U.S. Tax Code May Be Facing a Full Rewrite

LA Times ^ | Nov. 7, 2004 | Warren Vieth

[FairOpinion]

An official says all provisions will be examined by a reform panel. Many experts think Bush will favor a piecemeal approach.

As the White House prepares to name a blue-ribbon panel on tax reform, the labyrinthine U.S. revenue code could face the first top-to-bottom rewrite since President Reagan closed loopholes and slashed income tax rates on a historic scale in 1986.

"This is a fundamental look at the entire code, every component of the code," a senior administration official said late last week. "Nothing is off the table."

"Simplification would be the goal," Bush said Thursday during his first postelection news conference. "The main thing is that it would be viewed as fair … that it wouldn't be complicated."

"They'll be looking at the whole thing with three principles in mind: The fundamental reform should be more fair, more simple and more growth-oriented," the official said. "That's their marching orders."

[konaice]

Quote:
All sales taxes are regressive taxes.

The only fair tax system is a flat tax. Just list what you made, take 15% of that, and that's your tax.

--

I submit to you that you make a distinction without a difference. One is just as regressive as the other.

The only difference is your method taxes income (hence we still have the IRS to deal with) and the other taxes spending (and only businesses deal with the IRS).

Regressive-ness is a fact of life, and its time to disabuse the liberal left of the idea that it is somehow unfair. Poor folk can't afford to take vacations in Cabo San Lukas as they need all the money for rent and food. That's "regressive". No way around it. They tend to die younger too. Now thats REALLY regressive.

Your Flat Tax still leaves a HUGE IRS bureauacy to deal with and a ready way for "Exemptions" to creep back in. Doing away with this prevents exemption creep because there is no mechanism for them any more.

If nothing escaped taxation, the tax rate would be so small as to go un-noticed.

[konaice]

Quote: "Wonderful way to run the economy into the ground, friend. Give consumers disincentives to make purchases. Which Einstein thought that economic plan up, hm?"

Oh calm down.

The level of taxation in a VAT or national sales tax is not so great that anyone will for-go buying that new car or skip their double Mocha at lunch. They will have more to spend because they have less (as in zero) taken out of their pay check.

Those states with sales tax have NOT seen a drop in spending.

Like I say... Calm down, its way more efficient to tax 4 million businesses than it is to tax 300 million people. The tax rate could be way smaller.

[konaice]

Quote:
"A national retail won't happen for the following reasons. "
(old thinking "reasons" deleted)

There are far more reasons it might happen than there are reasons it wont. People are goddamed sick of the IRS and the abuse it has heaped on american life.

There has to be a different way. Mortgage deductions are not that big a deal when you are given the prospect of getting the IRS off your back.

[GeronL]

The VAT is a terrible idea, consumers won't have a clue how much they're really taxed/

[upstatenyrepublican]

15 % of everything is fair. Terresa Heinz paid 15 % probably because her income came from investment. What about all the tax free municipal bonds? Should that loophole be closed? That would hit the super rich hard. It would also raise interest rates since tax-free would no longer apply. Also the tax on real property would go down because it wouldn't be a deduction, and people would vote the tax and spend local governments out. And finally, home interest rates would be low or home prices would drop if home morgage interest wasn't deductable. It could ge very interesting!

[konaice]

"consumers won't have a clue how much they're really taxed"

So what?

Most people have no idea how much they are taxed now, because its all disguised in a multitude of taxes hear and there, and engineered so you get a refund at the end of the year to help you forget that your 100 dollar refund hides 20,000 in taxes.

Bush has already said whatever is done will be Revenue Neutral (no higher tax). In subsequent years it might creap up, expecially if the DemoRats get back in power. But it can just as easily creap down withoug having this fight about tax cuts for the rich every two years.

Like I say, So what?

It works in a lot of countries right now.

[Odyssey-x]

A full rewrite of the tax code might cause a bit of temporary screwiness with the economy. That's because whole businesses have their business models built around tax minimization, especially when it comes to depreciation rules.

[konaice]

What about all the tax free municipal bonds? Should that loophole be closed?

Yes.

That would hit the super rich hard.

No, it only applies to the income they earn from the bonds, not the principal they have tied up in bonds

It would also raise interest rates since tax-free would no longer apply.

Thats not at all clear, because some bonds could be exempted from sales tax. But so what? Even if the interest rate goes up, the net effect will be the same, because Bush as said it will be revenue neutral...

And finally, home interest rates would be low or home prices would drop if home morgage interest wasn't deductable.

That does not necessarily follow. A house's value is not determined by the mortgage deduction. The market doesn't even recognize the deduction in the setting of the price. It might affect the seller, but they have more money to pay for the house because they have no income tax. If you wanted to have the government subsidize house purchases as they do with the mortage deduction, all you need do is have a lower sales tax on houses.

[RustysGirl]

Interesting. Am I right in assuming that if you replace income taxes with a national sales tax or VAT system, then tax-sheltering options like IRAs and tax-free bonds become obsolete (at least from a tax-shelter standpoint). And what happens with unearned income, like interest, dividends, and capital gains? Would they be tax-free? Wouldn't that be lovely!

On the other hand, from articles I've read about VAT systems in Europe, the tax code can get pretty ridiculous. My favorite: an undecorated cookie sold in a bakery was exempt from the last VAT tack-on, but the same cookie decorated with an icing "face" was not exempt.

[konaice]

Any accountant will tell you running your business for tax reasons is the best way to go broke.

Getting rid of depreciation rules should be the FIRST order of business.

Depreciation only makes sense in an INCOME TAX world. In a spending tax world (sales tax or vat), it becomes meaningless.

[konaice]

Interesting. Am I right in assuming that if you replace income taxes with a national sales tax or VAT system, then tax-sheltering options like IRAs and tax-free bonds become obsolete (at least from a tax-shelter standpoint).

IRAs and TAX free bonds could still exist, you would be charged no sales tax on the amount you earned (the interest). Wouldn't NEED an irs for this either, because the bond seller is paying that tax, not the bond holder. So the tax exempt status of bonds need not be affected, but why go there. Just tax it at the normal rate and forget the exemptions. Every exemption costs someone else more. Thats why we are in this mess. We could see tax rates as low as 8% and still fund everything we do now if a vat were used.

And what happens with unearned income, like interest, dividends, and capital gains? Would they be tax-free? Wouldn't that be lovely!

We wouldnt care how you GOT the money. Its taxed only when you SPEND it.

On the other hand, from articles I've read about VAT systems in Europe, the tax code can get pretty ridiculous. My favorite: an undecorated cookie sold in a bakery was exempt from the last VAT tack-on, but the same cookie decorated with an icing "face" was not exempt.

Thats no different than our silly tax rules, and there would be no reason we would have to go that way. The simplest VAT is If you buy something for $100, and sell it for $110, Vat is calculated on the diffrerence between the $100 you paid and the $110 you sold it for. It makes the caluclation fairly easy. You set your prices to cover your costs, and your profit, and then add vat.

The hard part will be convinvcing the government to LEAVE it that simple. I think we should enact some Death Panalty clauses for any congressman who wants to propose complications. ;-)

[sprotte]

I am afraid I have to disagree with you. If a taxpayer has $20,000 of mortgage interest or any amount of deductions, that amount does not lower the amount of taxable income as the same amount. The taxpayer only gets a percentage of the deduction not the whole amount. The only fair tax is a flat tax; however I believe the first $15,000 dollars of income should be exempt. So someone making $25,000/year will only have federal taxes of $1000. If one makes $150,000/year the bill will be $13,500. Hong Kong and Singapore have had flat taxes for years. The former Baltic Republics of the Soviet Union were so sucessful with their economy based on flat rate, the Russians changed to a flat rate which has helped their economy tremendously.
As far a SS reform, look to Argentina. They changed their system in the 80's. It is probably the strongest one in the western hemisphere. It encourages work and investment and savings by making the people more responsible for their own retirement.

[IStillBelieve]

They're (IRS) will be fighting tooth and nail to save their jobs. The beast has a life of it's own.

Imagine receiving the resume of an unemployed career IRS bureaucrat...

"Employment: 1990-present Internal Revenue Service"

*Stop reading. Begin shredding.*

;-)

[Stateline]

10 percent flat tax.....BRING IT ON!!!!!......

[Caipirabob]

Man, all these potential reforms. I've been dissappointed so much I'm trying not to get too hopeful. As it is, Christmas came early this year.

[numberonepal]

The time for "fairtax" -- retail sales tax, instead of income tax has come.

The time has come when MY right to privacy (and yes that is and actual right) has come. The time has come when it is no one's business, including the government, how much moeny I earn. This is precisely why I do not support the Flat Tax.

We have got to begin reigning in some of the losses suffered to our privacy. It's a tough road with all the technologies out there now that can breech personal privacy. But, we MUST make new strides in this area to get this country back on track.

Getting the Fair Tax implemented may be an even more difficult task than getting the President re-elected. It's time to hunker down on this on and git 'er done. This may be our last chance for serious privacy reform in America.

[numberonepal]

The only fair tax system is a flat tax.

Eeeeeeeeee! Incorrect. Thank you for playing. Tell me something. What is you argument in favor of it being anyone's business how much money I earn? What is your argument for people (yes the government is made of of people) not only breeching my right to privacy, but stealing portions of my life at the point of a gun? By what right is this justified?

This is a fundamental philosophical fight here. You can hem and haw over the details later on. But first we must address rights, and more pointedly, the right of the individual.

[Non-Sequitur]

An official says all provisions will be examined by a reform panel.

Like the 9/11 commission? Look how well those recomendations went over.

Even if President Bush was serious about this, any reform has to make it through Congress. A month or so ago Congress passed 'tax reform' for business. It was loaded down with literally thousands of targeted tax breaks, but in by Senators to help major supporters or contributors. They would never agree to a system that would remove their ability to pander to their supporters in ways like that. There may be something passed under the guise of tax reform or tax simplification, but it will only make it worse and more complex.

[numberonepal]

Businesses have to keep better books

Under the Fair Tax businesses do not pay taxes. Retailers only collect taxes just like that already do for the state.

[livius]

One of the things I really like about the retail sales tax idea is precisely that we would no longer have to be explaining all of our financial decisions to the government.