Posted on 08/24/2005 8:27:44 PM PDT by Man50D
Imaginative director Terry Gilliam recently released his long-awaited epic The Brothers Grimm, starring Matt Damon and Heath Ledger. After well over a month, Neil Boortz and Representative John Linder’s The Fair Tax Book still resides in the top 10 on Amazon.com’s best-seller list.
It is difficult to tell whether the book or the movie is the bigger fairy tale.
Aug 23, 2005 -- 09:07:50 PM EST
The premise behind the “Fair” Tax is simple – shockingly so. The income tax should be disbanded (as should the IRS) and replaced with a 23% consumption tax on all retail purchases. The authors contend that this change will be revenue neutral, although they clearly intimate that they would prefer (maybe in the future) massive tax cuts of the “drown your government in a bathtub” variety.
Serious tax policy being dictated by a talk show host . . . sounds implausible, doesn’t it? Well, whether it is or not, there are a lot of people who are taking this very seriously. There’s a bill circling Congress in support of the “Fair Tax” with several notable supporters, including Dennis Hastert and Tom Delay. As this TPMCafe post details, letters to the editor are starting to appear in favor of the plan. And, as mentioned above, the book is a runaway Amazon bestseller, with hundreds of favorable reviews. During the last election, President Bush even voiced a willingness to consider the bill, before pulling back on his comments after a groundswell of opposition.
The popular support should not be surprising - it’s easy to criticize the IRS in order to make friends (and win votes). Boortz and Linder even have a valid point: the tax code does need to be reformed; at the very least, its too confusing and too easy to cheat. (For an excellent book on where we really should start reforming the tax code, check out David Cay Johnston’s Perfectly Legal.)
The fact that the plan is gaining momentum does not make it a legitimate option, however. There is plenty of room to question Boortz and Linder’s claims: the book is a ill-supported bromide that ignores unfavorable arguments and considers the necessary data optional, at best. And, even taking the proposal at face value, it is clear that the Fair Tax reflects the business interests that financed its creation and are pushing its adoption. It’s hardly surprising that the proposal is aggressively regressive and definitely not a change that will be beneficial to people who must spend a large portion of their income to live (read: middle and lower class Americans).
Given this, we here at The Warren Reports think it is important to get the word out about this plan. Over the next couple of weeks, we’re going to take a much closer look at Boortz and Linder’s Fair Tax Book, with at least three more posts planned: one on the impact the tax will have on Middle Class Americans (is it regressive?), one on our concerns with the empirical data and consistency of the argument in the book, and a final post on issues ignored in the book (e.g. transition costs). Our hope is that we can both point out the problems with the “Fair” Tax plan and stimulate a discussion on real tax reform – tax reform that benefits all Americans, not just the political donor class.
Ping
Is there a country anywhere that has a similar system (Fair Tax) and if so, does it work? Aren't the countries that have Flat Taxes doing well?
ping!
Will never happen. Countries with flat tax are doing great and generally running surpluses. Neither the fair tax or the flat tax will ever happen here although it would be great if it were to come to pass.
I think I know who Boortz is, but who's Lidner?
The flat tax will not stop the states from putting their hands on you with their own state income taxes. This will only change the federal tax system.
thanx....
Republican congressman from Georgia
And, as I understand it, the Social Security Admin, which already has an excellent system for mailing or direct depositing Social Security check each month would be in charge of mailing the pre-bate checks each month.
Agree; and logically. . .reasonably; it makes the best cents - in a manner of speaking;
. . .so I do not understand why the 'Forbe's formula' for tax reform is not looked at more seriously.
It just does not have the 'appeal' apparently, of the 'tax the rich' MO; which underscores the 'consumption tax'.
disregard multiple ' '. Yikes - nothing like 'overkill'. . . :^)
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.