[ancient_geezer]

Could I have a show of hands of those who want to pay
$105

Sorry, hiding the rest of the tax burden in consumption expenditure dosen't do the trick.

You want to believe in $105. The reality, the rest derived from the cost of goods, services, stagnation of wages, and loss in retirment pension returns. all $7,500 plus the overhead cost and deadweight loss that arise out of a system that taxes the full capital of every turnover transaction making up GDP.

There aren't any free lunches friend . You pay it up front minimizing the overhead & upsteams costs involved, or pay it in inflationary pricing with all the burdens attendant with a ubiquitous tax system besides.

Pre-WWII Europe tried those turnover taxes and destroyed world economies with them. You think you're getting a freebee but look behind the curtains, the piper gets paid no matter what. And that guy that pays the piper will always be you.

[tech30528]

Nope. I've tried, but I just can't get past the initial down payment on the new home. If NRST is only going to impose tax on the new home, and not the used one, it just seems to me that the new home market will take a hit. However, there is a solution. Now, I know we are in no position to make changes to a proposed tax plan, after all, we didn't write it (although I wonder if maybe geez helped, given his outstanding knowledge of it. Just a joke geez, and a compliment at that) but what if the final point of sale was construed as the payment made on said purchase? What if the tax was applied to each payment made on the mortgage? Then the finance company doesn't have to cover it at closing, and the "owner" would pay the tax on each principle payment? This takes the burden off the initial purchase, removing liability from the finance company, and in the end the tax is only payed once... by the consumer, not the finance company. This also allows the tax to be imposed on used home sales, and reflects the end result of eliminating payroll taxes to the owner of the home without negative effects to the housing market. Geez?

[tech30528]

Nope. I've tried, but I just can't get past the initial down payment on the new home. If NRST is only going to impose tax on the new home, and not the used one, it just seems to me that the new home market will take a hit. However, there is a solution. Now, I know we are in no position to make changes to a proposed tax plan, after all, we didn't write it (although I wonder if maybe geez helped, given his outstanding knowledge of it. Just a joke geez, and a compliment at that) but what if the final point of sale was construed as the payment made on said purchase? What if the tax was applied to each payment made on the mortgage? Then the finance company doesn't have to cover it at closing, and the "owner" would pay the tax on each principle payment? This takes the burden off the initial purchase, removing liability from the finance company, and in the end the tax is only payed once... by the consumer, not the finance company. This also allows the tax to be imposed on used home sales, and reflects the end result of eliminating payroll taxes to the owner of the home without negative effects to the housing market. Geez?