C'mon - what you got? Anything? Namecall and avoid the website because you can find nothing wrong with it?I got one. It says a married couple with one child has an "annual tax-free spending allowance" of $23,000, but even with the $440.83 "prebate," this family can't but $23,000 worth of goods. The bill uses the inclusive rate to determine the Family Consumption Allowance when it should have used the exclusive rate. This family can only buy $21,783.27 worth of goods.
I think either method of calculating effective rate is defensible. One, the rebate is spent on goods/services beyond that which one could buy with earnings alone, the other using the rebate merely to offset tax paid.
IMO it would be different depending on the situation; ie do I use the rebate to offset taxes I incurr spending my earnings? Or do I try to spend every single dime and spend the rebate on goods and services too?
I look at both rates, just b/c I'm curious. But either can be used. I would venture that the pafairtax uses the method where the rebate is used only to offset tax - but I don't know that. I haven't looked at the site too carefully - which is one of the reasons I wanted others to do so.
Besides their definition of effective rate (which encompasses both of your observations), is there anything else about the site that is questioned?
BTW, thank you for the appropriate reply.
What is the annual income from your mythical M1K family or is this one of your little games?? Your claim seems to be that this family has $0 income. Need a bit more input Nightie ... how do they live presently with no income???