Instead of making every American family dependant on a monthly government welfare check [family consumption allowance], and ration tax-free basic necessities, why don’t the architects of the so called fair tax simply prohibit taxing the necessities of life [food, shelter, clothing, medical expenses, etc]?
You wrote:
How does the government determine what these are? Do they have a limit of quality or quantity for them? Would Murdoch get his recent $44 million penthouse purchase tax free? Do people who buy lobster and those who buy rice and beans get the same tax deduction? Are fur coats considered clothing? Will Coke and Pepsi rent a few congressmen to get onto the food list?
ANSWER
Surely there is a clear enough distinction between such foods as caviar and chicken eggs, between wine and milk, between silk and cotton underwear to truthfully say one is a luxury and the other a necessity. I believe in such cases the people’s perception will prevail in Congress to a larger degree and help to diminish the factions crying for “exemption“. But in the final analysis, it is far better to have Congress spend its time selecting specific articles of consumption for taxation as was done inthe first revenue Act of our country
We need to study and get back to our founding father’s original tax plan!
Sincerely,
JWK
On rum, per gallon,——or a dollar; on all other spiritual liquors——; on molasses——; on Madeira wine——; on all other wines——; on common bohea teas per Ib.——; on all other teas——; on pepper——; on brown sugars——; on loaf sugars——; on all other sugars——} on cocoa and coft'ee——on all other articles——per cent, on their value at the time and place of im-pui tation. That there ought, moreover, to be levied on all vessels in which goods, wares, or merchandises shall be imported, the duties following, viz. On all vessels built within the United States, and belonging wholly to citizens thereof, at the rate of——per ton. On all vessels belonging wholly to the subjects of Powers with whom the United States have formed treaties, or partly to the subjects of such Powers, and partly to citizens of the said State*, at the rale of—— On all vessels belonging wholly or in part to the subjects of other Powers, at the rate of——
-- You have just proved our point for us. these taxes levied were CONTEMPORARY! They had to summarily be picked and chosen. Presumably, under your system Congress would have to do that same thing now. And what would they choose??? What would they not choose??? They would most likely choose the items that their political contributors wanted, or those that would benefit the party. Your source doecument does not tell us what should and should not be taxed in 2005. Congress would have to do that!
"We need to study and get back to our founding father’s original tax plan!"
Interesting proposal. What's the bill number?