To: lewislynn
If it is shifted to consumption, why is there the need to declare an employee's income? Or am I misunderstanding your post? Isn't your position that compliance cost would still be high because income, for SS purposes, would still be required to be reported to the Feds by the employer? Given the fact that a person's income while working doesn't determine the benefit they receive, why would the income of any employer need to be reported?
78 posted on
08/23/2004 7:22:13 AM PDT by
CSM
(To spread the wealth the liberal is willing, he'll take YOUR dollar and keep his shilling. -albertp)
To: CSM
If it is shifted to consumption, why is there the need to declare an employee's income? Or am I misunderstanding your post? No, you aren't misunderstanding my post. You just aren't as informed about the nst as you think you are.
Isn't your position that compliance cost would still be high because income, for SS purposes, would still be required to be reported to the Feds by the employer?
Yes, not only reported by the employer but paid to the employee.
Given the fact that a person's income while working doesn't determine the benefit they receive, why would the income of any employer need to be reported?
So the bureaucrats at SS can detrmine the tax rate as required by the bill to fund their scam...
Get informed, be careful what you wish for.
79 posted on
08/23/2004 7:40:16 AM PDT by
lewislynn
(Why do the same people who think "free trade" is the answer also want less foreign oil dependence?)
To: CSM
From the fairtax bill:
`SEC. 903. WAGES TO BE REPORTED TO SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.
`(a) IN GENERAL- Employers shall submit such information to the Social Security Administration as is required by the Social Security Administration to calculate Social Security benefits under title II of the Social Security Act, including wages paid, in a form prescribed by the Secretary. A copy of the employer submission to the Social Security Administration relating to each employee shall be provided to each employee by the employer.
`(b) WAGES- For purposes of this section, the term `wages' means all cash remuneration for employment (including tips to an employee by third parties provided that the employer or employee maintains records documenting such tips) including self-employment income; except that such term shall not include--
`(1) any insurance benefits received (including death benefits);
`(2) pension or annuity benefits received;
`(3) tips received by an employee over $5,000 per year; and
`(4) benefits received under a government entitlement program (including Social Security benefits and unemployment compensation benefits).
`(c) SELF-EMPLOYMENT INCOME- For purposes of subsection (b), the term `self-employment income' means gross payments received for taxable property or services minus the sum of--
`(1) gross payments made for taxable property or services (without regard to whether tax was paid pursuant to section 101 on such taxable property or services), and
`(2) wages paid by the self-employed person to employees of the self-employed person.
80 posted on
08/23/2004 7:44:14 AM PDT by
lewislynn
(Why do the same people who think "free trade" is the answer also want less foreign oil dependence?)
To: CSM
If it is shifted to consumption, why is there the need to declare an employee's income?
the need is to declare an employee's wages, not total income. they are used to "derive SS benefits" or something like that. i read it somewhere i don't remember where... i'll look.
the only difference i see in wages v income is that wage income comes from employer - they don't need income information other than eployee paid wages in order to "determine benefits"...
dang got to find that link...
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson