Replies

I specifically mentioned the super-rich because most of their money is UN-taxed in the current "income" tax laws.

For example (nobody in particular)

A politician makes $100k salary but his family trust is worth $100,000,000 and his 'take' from that trust is minimum of $1,000,000 /yr to play & SPEND.

The politician gets to pay "his fair share" of $100k - the $1 Million is free and clear (usually) so he pays at the most $40k out of the $1,100,000

Take the hard working small business owner who earns $100k from his labor - He also pays $40k income tax.

Now - if we had a SALES tax set at 25% flat.
the businessman saves 10% of his money and spends $90k so his tax would be: $22.5k A lot less than the $40k

The politician spends, lets say the full $1 Million on a yatch, he gets to pay $250k in taxes.

So before the govt got $80k total - now it will get $272.5K - a hefty increase total.

Who could complain about that? Almost every lawyer, politican and judge - that is who!

I would only have a few exemptions and that is food, clothes, medicine, and shelter under a determined $$ amount.

SAVINGS are NOT TAXED under my plan.

"I would only have a few exemptions and that is food, clothes, medicine, and shelter under a determined $$ amount.

SAVINGS are NOT TAXED under my plan."

Your sales-tax plan sounds a lot like Alan Keyes' tax plan. I agree with you 100%. So long as we can establish a basket of goods and services that would be tax-free (such as milk, eggs, the first $10 of a pair of shoes, the first $100,000 of the price of a home, etc.), a national sales tax would not be regressive and would allow thrifty Americans to save more money than ever before.