Posted on 10/27/2010 9:05:22 AM PDT by CHISEL32
I have heard that most of you do not like Mike Huckabee. Some of the reasons I have never heard of and i will research them. Regardless of how you feel about Mike Huckabee what do you think of the fair tax? go to FairTax.org if you've never heard of it, but given the group of people on this website I'm sure nearly all have.
Another great reason to support the Fair Tax. It makes the government instantly smaller!
The 10% flat tax probably would do that since nearly half of the population does not pay anything at all. Actually the Fair Tax could pass easier than the 10% flat tax because the Dems want to keep our tax system as a welfare program.
A similar proposal was flying around in the UK a few years back but as usual it got pulled to pieces by people with dissenting opinions over how much to set it at, and so on.
One thing that did crop up over here (England) was, what, if anything, should corporations / businesses pay under such a regime.
It’s a tricky one because you could have two identical businesses doing the same job with the same size and complement of workforce, where one pays its workers a generous wage and throws in lots of benefits to the workforce (healthcare, pensions, holiday entitlements, paid overtime for example) while the other one pays substantially lower wages, pares down the benefits they do offer to a bare minimum, and pockets the difference.
Ironically (and remember I am talking about Britain here - we have a HUGE mountain of employment protection legislation and state obligations to workers being made redundant and so on), my experience of companies that are proud to have the “Made in England” stamp and sacrifice a bit off the profit margin to look after their employees are the ones least likely to say, “Let’s fire our English workforce and offshore the work because we’ll make more money”.
We have many companies that owned and operated by venture capitalists and they have a tendency to off-shore the work the first chance they can get - because the way they’re run, the people in charge are only ever interested in the quarterly numbers and the value of the company when the time comes to flog it and retire on the proceeds. Building a quality product, having a motivated workforce, and making a business that’ll last, just aren’t priorities for them.
I’ve got one supplier right now with a cracking product and they’re making it nearly impossible to sell because the VCs love seeing it fly off the shelves (because that means they’ve spent money) but hate having customers phoning them up asking “why doesn’t this work” and so on. And yet they go ballistic if the customer phones them up and says, “Your product sucks, I’m throwing it out and buying your competitor’s product”. That lack of joined up thinking drives me up the wall.
Does it work that way in America?
I don’t think this is an issue the Founding Fathers would’ve had to spend much time thinking about. If work needed doing in the mainland United States it got done in the mainland United States, by American companies.
This last few weeks I’ve been working at a customer site where they’ve just laid off hundreds of skilled workers because it’s cheaper to get the work done in India, and at Belfast City Airport they’ve got adverts all over the shop for companies like Tata and WiPro, which are making a shedload of money from jobs going off shore.
I don’t like the work going offshore, but I can’t really see how we could prevent it without having some government intrusion into the corporate market. I’ve got no idea how it’d work, though.
That is part of the fair tax.
The Federal Government consumes about 24% of GDP.
The reason I prefer a Fair sales tax to a Flat income tax is that a flat tax is still taxing production rather than consumption albeit at lower levels. You will still have an underground cash economy with a flat tax that avoids all income tax whereas the big pick up in revenues with a Fair sales tax is that folks that heretofore avoided income taxes by hiding income will be paying the tax at point of consumption so they can no longer avoid taxes.
My only problem with the “Fair Tax” is this. Suppose that I have saved $1000 from my current and past income which has already been taxed. Suppose then the “Fair Tax” is implemented and I use that $1000 to purchase something and I only get to spend $813 (1000 / 1.23). Could you not then argue that the $1000 was double taxed. This would only be a problem for those who have been prudent and saved money under the current tax system. But I still see it as a problem.
LLS
Huckabee isn’t just for a “Fair Tax”, he is for every tax. As he is also for open borders and government benefits for illegals, he needs your cash badly.
BINGO!
H.R.25
Fair Tax Act of 2009 (Introduced in House - IH)
TITLE I—REPEAL OF THE INCOME TAX, PAYROLL TAXES, AND ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES
SEC. 101. INCOME TAXES REPEALED.
Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to income taxes and self-employment taxes) is repealed.
SEC. 102. PAYROLL TAXES REPEALED.
(a) In General- Subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to payroll taxes and withholding of income taxes) is repealed.
(b) Funding of Social Security- For funding of the Social Security Trust Funds from general revenue, see section 201 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401).
SEC. 103. ESTATE AND GIFT TAXES REPEALED.
Subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to estate and gift taxes) is repealed.
SEC. 104. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS; EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) Conforming Amendments- The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended—
(1) by striking subtitle H (relating to financing of Presidential election campaigns), and
(2) by redesignating—
(A) subtitle D (relating to miscellaneous excise taxes) as subtitle B,
(B) subtitle E (relating to alcohol, tobacco, and certain other excise taxes) as subtitle C,
(C) subtitle F (relating to procedure and administration) as subtitle D,
(D) subtitle G (relating to the Joint Committee on Taxation) as subtitle E,
(E) subtitle I (relating to the Trust Fund Code) as subtitle F,
(F) subtitle J (relating to coal industry health benefits) as subtitle G, and
(G) subtitle K (relating to group health plan portability, access, and renewability requirements) as subtitle H.
(b) Redesignation of 1986 Code-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Internal Revenue Code of 1986 enacted on October 22, 1986, as heretofore, hereby, or hereafter amended, may be cited as the Internal Revenue Code of 2009.
(2) REFERENCES IN LAWS, ETC- Except when inappropriate, any reference in any law, Executive order, or other document—
(A) to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall include a reference to the Internal Revenue Code of 2009, and
(B) to the Internal Revenue Code of 2009 shall include a reference to the provisions of law formerly known as the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
(c) Additional Amendments- For additional conforming amendments, see section 202 of this Act.
(d) Effective Date- Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the amendments made by this Act shall take effect on January 1, 2011.
That would be a slight disadvantage initially that some funds would have been double taxed.Over the long haul though it evens out because the Fair Tax advocates studies show that if a middle class taxpayer pays a 24% national Fair Tax at point of sale that replaces income taxes, payroll taxes and corporate taxes, the average middle class person would save 9% on income that he would have paid under the old system. The reason is that the government is now collecting additional revenues from the hidden economy with a Fair sales tax that was previously avoiding taxes on hidden income under the old income tax system.
Welcome to FR.
Like many here on this forum, I do not care too much for the Huckster and do not trust him.
America is badly in need of some kind of tax reform, but regardless of how taxes are collected, the real problem at the moment seems to be that we spend much more than we collect. We’re not going to solve that problem with the current group of goons we have in congress, so we need to correct that problem first. Then maybe we can talk about how to get rid of the existing tax system and replace it with something that is fair, simple and doesn’t hurt business growth and discorage personal ambition.
For most people it would be a tax increase. Why would we support that?
“…what do you think…”
First, Huckabee is a pussy!
Second, if such could work they would have done it a long time ago!
Third, Corporations and Government do not pay taxes, you the citizenry do!
Fourth, it would not be 10% it would be 35%!
Fifth, any value added, flat or otherwise tax system will have political creep!
Sixth, the real issue is power and political corruption; any alternative taxing will only alter the mechanisms to maintain political class wealth, influence and control…instead of plan ‘A’ it will be plan ‘C’!
Seventh… there is no such thing as revenue neutral taxation!
Eighth, all taxation stripes from the citizenry their labor, is an arbitrary drag upon society and limits the accumulation of wealth!
Ninth, until government spending and national goals are the issue, talking about alternative tax systems is just a distraction!
Tenth, yes, a percentage only tax could work, only if, again only if open public information, applied to all equally, all tax incentive programs be in the form of grant style applications open to public review, and subject to public hearing requirements and able to be challenged by the public...so why has it not been tried!
Eleventh,…
Companies are in business to make money for the Corporation and the stock holders!If a country becomes to expensive to operate in they will move to another country or close their doors!!!!!
Because you get to keep your money and only pay a tax when you buy something. The feds would take no money from your pay check, no income tax, no SS tax, no fica etc.
So everything everyone buys goes up 23%? Food, housing, transportation, clothing, etc.? Everything from college tuition to toilet paper? What will suppressing consumption do to our consumption based economy? And what about those who pay far less in taxes than someone at my income level does? My kid makes $9 an hour. She has very little in the way of taxes witheld because she pays next to nothing at the end of the year. Suddenly her taxes are at 23%. I'd rather a flat tax than a regressive one.
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.