Good question.
The FairTax is an attempt to rein in, in respect of taxes, the “Rule of Man” that has so corrupted human civilization right FRom the get-go. By that, I mean, Rule of Law is supposed to mean something.
If, every time the law is perceived as “unfair” by some powerful person or group and they have the clout to and then do change it to benefit themselves or their “tribe,” what happens to the Rule of Law?
IMHO, the less exemptions and loopholes a law has, the better. After all, our Constitution promises equal treatment under the law. That is hard to do when the law is perverted to satisfy some tribal requirement.
HST, the way to control the “exemption and loophole” game is for We the People to regain control of our elected officials. They DO work for us, you know!
I am reminded that in the Florida Primary yesterday, for example, EVERY sitting Congressman won their primary contest. On average, BTW, 90% of those who hold public office (and run for re-election) get re-elected every cycle.
What we need, of course, is to throw the rascals out! Even better, we need term limits, and an end to the Cadillac retirement plans/health insurance plans these Bozos vote for themselves!
Diapers and politicians need changing FRom time to time, and often for the same reason!
I don’t like the VAT for a lot of reasons: it is a hidden tax; historically, it starts out single digit, and morphs quickly into double digits; it is an administrative burden; nowhere in the world is the VAT the only tax — usually, it is in ADDITITON to an income tax scheme (FairTax REPLACES income taxes); and, lastly, governements LOVE the VAT!
Anything, be it a “program,” a tax, food stamps, welfare scheme, “benefit,” etc., etc. that government likes, I automatically don’t like!
Let us stay focused on FairTax and not get led astray by the Flat tax and VAT crowd!
I appreciate your support for the FairTax. Stay with it, please.
The basic premise of the VAT is that at each stage of sale that a sales tax is paid. That means that if the lumber company sells a load of wood to the furniture manufacturer that they pay the tax there. Then the furniture manufacturer sells furniture to a furniture store, and that is taxed there. Then the furniture store sells to the customer who pays a tax at the register.
As it stands, the fair tax wants the only “sales tax” to be to the final consumer. I’m saying that exemptions already exist for sales taxes, and that those exemptions will either continue or will eventually reappear under the fair tax. I am not entirely opposed to them. For example, I believe that a church is constitutionally untaxable. However, I can argue that their purchase as an end customer had nothing to do with the purchase that the furniture manufacturer made from the lumber company. So, they are not really being taxed when they purchase an item that has costs embedded from previous stages bringing that item to market. The only taxation on them would be the tax at the point of sale when they purchase. That tax, they could constitutionally protest.
A VAT would also ensure that those who tried purchasing and selling under the table would have at least some taxes embedded in the prices of what they purchase.
How is it going to be less prone to fraud?
Why not just not tax the things the prebates are supposedly going to refund taxes for, and eliminate all that?
I'd rather have a flat tax than something prone to smoke and mirrors.