Posted on 01/18/2015 5:23:37 PM PST by JOHN W K
SEE: Cruz: Abolish the IRS
January 13th , 2015
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz said Monday that Republicans should take advantage of their control of Congress to abolish the Internal Revenue Service.
We need to pass fundamental tax reform making our tax code simpler, flatter, fairer, he said Monday at Heritage Actions 2015 conservative policy summit. And Ill tell you, the single most important tax reform, we should abolish the IRS.
What is discouraging is, the above article goes on to say that Senator Ted Cruz
acknowledged its not really possible to abolish the IRS or adopt a flat tax while Obama is in office
Seems to me even if Obama were to agree to adopting a flat tax on incomes (profits, gains, salaries, interest, wages, tips, etc.) which I believe is what Senator Cruz is in favor of, the IRS would have to remain intact and the American people would continue to suffer all the miseries connected with this hideous form of taxation.
Would Congress not remain in charge of defining what is and is not taxable income? Wouldnt a flat tax in incomes continue to allow taxation to be used by our federal government as a weapon against political foes, and to silence free speech? Is a flat tax on income not intentionally designed to place an unequal tax burden on our most productive and hardworking citizens, who are then taxed directly on their earned wages which is then used by corrupted politicians to buy the votes of the unemployed and unproductive who have been made dependent upon free government cheese? Would a flat tax on incomes not continue to generate class warfare and divide American Citizens into countless factious groups, each of which attack each other and seek to benefit from this unequal form of direct taxation? And how about the billions of dollars wasted each year by Americas taxpayers and businesses to conform to its regulations and record keeping, and its mandatory divulgence of personal information? Is this not in itself a cause to reject this hideous and oppressive form of taxation?
Moving on, is it really true that its not possible to abolish the IRS as we know it and adopt a fairer system of federal taxation while Obama is in office as suggested by Senator Cruz? Seems to me that Article V of our Constitution provides a pathway which would remove Obama from an effort to close down the IRS as we know it and adopt real tax reform. But this procedure, sending an amendment to the states for ratification would require the Republican controlled House and Senate to be sincere about wanting real tax reform.
I fully agree with Senator Cruz that "Republicans should take advantage of their control of Congress to abolish the Internal Revenue Service". And this could be accomplished by the Republican controlled Congress sending the following constitutional amendment to the states for ratification!
The Fair Share Balanced Budget Amendment
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the sixteenth article of amendment, and require an annually balanced federal budget
SECTION 1. The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money
NOTE: these words would return us to our founding fathers ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of taxation which now oppresses Americas free enterprise system and robs the bread which working people have earned when selling their labor!
"SECTION 2. Congress ought not raise money by borrowing, but when the money arising from imposts duties and excise taxes are insufficient to meet the public exigencies, and Congress has raised money by borrowing during the course of a fiscal year, Congress shall then lay a direct tax at the beginning of the next fiscal year for an amount sufficient to extinguish the preceding fiscal year's deficit, and apply the revenue so raised to extinguishing said deficit."
NOTE: Congress is to raise its primary revenue from imposts and duties, [taxes at our waters edge], and may also lay miscellaneous internal excise taxes on specifically chosen articles of consumption. But if Congress borrows and spends more than is brought in from imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes during the course of a fiscal year, then, and only then, is the apportioned tax to be laid.
"SECTION 3. When Congress is required to lay a direct tax in accordance with Section 1 of this Article, the Secretary of the United States Treasury shall, in a timely manner, calculate each State's apportioned share of the total sum being raised by dividing its total population size by the total population of the united states and multiplying that figure by the total being raised by Congress, and then provide the various State Congressional Delegations with a Bill notifying their States Executive and Legislature of its share of the total tax being collected and a final date by which said tax shall be paid into the United States Treasury."
NOTE: our founders fair share formula to extinguish a deficit would be:
States population
---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATES FAIR SHARE
Total U.S. Population
This formula, as intended by our founding fathers, is to insure that those states who contribute the lions share of the tax are guaranteed a representation in Congress proportionately equal to their contribution, i.e., representation with a proportional financial obligation!
"SECTION 4. Each State shall be free to assume and pay its quota of the direct tax into the United States Treasury by a final date set by Congress, but if any State shall refuse or neglect to pay its quota, then Congress shall send forth its officers to assess and levy such State's proportion against the real property within the State with interest thereon at the rate of ((?)) per cent per annum, and against the individual owners of the taxable property. Provision shall be made for a 15% discount for those States paying their share by ((?))of the fiscal year in which the tax is laid, and a 10% discount for States paying by the final date set by Congress, such discount being to defray the States' cost of collection."
NOTE: This section respects the Tenth Amendment and allows each state to raise its share in its own chosen way in a time period set by Congress, but also allows the federal government to enter a state and collect the tax if a state is delinquent in meeting its obligation.
"SECTION 5. This Amendment to the Constitution, when ratified by the required number of States, shall take effect no later than (?) years after the required number of States have ratified it.
_______
The only question remaining is, is our Republican controlled Congress sincere about real tax reform and removing Obama from the equation?
JWK
..with all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizensa wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address
JWK
Honest money and honest taxation, the Key to Americas future Prosperity___ from Prosperity Restored by the State Rate Tax Plan, no longer in print.
I said an additional consumption tax (NRST) would be needed. Income taxes are evil. Pass it on.
The IRS isn’t about collecting revenue - that comes from the fed reserve’s bottomless credit card. The IRS in its modern configuration exists solely as a hammer to be swung whenever elements within the population become uppity. It’s the Bureau of Law by Whim. Every American is already guilty until proven innocent. Who gets prosecuted is purely a political decision - and the courts go along with this farce.
Do you have the text for that?
Okay, let’s crunch the numbers, assuming a 50% tariff, as it was for most goods in the beginning.
The USD value of all goods and services imported into the US in 2013 was $2,770,400,000,000. Let’s say $2.77 trillion.
50% of that would be $1.385 trillion, assuming all exporters could afford to continue to export to the US. If so, that is less than the current (2013) US budget of $2.74 trillion.
On the strongly plus side, most exporters would be unable to sell in the US for 50% more, so would no longer export to the US. This would require that the US rebuild much of its industry to provide us with the goods and services we wanted.
In turn, our export industries would be wiped out because foreign nations would no longer be able to afford our goods. The US would probably have enormous inflation.
The bottom line is that it might be good for the US in the long term, but it would be very painful to us to get to a new state of economic equilibrium. So it would have to be planned very methodically.
The foreigners are not buying our stuff now due either to we don't make it anymore or it is tariff'ed by them already(other nations). So this part of your argument holds no water. The rest is ok but the economic stimulus of rebuilding our industries would be like WWII econnomically. It would be fabulous.
Second that!!!
US exports of goods and services in 2013 were $2.3 trillion. So it was $2.77 trillion in, and $2.3 trillion out.
Everything we export gets tariff'ed. I think the only country that doesn't charge us a duty is Singapore. LOL.
JWK
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.