Posted on 09/02/2005 11:01:09 AM PDT by pigdog
Comment: 50 Reasons I Support the FairTax (How many reasons can you give for supporting the present IRS tax system?)
Those Who Know the Facts Love the Fair Tax www.fairtax.org
FairTax and Individuals and Families (Family-friendly tax reform)
1. It allows workers to keep 100% of their pay, with nothing withheld the IRS or for Social Security and Medicare payments.
2. It is revenue neutral with the present income tax system, funding the federal budget at current levels.
3. It shifts the tax to consumption. Records show that consumption is more stable than income, therefore the tax revenue stream is likely to be a more stable and predictable amount.
4. It is progressive, a “prebate” of the tax amount up to the poverty level is given to everyone. This means that those spending below the poverty level have a net gain because the “prebate” exceeds the amount paid in taxes. (Under the present system the working poor pay the payroll tax even if they get a full refund of income tax withheld.)
5. It doesn’t tax pre-owned items – clothes, cars, homes. Only new items are taxed when sold by a business to an individual.
6. It is expected to remove an average of 22% of the cost of American made goods by removing the built-in payroll tax (the other 7.65% of earnings that employers pay), corporate income tax, and other business taxes that are now passed to consumers as an “embedded" tax of approximately 22% due to the cascading of income and payroll taxes paid by U.S. employers, at every step of production, to the U.S. Treasury. Competition will cause prices to fall by approximately that amount, on average.
7. It allows families to save more for home ownership, education, and retirement. An average family making $50,000 will have $7,500 more spendable income.
8. It removes the need for formal accounts of the 401(k), IRA, HSA, etc., varieties. Anyone, rich or poor, will be able to set up any kind of savings or investment account without regard to taxes or the government. No special knowledge of tax law is necessary.
9. It makes educational tuition a tax-free expenditure of tax-free income.
10. It eliminates the income tax and the IRS. Members of Congress and the public overwhelmingly agree that the current internal revenue code is cumbersome, intrusive, coercive, and inefficient.
11. It eliminates 90% of the cost of compliance. American families and American businesses waste an estimated $250 – $600 billion per year (and countless hours of time) doing the paperwork necessary to comply with the current tax code. That is roughly $1,000 – $2,000 annually for every man, woman and child in the U.S. (Businesses typically pass their tax bills and compliance costs on to the consumer, i.e., individuals and families.)
12. It’s simple, unambiguous, and certain, the opposite of the current tax code, 60,044 pages and counting.
13. It assures that no American will find, at the end of the year, a need to get a loan to pay taxes as an alternative to penalties, interest, or cheating.
14. The broader tax base comprises everyone spending money in the U.S., including the ten percent of our economy (an estimated $1 trillion) that today is underground or under the table. Under the FairTax, the illegal drug dealer will pay his tax just like the rest of us when he buys his sunglasses, BMW, and other items, as will those who work for cash and undocumented immigrants, all of whom receive government and societal benefits.
15. It encourages work by letting workers keep 100% of their earnings and giving a rebate, in addition, making the notion that “the more you work, the more money you have”, a reality, unlike the current system where welfare is lost when you go to work, so the first dollars earned after taxes just offset what a welfare recipient is currently receiving in assistance, so working is perceived as disadvantageous.
16. It allows more of the lower income families to become home owners by allowing a second job income above their current income (all tax free) to be applied to a mortgage. Money for down payments for homes is also saved totally tax free, causing it to accumulate faster.
17. It has the result that all lending in America will be at the equivalent of today’s tax exempt interest rates, which are 25%-30% less than today’s taxable home mortgage interest rates. This will create a huge boom in housing purchases and allow existing homeowners to refinance and reduce their cost of homeownership substantially.
18. It allows families to retain farms and businesses in the hands of those who built them through the elimination of the death tax.
19. It allows families to give tax-free assistance to one another by eliminating the gift tax.
20. It gives individuals (and businesses) the right to donate as much as they want to in a given year to charitable causes, without concern for exceeding an allowed limit on giving.
21. It encourages individuals to self-insure, making the health system more direct-pay (no 3rd party pay), thus bringing costs down.
22. It puts an end to the anxiety for honest taxpayers that begins soon after January 1 for most of use, culminating in wondering whether we’ve claimed everything we legally could and nothing we shouldn’t, all without raising questions at the IRS. It makes April 15 just another day. (Perhaps it will be a holiday after the FairTax is enacted!) FairTax and Social Security and Medicare
23. It eliminates the regressive payroll tax that hurts the poor. Currently, every one of us is taxed a minimum of 7.65% on our first-dollar of wages up to $90,000 (the cap for FICA, not Medicare), if we earn that much. It provides funding for Social Security and Medicare at a level equal to or greater than the present.
24. It provides that all 290 million Americans and 51 million visiting tourists fund Social Security and Medicare with their purchases. Today only 110 million workers fund these programs via deductions from their paychecks.
25. It assures that the wealthiest Americans will be voluntarily helping to fund social security with every last dollar they spend above the poverty level. Today, earnings are subject to FICA taxes only up to $90,000. The wealthiest Americans therefore do not pay into the system above that amount. If their earnings are from investments, no earnings fund the Social Security system.
FairTax and the Economy
26. It increases investment in business by eliminating the capital gains tax.
27. It allows for better planning by businesses, because they no longer have to consider tax implications for everything they do.
28. It makes higher employment or better compensation possible in the small business sector, where today it costs approximately three dollars in compliance costs to pay one dollar in payroll and income taxes.
29. It makes American products more competitive overseas by removing the embedded tax from them, thus lowering the prices of our exports, which compensates for low foreign wages.
30. By making our exports more competitive overseas, it lowers our balance of trade deficit and increases employment at home.
31. By removing the embedded tax from them, it makes American products more competitive with imports here, compensating for the low cost of imported products from which taxes have been removed before exportation to the U.S.
32. It encourages investment in companies located in the U.S., thus providing a home for money already in the U.S. and attracting more. The U.S. will be the most attractive tax-free haven in the world for doing business.
33. It encourages repatriation to the U.S. of money held by U.S. individuals and companies now in foreign countries, with no tax consequence. American companies will return from offshore and overseas.
34. It results in a windfall profit, likely to be invested in job-making businesses, for many of those holding taxable corporate high interest bonds at the time of passage of FairTax, since the bonds will not be taxed under FairTax. (Currently, a higher interest rate is usually paid to entice investors to buy the corporate bonds rather than go with the lower interest, but tax free, municipal bonds.)
35. It results in Federal Reserve rates being based on current consumption, which is rather stable, instead of future earnings, which are less predictable, resulting in surer inflation prevention.
36. It reduces production costs for farmers and other subsidized businesses, leading to a reduction in subsidies, thus reducing the federal budget.
37. It moves many individuals now providing tax advice (return preparation, advice, accounting, planning, and records maintenance) into an expansive economy where they will be producing goods and services. There they can add to the standard of living of all Americans and likely earn more than they do currently, instead of shuffling paper for the government (and not contributing anything economically to society).
FairTax and Churches and Non-profit Organizations
38. It frees churches and other non-profit organizations from the expense of filing tax returns and paying their half of Social Security and Medicare payments for employees. There will no longer be any 501(c) (3), 501(c) (4), etc., non-profit tax status, because there will be no more tax to be exempt from.
39. It restores to churches and non-profit organizations the 1st Amendment right to engage in free speech, without fear of losing their tax-free status. FairTax and Rights and Freedoms
40. It restores the 4th Amendment, protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures, from which the IRS presently is exempt.
41. It restores the 5th Amendment, which guarantees the right to due process. Under current systems the IRS has their own courts with their own set of rules not included in the 5th.
42. It restores individual privacy. The government no longer needs to know where you work, what you are earning, and what you are doing with it.
43. It relieves citizens of the risk of facing the shift in burden of proof that is so common with the current system, i.e., the taxpayer is guilty unless innocence can be proved, but even the IRS staff sometimes gives conflicting interpretations.
44. It eliminates the need to have a "marriage" clarification declaring who you live with, as that no longer has any bearing at all on a state or federal sales tax.
45. It eliminates the need for courts to decide which divorced parent gets to take the tax deduction for children.
46. Without FICA to pay, most states, counties, municipalities, and school districts will see a large increase in their state budget revenues, additionally lowering the overall tax burden (State & Federal) for most Americans.
47. It eliminates the administrative costs incurred by states in collection of state sales taxes because states will piggyback the state tax collection onto the national tax collection, for which they are compensated by the FairTax ¼% administrative cost give-back. (Retailers receive an equal amount for collecting the FairTax.)
FairTax and Politics<\b>
48. It cleans up a major flaw in campaign financing, eliminating campaign donations for "tax favors".
49. It eliminates wrangling in Congress over tax cuts, the tax code, and who is or is not paying a fair share of the tax bill, providing more time for debate on more productive issues.
FairTax and the Environment
50. It’s good for the environment. Reportedly, the IRS sends out 8 billion pages of forms and instructions each year. Laid end to end, they would stretch 28 times around the earth. Nearly 300,000 trees are cut down yearly to produce the paper for all the IRS forms and instructions. Also, since it taxes only new items, it would encourage buying tax-free pre-owned cars, clothes, furniture, houses, etc. Reuse is good for the environment, too.
Kenneth J. Van Dellen (with help from friends)
OK, here's how I'd support this:
Include a plan where I'd get a rebate for income taxes I've already paid on my savings.
Hey while were at it how about a rebate on all the taxes I paid on wage income to buy my house?
Why stop there? Better yet a rebate on all the income I have ever paid tax on in the past.
Wayne Gretzky said it.
Repeal that part of the constitution that allows the income tax, and I'll be on board, other wise, there is no point in having a national sales tax, and then a year later, a new and re-instated income tax.
Some other reasons to add to your list. Of course, these would be some reasons to NOT have a "fair tax":
51. It encourages a "black-market" un-taxed economy.
52. It makes it very easy for some taxpayers to "cheat" -- thereby increasing the tax burden on honest taxpayers.
53. It will probably decrease consumption.
54. Poor taxpayers would pay substantially more tax,
unless a mammoth "rebate bureaucracy" is established.
55. There is no proof that the "rebate bureaucracy" would be more competenet or smaller or less expensive than the IRS is now.
56. As that "rebate bureaucracy" would be disbursing rather than collecting dollars, it would be more prone to corruption than the IRS is now.
57. The income tax wouldn't "go away" anyway. So we would have both: an income tax AND a consumption tax.
58. etc..
Some other reasons to add to your list. Of course, these would be some reasons to NOT have a "fair tax":
51. It encourages a "black-market" un-taxed economy.
52. It makes it very easy for some taxpayers to "cheat" -- thereby increasing the tax burden on honest taxpayers.
53. It will probably decrease consumption.
54. Poor taxpayers would pay substantially more tax,
unless a mammoth "rebate bureaucracy" is established.
55. There is no proof that the "rebate bureaucracy" would be more competenet or smaller or less expensive than the IRS is now.
56. As that "rebate bureaucracy" would be disbursing rather than collecting dollars, it would be more prone to corruption than the IRS is now.
57. The income tax wouldn't "go away" anyway. So we would have both: an income tax AND a consumption tax.
58. etc..
6. It is expected to remove an average of 22% of the cost of American made goods by removing the built-in payroll tax (the other 7.65% of earnings that employers pay), corporate income tax, and other business taxes that are now passed to consumers as an “embedded" tax of approximately 22% due to the cascading of income and payroll taxes paid by U.S. employers, at every step of production, to the U.S. Treasury. Competition will cause prices to fall by approximately that amount, on average.
Of course these items are mutually exclusive, but fairy taxers like to claim both of them despite the researchers denial that they both can happen. It is just a minor $1.33 Trillion lie. That's more than 10 times the damage Katrina called, just to put it in perspective. A minor fib.
But it will be a nice income stream so bums will have money to buy their booze.
6. It is expected to remove an average of 22% of the cost of American made goods by removing the built-in payroll tax (the other 7.65% of earnings that employers pay), corporate income tax, and other business taxes that are now passed to consumers as an “embedded" tax of approximately 22% due to the cascading of income and payroll taxes paid by U.S. employers, at every step of production, to the U.S. Treasury. Competition will cause prices to fall by approximately that amount, on average.
You can't get both. Dr. Jorgenson's analysis, from which the 22% embedded tax figure comes, included the employer's half of Social Security and tax on frofits plus the employee's half of Social Security and the employee's income tax as the employer's embedded tax. You can keep your net pay and get no increase in prices, or keep your gross and get about an 18% increase in prices. Keeping your gross and having no change in prices is not an option.
Yep. The shills will never shut up until their paychecks dry up.
15. It encourages work by letting workers keep 100% of their earnings and giving a rebate, in addition, making the notion that “the more you work, the more money you have”, a reality, unlike the current system where welfare is lost when you go to work, so the first dollars earned after taxes just offset what a welfare recipient is currently receiving in assistance, so working is perceived as disadvantageous.
It sounds good, but if welfare is not based on income, what will it be based on under the fair tax? I will give you a hint, it will still be based on income and they will still reduce their aid just like they do today. There is no welfare reform in this bill, the system will work as it does today with the same real disadvantage of going to work. Just another bogus claim unfortunately.
Shills??? I am not the one lying through my butt about something that has been thoroughly disproved.
Woo, hoo! Great post. This guy has nailed it. 600,000 fair taxers can't be wrong. Neither can these guys:
http://www.gopinsight.com/2005/04/economists-nationwide-endorse-fairtax.php
Without FICA to pay, most states, counties, municipalities, and school districts will see a large increase in their state budget revenues, additionally lowering the overall tax burden (State & Federal) for most Americans.Yeah, the states wouldn't be paying 7.65% FICA, they would be paying 29.87% FairTax on their employee's wages! [For you FairTaxers, 29.87% is larger than 7.65%.]
51. It encourages a "black-market" un-taxed economy.
Interesting that the income payroll tax seems to be able to do that very nicely already. When all it takes to evade an income tax is to not report the income. Hiding out among 120 million taxpayers for the IRS to track down an check on evading income and payroll taxes today is easier than evading a retail sales tax anyday.
52. It makes it very easy for some taxpayers to "cheat" -- thereby increasing the tax burden on honest taxpayers.
Lets see to make a living off of an retail sales tax one must have a business large enough to attract customers and saletax enforcement types. Not a very good prospect for significant cheating, considering that to attract customers to such an enterprize they have to offer lower total prices to compete with legal sales, and operating without business certification means purchasing goods and services for use of the business means paying the retail tax further decreasing the profit potential of such cheating. Not too good a deal for the risk of getting caught it looks to me.
On the otherhand, the income tax it replace only requires failing to report cash transactions to evade as above.
Hmmm, yer right lets stick with the income tax so we can play with the IRS, the odds are better at not getting caught.
53. It will probably decrease consumption.
At least until savings and investment pick up driving up productivity advancements and increasing income to savers and investors as well as providing downward pressure on prices through increased competition. Seems to me that an overall increase in purchasing power as opposed to ever losing it would be a plus not a negative to any economy. Especially taking into consideration that remove the tax burdens from business open competition in foreign trade in US exports and invites new industry to locate in the US rather than drive it out.
Increasing opertunity for jobs and income rarely is a cause for decrease in the real value of consumption.
54. Poor taxpayers would pay substantially more tax,
unless a mammoth "rebate bureaucracy" is established.
Lets see, Social Security manages to provide checks to a rather large portion of the U.S. households today, no reason why they can't track their own SSN data and disburse fixed payments to all households for the amount sales tax rebate based on tax rate times the HHS povertylevel.
Seems to cover all taxpayers well, tax on the purchases of the poor (below povertylevel) would net out to zero while anyone spending more than povertylevel would see an net tax based on their expenditure above that line.
No tracking of income or expenditure required, just disbursment to know SS# holders. Necessary bureaucracy and infra-structure already there, net increase minimal.
55. There is no proof that the "rebate bureaucracy" would be more competenet or smaller or less expensive than the IRS is now.
Lets see, all that is required is sending a check to each household based on the number of SS# holders in that household. Feat accomplished by an already existing agency that pretty much does that already known as the Social Security Administration.
56. As that "rebate bureaucracy" would be disbursing rather than collecting dollars, it would be more prone to corruption than the IRS is now.
Sending out dollars on the basis of household size rather than shaking taxpayers down for dollars that folks tend to hide is somehow more corrupting. Let me think on that a while. Hmmm, danged can't seem to find a handle there.
57. The income tax wouldn't "go away" anyway. So we would have both: an income tax AND a consumption tax.
Lets see the income tax hasn't gone away in the last century, the constitution empowers congress with the power to lay and collect excises and duties of all kinds including sales taxes if it so chooses, and we don't have both today after a century of income tax. Wonder why.
Some how there seems to be a disconnect in the logic there.
If there is enough electorate interest in tax reform to throw out the existing income tax to replace it with a retail sales tax, you can believe there is enough public support to keep it that way just as there has been enough to prevent the institution of consumption tax with income taxes for the last 90+ years.
I know that; I didn't want to "out" even the obvious ones.
Oh I always forget about the magic of taxing government services. School districs will love having to spend 30% more on their payroll because of the fair tax. I assume teachers get to keep 100% of their paycheck too? You know these people seem to smart to be this stupid.
Of course these items are mutually exclusive,
Actually they aren't as the current taxsystem imposes very heavy burdens on business and the economy that would provide substantial room for a net incease in purchasing power for the consumer as the burdens are removed from producers upstream from retail sales.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/hl565.cfm
An American Economic Review study found that every dollar of taxes could impose as much as $4 of lost output on the economy, with the probable harm ranging between $1.32 and $1.47
Edgar K. Browning, "On the Marginal Welfare Cost of Taxation," American Economic Review, Vol. 77, No. 1 (March 1987), pp. 11-23."Another study in the Journal of Political Economy estimated that the corporate income tax costs more in lost output than it raises for the government."
Jane G. Gravelle and Laurence J. Kotlikoff, "The Incidence and Efficiency Costs of Corporate Taxation When Corporate and Noncorporate Firms Produce the Same Good," Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 97, No. 4 (1989), pp. 749-780.
STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DICK ARMEY
HEARING ON THE IMPACT ON
INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES OF REPLACING THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX
Committee on Ways and Means, Full Committee, 4-15-97 Testimony
Hinders Economic Opportunity
According to a study by Jane Gravelle, an economist with the Congressional Research Service, and Larry Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University, the corporate income tax costs the economy more in lost production than it raises in revenue for the Treasury. Dale Jorgenson, the chairman of the Economics Department at Harvard University, found that each extra dollar the government raises in revenue through the current system costs the economy $1.39.
Economic Burden of Taxation
William A. Niskanen
Presented October 2003
Friedman Conference
Federal Reserve Bank Dallas page 6.
www.dallasfed.org/news/research/2003/03ftc_niskanen.pdf"Given that the elasticity c implicit in recent U.S. fiscal conditions is about 0.8 and the average tax rate is about 0.3, the marginal cost of government spending and taxes in the United States may be about $2.75 per additional dollar of tax revenue. One wonders whether there are any government programs for which the marginal value is that high. Given the estimate of the long-term elasticity c from the U.S. time-series data, the marginal cost of government spending and taxes may be as high as $4.50 at the current average tax rate. "
Drag $100 through an economics department, and you can prove anything.
The "Full Paycheck" is a misrepresentation. The original FairTax economic study assumes that all wages and salaries will magically be reduced from current gross pay down to current after-tax pay.
See below for more information:
| JORGENSON EXPLODES FAIRTAX MYTH (FR Exclusive) |
||
| Posted by RobFromGa On News/Activism 08/25/2005 12:40:44 AM EDT · 655 replies · 6,383+ views self | August 25, 2005 | RobFromGa |
||
| OPEN LETTER TO BOORTZ/LINDER (FairTax) |
||
| Posted by RobFromGa On News/Activism 08/22/2005 9:53:28 PM EDT · 542 replies · 3,072+ views self | August 22, 2005 | RobFromGa |
||
|
|
||
| A Fair Question about Fair Tax |
||
| Posted by RobFromGa On News/Activism 08/03/2005 7:51:43 PM EDT · 966 replies · 5,230+ views August 3, 2005 | RobFromGa |
||
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.