I'm not even sure what you are arguing for now. So, let me tell you what I am arguing for - the complete elimination of income and property taxes. Education is the responsibility of parents. Revenues lost from income taxes should be replaced with sensible tariffs. Any shortage of revenue should be met with spending cuts. That's all. A nat'l sales tax is just a shell game. If we can not get rid of the income tax and raise tariffs, then a flat tax is the only option.
Come on geezer, do you expect me to believe that since sales tax was not mentioned by the founders that it is not a direct tax?
A sales tax is an excise, an indirect tax, not a direct tax which is a tax on real property or a captitation tax.
A sales tax is levied with respect to exchange of value between persons (commercial activity) not on the ownership of property.
tariffs are legitimate sources of revenue with the NRST folks now?
Certainly they are legitamate. However the main problem with them is they hide the cost of government from the view of the electorate. If that is what you want, and end up reducing incentives for people to push for smaller government, well go for them.
property taxes should be thrown out with income tax?
Seeing as the only property taxes are those levied by States, you have to deal with them I am afraid. If you can get a Constitutional amendment ratified by the states that removes that power from them more power to you. I would like to see the end of property taxes myself. Just don't figure it is going to happen through any process I can envision as being successful on a national basis.
Might get property taxes abolished on a state by state basis in those states that allow citizen referendums and initiatives to modify state constitutions though.
So, let me tell you what I am arguing for - the complete elimination of income and property taxes.
Elimination of all federal income and payroll taxes. Replacing them with a single national retail sales tax on all goods and services purchased for final consumption as opposed to business purpose.
. Education is the responsibility of parents.
So? What does that have to do with a federal tax?
Revenues lost from income taxes should be replaced with sensible tariffs.
What about SS/Medicare taxes on wages?
Furthermore, any tarrif hides the cost of government from the view of the electorate by becoming embedded into the price of goods and services they effect.
Not good, leaves the electorate with the false perception that someone else is paying the freight for more government goodies.
"So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?"
Walter Williams
Any shortage of revenue should be met with spending cuts. That's all.
Ain't happening today, you had best be figuring out why.
- "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.
A nat'l sales tax is just a shell game.
Shell games hide taxes from major groups of the electorate, an national retail sale tax makes sure taxes have maximum visibility to the electorate.
If we can not get rid of the income tax and raise tariffs, then a flat tax is the only option.
Now there is a shell game a VAT and a wage tax:
The Forbes/Armey Flat tax is still an income tax with VAT, requires an IRS, and still taxes business passing on such taxes in higher prices to consumers, lower wages to employees, and lower returns to investors/retirees.
Issue: What Is the Best Way to Collect a Value Added Tax?
A value-added tax (VAT) generally is a tax imposed and collected on the value added at every stage in the production and distribution process of a good or service. Although a VAT may be computed in any of several ways, the amount of value added generally can be thought of as the difference between the value of sales and purchases of a business. (e.g. Revenues - Costs = Taxable Business Income)
***
Subtraction-Method VAT. Under the subtraction method, value added is measured as the difference between a business's taxable sales and its purchases of taxable goods and services from other businesses. At the end of the reporting period, a rate of tax is applied to this difference in order to determine the tax liability. The subtraction method is similar to the credit-invoice method in that both methods measure value added by comparing sales to purchases that have borne the tax.
***
The subtraction method differs from the credit-invoice method principally in that the tax rate is applied to a net amount of value added (sales less purchases) rather than to gross sales with credits for tax on gross purchases. A business's tax liability under the credit-invoice method relies on the business's sales records and purchase invoices, while the tax liability under the subtraction method may rely on records that the taxpayer maintains for income tax or financial accounting purposes.
The flat tax is a VAT. None other than the father of the flat tax, Robert Hall of Stanford University (along with Alvin Rabushka), in his 1995 Ways and Means Committee testimony said, "The Hall-Rabushka flat tax is a value-added tax."
Which was pointed out again in additional hearings in April of 2000:
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/fullcomm/106cong/4-11-00/4-11kotl.htm
"Robert Hall, one of the originators of the proposal(Flat Tax), who describes his Flat Tax as, effectively, a Value Added Tax. A value added tax taxes output less investment (because firms get to deduct their investment.)"
"The Flat Tax differs from a VAT in only two respects. First, it asks workers, rather than firm managers, to mail in the check for the tax payment on that portion of output paid to them as wages. Second, it provides a subsidy to workers with low wages."
The Flat Tax; Chapter 3, by Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka
| Here is the logic of our system, stripped to basics: We want to tax consumption. The public does one of two things with its income—spends it or invests it. We can measure consumption as income minus investment. A really simple tax would just have each firm pay tax on the total amount of income generated by the firm less that firm’s investment in plant and equipment. The value-added tax works just that way. But a value-added tax is unfair because it is not progressive. That’s why we break the tax in two. The firm pays tax on all the income generated at the firm except the income paid to its workers. The workers pay tax on what they earn, and the tax they pay is progressive. To measure the total amount of income generated at a business, the best approach is to take the total receipts of the firm over the year and subtract the payments the firm has made to its workers and suppliers. This approach guarantees a comprehensive tax base. The successful value-added taxes in Europe work this way. The base for the business tax is the following: Total revenue from sales of goods and services less purchases of inputs from other firms less wages, salaries, and pensions paid to workers less purchases of plant and equipment The other piece is the wage tax. Each family pays 19 percent of its wage, salary, and pension income over a family allowance (the allowance makes the system progressive). The base for the compensation tax is total wages, salaries, and retirement benefits less the total amount of family allowances. |
FLAT TAX, VAT TAX, ANYTHING BUT THAT TAX; Duke Law Magazine, Spring 96: