Posted on 08/20/2007 6:22:57 AM PDT by John Galt 72
A Tax Break for Driving to Work? The Fair Tax Will Fix This
By Herman Cain
August 20, 2007
There is a little-known deduction in the tax code that 400,000 people know about, and by which they avoid $150 million dollars in taxes each year. The issue is not that most of us do not know about this little sneak-a-tax, or even the amount that the rest of us are picking up through a higher federal deficit.
The issue is that this is another example of how the tax code is used to encourage a desired behavior. The deduction encourages people to drive to work by subsidizing their parking costs. If you do not have to pay for parking at work you get zero deduction. At the same time, the Department of Transportation is planning to spend $354 million to encourage people to not drive to work by subsidizing their mass transit costs.
That’s right! Our tax dollars are working against each other.
Read the entire column here: http://www.northstarwriters.com/hc074.htm
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I have a more basic objection, namely, it’s not the government’s job to socially engineer our behavior according to their wishes, by providing little carrots (tax deductions, credits, exemptions) and sticks (taxes, marriage penalty, recaptures) when we do what pleases them, or we don’t. They should leave us the hell alone unless and until we infringe on other’s lives, rights or property.
The IRS generally makes deductible the costs of generating income: uniforms, union dues, materials or tools, that sort of thing.
To someone with an office job in a big city, the cost of parking is often a sizable cost related to their generating income.
That’s why it’s deductible.
To someone with an office job in a big city, the cost of parking is often a sizable cost related to their generating income.
That’s why it’s deductible.
Your “income” is a direct measure of how much talent, skill, and work you put INTO the economy and society. To tax/punish this is inherently wrong.
However, there is no such moral wrong taxing based on what you consume, especially if you are not taxed on what you consume in order to live.
I agree with you 100% but I do NOT like the so-called “fair tax” (its not)
It will replace these thousands of bad tax laws with one huge bad one.
It will tax at a HUGE rate at the cash register and then...
wait for it..
GIVE A ‘REBATE’ to people at the end of the year according to how little they make.
How long before the democraps will want to increase this payout to attract the stupid voters?
So we replace huge complex tax code with one stupid law that even the simplest minded will understand... “Vote for me and get a bigger handout at the end of the year”
I am for a ‘FLAT TAX’ - no rebates, NO DEDUCTIONS (not even mortgage) and EVERYONE PAYS THE SAME PERCENT (rich and poor pay 10%)
Then the major argument will be what do you spend it on?- law enforcement and bridge building? or ‘diversity’ programs and welfare handouts?
A tax break for parking? I pay almost $1100 a year for parking. You are telling me I can deduct that??
Yeah, you are right. Get rid of that tax loophole.
I hate those loophole things.....
“GIVE A ‘REBATE’ to people at the end of the year according to how little they make.”
Dude, do you even read the proposals you complain about?
Pardon my all caps but “EVERYONE GETS THE SAME REBATE” regardless of income, net worth, gender, race, religion, creed, sexual orientation or whether they bothered to read it when it was proposed.
Consumption tax bump.
The tax code will never be modified in such a way that career politicians will lose their ability to dole out favored status for campaign contributions.
As far as the flat tax goes, this sounds wonderful, but the same social engineering is implicit. Does Mr. K really think a blind grandmother should pay the same tax (rate and amount) as someone without the extra costs of a handicap? Oila’ the deductions.
Fire away, but I think the current system is here to stay and it should be that way. Probably should add a sales tax. After all, the problem of people earning here (with no income tax) and then spending where there is no US tax generated (Europe, Mexico, etc.) will use US services and never support them. Every person has income (even if it is savings) and outgo (even if they are a cheapskate). We need to tap some of that movement in both directions.
B4L8r
Are you listening to yourself? how long will that last? Until people start screaming “why do the rich get the same rebate as the poor”
VERY soon there will be a means test, then the rich get excluded from any ‘rebate’ then the poor vote themselves bigger and bigger rebates and higher ‘sales tax’
Yes I think a blind gramma should pay the same rate as everyone else.
Where do we stop means-testing once we start? Everyone benefits from public services such as roads and military protection- even blind gramma.
ping
I have to agree with you on this one. I can hear the sob stories now and see the coverage of the Hedge Fund manager driving up in his 120k car and cashing his rebate check the same time fixed income grandma is dropped off by the bus to cash hers.
Thanks.
These ‘fair tax’ proponents seem to think that government will suddenly begin to work correctly and the ‘fair tax’ will get implemented so nice and easy with no unintended consequences.
I can see the step 2 implementation of the plan from a mile away. (and 3 and 4 ...)
Imbedded in the philosophy of the law is the destructive principle, so that once it is in effect the economic and political consequences are inevitable. The principle of the income tax is the denial of private property.
There is nothing in the Sixteenth Amendment, there is nothing in the principle of the income tax, which puts a limit on the amount the State may demand, and hence the implication is clear that the individual's absolute right of private property is denied.
The theory of republican government, that its powers are derived from the will of the people, is no safeguard against this denial of private property.
Assuming that the Sixteenth Amendment at the time of its enactment did express the will of the people, every one of them, the substance and effect of income taxation was to destroy the will of any subsequent generation for modification or revocation.
It is unlike any other law. For the denial of the right of private property is in essence the denial of the right of the individual to himself. He is no longer a free person if he is not free to keep and enjoy the products of his labors. …"
Excerpted from From Solomon’s Yoke to the Income Taxby Frank Chodorov
If we are ever again to be a truly free people we MUST free ourselves of the communist inspired "progressive" income tax and the best vehicle available currently is HR 25, the FairTax bill!
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.