Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ancient_geezer
You do not find it because the Budget Enforcement Act / CBO methodology does not require accounting for refunding excess tax payments for setting rates on a revenue bill. refunded excess tax payments are not reported as part of revenue under the current income/payroll tax system, nor are refunded excess tax payments a part of revenue under the NRST.

It's not a refund, it's a credit. One that will reduce the amount of revenue for the first two years meaning the 29.87% rate is NOT revenue neutral. It will have to be higher.
130 posted on 05/29/2004 7:51:40 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies ]


To: Your Nightmare
It's not a refund, it's a credit.

If inventory has already been taxed, then taxing again at sale is double taxing- hence the refund. Call it what you will, but it's function is to refund taxes already paid.

131 posted on 05/29/2004 7:57:24 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

To: Your Nightmare

meaning the 29.87% rate is NOT revenue neutral. It will have to be higher.

The 23% rate imposed by the legislation is "revenue neutral" under the requirments of the Budget Enforcement Act through CBO measure.

CBO methodology is the determinate, not your aspirations of paying for the refund of excess payments to government by increasing rates so there is no longer an excess.

With your rationale, Congress would be forced by law to raise income tax rates whenever anyone could receive an income tax refund.

The reason a refund is paid is because of an overpayment to govenment (overpayments do not count as revenue), not because the rate is too low. Overpayments occur under the income/payroll tax system and are refunded, during transition overpayments will occur and be refunded by the NRST.

"Revenue neutral" tax rates under BEA/CBO are set by equilibrium conditions not by transient overpayments.

Furthermore, the BEA requirements actually allow reducing the 23% NRST rate provided the conditions can be met to allow a tax cut coincident with implementation of the NRST.

PAYGO RULES: CRS Rules 98-20006
Refer 2 USC 900-909
House
Point of order waivable by unanimous consent
Senate Point of order waivable by 3/5ths vote.
May be waived under Sequestration Rules on declaration of War or
conditions of <1% real economic growth for 2qtrs.

It doesn't fly NY, your argument is a dud and a strawman from its conception.

If you want higher taxes, go push your baloney to democrats they will agree to anything that raises taxes. (They will glad to cancel out your income tax refunds for tax overpayments by increasing income tax rates).

140 posted on 05/29/2004 9:02:10 AM PDT by ancient_geezer (Equality, the French disease: Everyone is equal beneath the guillotine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson