie. I agree that IRS tries to maximize revenues, but look at the tactics they are required to use to do so? Flat Tax will, IMHO, make IRS a more abusive agency.
Most of the CPAs and Tax Attorneys I have talked to like FairTax. There are some holdouts, but that is because they feel that their livelihood would be threatened; they cannot see what is on the other side of “no income tax filings.” It is a “one mind at a time” process to win them over.
Man50D had to drop out, unfortunately. I still ping him, hoping to catch him “lurking” and that he’ll decide to join us again. So, by default, I am the keeper of the ping list.
Dutchboy88, I accept your apology. Please accept mine, as well. I, too, was snarky. I should have been more helpful.
Senator Cruz has good intentions, he just cannot think outside the income tax box. And to postulate that the flat tax will result in a less intrusive IRS is folly, IMHO. See my comments re: intrusive IRS in my conversations with foxfield, a CPA. He makes good points. HST, an income tax of every kind DEMANDS an IRS be in place to “administer” it.
The FairTax will be collected by the respective state sales tax agencies. A state can choose not to collect the federal sales tax, and either outsource the collection to another state, or opt to have the federal government collect it directly. Somehow, I believe the 5 states with no sales tax will set up their own agencies.
Each state sales tax collection agency, and each retail business that collects the FairTax will be paid to do so, to cover their administrative costs.
With respect to your comments re: airlines and service companies, there are roughly 5 million (best number I could come up with) retail businesses in the US. As you can readily understand, there are far fewer companies to monitor and audit than there are individual tax payers. Under the FairTax, an individual American who does not own a retail business, will never see a tax collector.
That, to me, makes the FairTax a no-brainer!
With respect to off-shore purchases, FairTax will be levied when the item in question is imported into the US. The mechanism is in place and is used today.
Hope this helps. For more information, go to http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=FAQs
Certainly, I will accept it. Very kind of you to offer some more info. I see some valuable things in your post and when I am not slammed at work, I'll spend some time digesting these. More when I can...regards.
We are both teaching our respective pigs to sing?
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.