Posted on 12/01/2004 8:25:22 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
...President Bush and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (search) have both said the idea of a national sales tax deserves a serious look. For many, the idea of a world without the Internal Revenue Service is very seductive.
"We spend about $400 billion a year complying with the tax code. We spend $200 billion a year just filling out IRS paperwork," said Rep. John Linder (search) , R-Ga., who has proposed a bill that would create a national sales tax.
Proponents have spent millions on research and have concluded that a national sales tax can replace the income tax, payroll tax, estate tax and corporate tax. Advocates say the new tax would lower the cost of manufacturing and job creation and attract foreign investments, among other things.
"If we were to get rid of the sales or the income tax and the payroll tax and all compliance costs, we would be so ferociously competitive in a world economy that corporate America would not be competed with unless foreign corporations started building their plants in America," Linder said.
Proponents seek a 23-cent national sales tax on all retail goods, everything from groceries to clothes, cars to electronics. Everyone would pay the same rate, which critics argue is part of the problem.
"If you consume $40,000 a year and you make $50,000 a year, would you feel it is fair if a guy who made a half a million dollars a year but spent $40,000 a year paid the same tax you do? I think you wouldn't feel it's fair," said Buck Chapoton, former assistant treasury secretary.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
You have already paid tax on money you've already saved, unless it was saved pre-tax. If you took it out and spent it, the Federal Govt would get to bite you again.
The flat will not pass since it only benefits the Top tier. Mark my words on that. The only thing that has a chance to replace the status quo is the fair tax.
if you have more money, then you will consume more. Its just that simple.
As income goes up the amount spent on necessities flattens out. You only need so much toilet paper but you need exactly as much as you need, for example.
The truth is a beautiful thing. Therefore, we can pass the National Retail Sales Tax the same way.
I'm wondering how in the heck an amendment like the 16th was passed in the first place.
So you're saying you have to pay tax on the tax? I'm not getting this tax inclusive thing.
Yes. Corporations can try to pass on a tax, but if the consumer doesn't like what that does to the price they don't have to by. Elasticity of demand. Of course if a government bears a tax, they pass it along by definition because nothing that they have it theirs, it belongs to the people they took it from, in theory.
This idea is as bad as this new reform proposal from the UN that says they need to tie the US down across a table and gang-rape us.
As a business owner, I already collect state sales taxes, FICA, SS etc etc. The sales tax is the easiest to account for. Gross Sales - exempt sales=taxable sales X tax rate.
The tax rate under the FairTax would be $.23 of ever $1.00 spent no matter the convulsions some go through trying to confuse the issue!
"Necessities" are variable. Are you talking about what one person "needs" or are you talking a breadwinner in the family, supporting a family of four, or five, or three...whatever.
And who's to say how much goes back into the economy, is spent on business related items, ect...? The variables into this equation are endless.
No one has the right to tell someone how they must or must not spend their earned income. The whole idea is absurd.
Of course, not in the mind of a liberal, telling someone else how to spend their income, I'm sure you'll agree ;)
So you're saying you have to pay tax on the tax? I'm not getting this tax inclusive thing.In a sense they are taxing the tax. You are paying 23% of the tax paid in addition to the product price.
$100 x 29.87% = $29.87 or $129.87 Total
$29.87 is 23% of $129.87
So you are paying 23% of the price inclusive of the tax.
Buy a used $20,000 car. No NRST. :)
And if they do that they will lose my vote. The current tax code is terrible. We need to try something different.
I don't like the "mandatory" reduction in prices. Unless it is the invisible hand that communicates this "mandatory" reduction.
Which, of course, it would...
Have you read HR 25?
Social Security is not taken out.
State income taxes would still be there.
Not only are sales tax rates different, there are five states that have no sales tax at all: Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire, and Oregon. (Source: The Sales Tax Clearinghouse.)
23% may be high, or it may be low. So far, it is all just educated guessing.
I am myself in favor of a national retail sales tax, even though there are provisions of the Fair Tax that in my opinion would be problematic. But if it eliminates the income tax (and I mean that part of the deal is that the 16th Amendment is indeed repealed), then I would even accept the Fair Tax.
Again...Under the current system my income has been taxed. I put part of that already taxed money into savings. Now...the system changes to the NRST. I decide to spend this saved money that has already been taxed. Would I not be taxed again? How would this be prevented?
The Fair Tax eliminates the IRS/IRC...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.