[Beagle8U]

" Even he recognized that if a tax could be partially hidden, the objection to the tax would be minimized."

OK. Now I get it. You mean if the tax is partially hidden and misleading people may buy into it being a good deal.

Kinda like the Fairytax when they say its going to be a 23% sales tax, but when you buy a $1 item, after the tax is added it wont be $1.23. It will be more.

Great idea, hiding what the real tax will be. I'll bet that will help to get people on board with this.

[groanup]

The rate isn't the problem. The argument about the rate is bogus. You tell me, what should the rate be? The debate should be about the method.

[Congressman Billybob]

You have it exactly backwards. A "hidden" tax is when the government gets your money without you ever seeing it happen. A tax is not "hidden" when the money must come directly from your pocket, and you can see the amount on the receipt.

FICA and income taxes are hidden. The hundreds of taxes buried in the price of a new car (except the sales and registration taxes) are hidden. Got the distinction?

John / Billybob

[pigdog]

"... OK. Now I get it. You mean if the tax is partially hidden and misleading people may buy into it being a good deal.

Kinda like the Fairytax when they say its going to be a 23% sales tax, but when you buy a $1 item, after the tax is added it wont be $1.23. It will be more.

Great idea, hiding what the real tax will be. I'll bet that will help to get people on board with this."

No, obviously you DON'T get it. You're seriously misinformed on almost every point you make. You'd help yourself a great deal just by reading the first 3 or 4 pages of the report and then the paragraph headed "3.3 Tax-Inclusive versus Tax-Exclusive Rates" that starts at the bottom of page 10 of the paper.

There is no "hiding" of the tax rate - quite the opposite since a receipt is required with each taxable sale that shows the rate clearly.