Many celebrate "Tax Freedom Day" each year--the day on which our wages so far for the year pay all our income taxes. With increases in the number and magnitude of taxes, Tax Freedom Day is pushed back later and later each year. In 1998 that day was May 8th, a day later than in 1997. We worked 45 days to pay personal income taxes, 18 days to pay sales and excise taxes, 12 days to pay property taxes, 13 days to pay corporate income taxes, and 3 days to pay other miscellaneous taxes.
On September 30, 1998 President Clinton announced a federal budget surplus of $70 billion and that he wanted to use a portion of it to save Social Security. One fact he neglected to mention was that during 1998 the Federal deficit ballooned by nearly $120 billion.
We must work to eliminate the problems with the current tax environment and implement a tax environment that is fair, simple, non-intrusive, and not counterproductive to economic growth. We must also control spending.
We must adopt a constitutional amendment to both repeal the 16th Amendment and Article I. Section 2's reference to direct taxes. This amendment could mandate a national sales tax as the sole means of taxing individuals specifying upper limits on the tax rate.
We must adopt a balanced budget constitutional amendment. Such an amendment could require the total spending of all Federal government agencies, departments, and government branches not exceed the average total revenues for the previous three fiscal years.
What are the chances that this will be implemented by the jerks in Congress, who benefit immensely by the current complex system?
Regards 37 & 39
Tell us something we don't know. Like the tactical plan to implement your strategic goals:
We must adopt a constitutional amendment to both repeal the 16th Amendment and Article I. Section 2's reference to direct taxes. This amendment could mandate a national sales tax as the sole means of taxing individuals specifying upper limits on the tax rate.
We must adopt a balanced budget constitutional amendment.
You offer no tactical plan of action to get there (smaller government) from here (income taxes); History has amply demonstrated it ain't gonna happen with income and payroll tax statutes in place.
As a consequence the answer to your question:
What are the chances that this will be implemented by the jerks in Congress, who benefit immensely by the current complex system?
Is none until the people of the United States have the income tax horseblinders removed from their eyes and all perceive the real cost of government largess personally.
- "There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government.
Politics operates on the basis of manipulating the perception of the burden of taxation:
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-George Bernard Shaw
Those who perceive little burden play the role of Poor little Paul:
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Lowest Quintile | -0.6 | -0.8 | -0.2 | -0.5 | -0.2 | -1.3 | -1.9 | -2.9 | -3.4 | -5.6 | -6.8 |
| Second Quintile | 3.6 | 3.9 | 4.6 | 3.5 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 0.9 |
| Middle Quintile | 7.1 | 7.5 | 8.3 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 6.5 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 6.1 | 5.4 |
Those that readily perceive some of the burden:
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Fourth Quintile | 9.7 | 10.4 | 11.3 | 9.5 | 9.3 | 8.7 | 8.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | 8.7 | 8.4 |
| Highest Quintile | 15.8 | 16.3 | 17.1 | 14.5 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 15.1 | 14.8 | 15.5 | 16.2 | 16.1 |
To play the role of mean ole Rich Peter.
While Congress plays both ends against the middle; hiding the real burden in inflation, higher prices on all goods and services, lower takehome pay, lower return on investment, and higher interest rates. All keeping the poor right where they are and pushing for more freebees.
We really pay:
| Effective Total Federal Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| All Families | 22.8 | 23.4 | 23.5 | 21.4 | 21.8 | 22.6 | 22.5 | 22.6 | 23.5 | 24.7 | 24.2 |
Data from IRS collections statistics and The Bureau of Economic Analysis as compiled in tabular form by the Congressional Budget Office.
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0
To remove the perception of taxation of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Federal tax rates are high because a majority of the electorate do not share proportionately in the burden their demand for largesse imposes on the minority of citizens.
The siren call for representation without taxation is the formula that got us where we are at today. The ability to hide or disguise taxation from the view of large sectors of the electorate allows the Congress to get away with the creation of the evergrowing monster that it fosters.
Liberty and freedom have a price, responsibility. If that price is avoided there are no brakes on the growth of government, the ultimate result is the end of freedom through creeping socialism.
Right now the bottom 60% perceive little to no "Individual Income Tax" burden,(in many cases even a handout) and 70% of the voting public clamor for more from government looking for the top 40% of income earners/producers to foot the bill. That perception continues to grow ever stronger by eliminating even more participants from the Federal Individual Income Tax rolls as proposed in the tax reduction proposals through changes in personal exemption limits and other mechanisms such as the EITC.
The Intent of the individual income tax is for political and social control not revenue collection. The Individual Income tax is maintained to establish and hold every person in the country perpetual legal jeopardy. That is a situation that must end with the repeal of the income tax from the statutes, and the prohibition of its use by Constitutional amendment that future generations will not face the same manner of manipulation and interference in their lives.
Until you first remove the income/payroll tax statues and provide a viable alternative, you will never see any of the actions you propose come alive in reality. The will remain in the world of libertarian and utopian fantasy.
The NRST is the means to open VOTERS eyes to the reality and first step towards restoring a Constitutionally limited government. Without it, what you say you want will remain mearly a pipe dream.