Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Seniors Support the FairTax
Americans for Fair Taxation ^ | October 2004 | Americans for Fair Taxation

Posted on 12/19/2004 1:40:29 PM PST by Remember_Salamis

Why Seniors Support the FairTax Americans for Fair Taxation October 2004

The Democratic staff (House Ways and Means Committee) makes a number of errors concerning seniors. They state that seniors would be subject to “double taxation.” To tout the virtues of the income tax, they falsely claim that seniors are exempt from the payment of tax on pensions and that they can deduct medical care and long-term care. They further mislead the reader stating that seniors would be taxed on their Social Security benefits and would have to pay tax on drugs, hospital, and nursing home care, as well as doctor visits.

This is just plain wrong once again. Americans For Fair Taxation has many seniors as members, and for good reason. The greatest gift these seniors can give is not to saddle succeeding generations with a broken tax system. But there are other reasons many seniors support the FairTax. For seniors, our broken system presents unusual conundrums. For example, consider a senior who is sitting on a capital asset. If they sell it, they will be hit with capital gains taxes and any unspent capital eventually with the death tax. If they don’t sell it, their heirs will be hit with the death tax. That is why many seniors are sitting on bad investments because the tax laws tell them there is a penalty for getting out.

Senior citizens are becoming a larger portion of the overall population. In 1970, those over 65 years of age were 9.8 percent of the population. By 1995, seniors were 12.7 percent of the population. 13 years from now, seniors will account for 13.3 percent of the population and in 2020, they will account for 16.5 percent.

The average household money income of those over 65 is about 63 percent of the average of all households.13 At any given time, a lower proportion of seniors are poor than in any other age group. However, seniors are more represented in the long-term poor than other adults but less represented than children.14 In terms of financial assets held, those 55 - 64 years old are the wealthiest age group, with those 65-74 years old next.15 In terms of non-financial assets held, those 55 - 64 years old are the wealthiest age group, with those aged 65 - 74 slightly below the 35 - 44 year old group.

Under the FairTax plan, senior citizens will receive a cash rebate effectively exempting consumption up to the poverty level from tax. The sales tax rebate is equal to the sales tax that would be paid on expenditures up to the federal poverty level. It is paid monthly in advance. Thus, poor seniors will pay no sales tax. A household spending twice the federal poverty level would pay an effective tax rate of 11½ percent.

Because income and payroll taxes are embedded in the price of everything we purchase, it is unclear whether prices will increase once the income and payroll taxes are removed and the sales tax is added. They may not increase at all because pre-sales-tax prices may fall once the income and payroll taxes are repealed. Nevertheless, the FairTax plan makes sure that the Social Security benefits would be adjusted so that benefits will increase to the extent, if any, that the sales tax results in higher tax-inclusive prices. The income tax imposed on Social Security benefits will be repealed.

The income tax imposed on investment income and pension benefits or IRA withdrawals will be repealed. An income tax deduction was taken for contributions to most of these plans. All beneficiaries and owners of these plans expected to pay trillions of dollars in income tax on them upon withdrawal and will not be required to do so since the income tax is being repealed.

Repeal of the corporate and individual income tax and the estate and gift tax will have a substantial positive impact on the stock market. Those seniors that own stocks either directly or through mutual funds, Individual Retirement Accounts, 401(k) plans or otherwise will experience significant gains. More seniors own stocks, mutual funds or have IRAs than other age groups. In addition, unrealized capital gains that would have been subject to the income tax when realized will no longer be taxed.

The FairTax plan imposes a sales tax on newly constructed homes but exempts existing homes and other used property from any sales tax. Currently, equity payments on homes must be paid from after-income tax and after-payroll tax earnings (i.e., principal payments are not deductible). The purchase of existing housing is thus subject to the income tax. All owners of existing homes will experience large capital gains due to the repeal of the income tax and implementation of the FairTax plan. Seniors have dramatically higher homeownership rates than other age groups (81 percent for seniors compared to 65 percent on average). Homes are often a family’s largest asset. Gains are likely to be in the 20 percent range.

Under the FairTax plan, the estate and gift tax would be repealed. The need for small businesses and farmers to engage in expensive estate planning involving attorneys, complex estate freeze transactions, and expensive life insurance plans in anticipation of future estate and gift tax liability would disappear. Heirs would no longer need to sell the business or farm out of the family or borrow heavily, putting the business at risk, to pay the estate tax.

A sales tax will make the economy much more dynamic and prosperous.

Consequently, federal tax revenues will grow and spending will be under less upward pressure and the deficit will decline. Budget pressure on entitlement spending, already significant, will become much more pronounced once the baby boom starts retiring in 2008 in 4 short years. The economic growth a sales tax would cause would make it substantially less likely that federal budget pressures will result in Medicare or Social Security benefits cuts or reduce their severity.

According to work by Stanford University economist Joseph Kahn, those seniors with a net worth over $400 thousand (nearly four times the median) may see a reduction in their purchasing power. The largest decline in purchasing power, about 3.5 percent, is for those with a net worth above about $700 thousand. The primary reason for this effect is that wealth, spent for consumption purposes, which is held in non-tax deferred accounts like IRAs will be taxed when spent under a sales tax and would not be taxed further under an income tax.

Seniors will be able to take comfort in the fact that their children and grandchildren will no longer be laboring under the yoke of the income tax and will once again be able to see their standard of living improve, one generation to the next.

Although the FairTax national sales tax plan would repeal both the federal income tax and payroll taxes, social Security or Medicare benefits would remain the same under the FairTax plan as they are under present law.

Currently the Social Security system is funded by a 12.4 percent payroll tax imposed on the first $87,900 of wages (2004). The Medicare program is funded by a 2.9 percent payroll tax on all wages. Both of these taxes are evenly divided between employers and employees. Self-employed persons pay a separate tax equal to the combined employer and employee tax.

Although the Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes would be repealed, the funds necessary to support these programs would come from a portion of the revenues raised by the national sales tax. Under the FairTax plan, the same amount of revenue as would have been raised by existing payroll taxes would be deposited in the Social Security and Medicare Trust Funds.

Thus, the FairTax plan does not affect the Social Security or Medicare programs except that these programs will be funded by sales tax revenues instead of payroll taxes.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Political Humor/Cartoons; Politics/Elections; Unclassified; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: fairtax; nrst; reform; sales; seniors; tax; taxes; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 701-715 next last
To: All
Rip off the old folks they're going to die anyway. Screw you we paid and you played!!!!!

I don't care how far you have to cut back spending I want my money and benefits. If you can't be trusted meet your obligations we might as well be living in some open dictatorship. That we are even discussing this is a disgrace.

21 posted on 12/19/2004 2:14:12 PM PST by sandviper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

"Just as "Social Security" is a massive transfer of wealth from younger to older Americans???"

Don't confuse the issues. The "Fair Tax" has nothing to do with reforming Social Security.


22 posted on 12/19/2004 2:16:20 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Principled

"Define income."

How about payroll wages? Minus some very commonly agreed-upon deductions?

If you enact a 30% sales tax, you don't think a black market for goods will emerge? Remember Prohibition? Federal agents didn't stop liquor from flowing, and they won't stop black-market computers and tv sets from travelling from Tijuana to Los Angeles, where you could buy them on the street for a 30% discount to the price at Circuit City or Best Buy.

Enforcement would need to be massive with a "Fair Tax."


23 posted on 12/19/2004 2:18:37 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

Where is it written in stone that the tax would be 23%? I have also heard 18% bantered about... Also on a $77.00 purchase the tax @ 23% would be $17.71...at least where I went to school that's what I was taught....


24 posted on 12/19/2004 2:18:59 PM PST by RVN Airplane Driver (Thanks America for not slapping us in the face again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: nj26
The "Fair Tax" has nothing to do with reforming Social Security.

ehhh?

It changes the base! The SS tax base would no longer be regressive. There would be no limits. It would be more stable. It would end the SS/MC crisis we now face.

25 posted on 12/19/2004 2:18:59 PM PST by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Principled

"It would end the SS/MC crisis we now face."

The reason why we have a SS "crisis" is because we have too little revenue, and too many obligations.

Shifting the tax burden will not solve the "crisis" unless benefits are cut. So, if the "Fair Tax" is ending the crisis, then the "Fair Tax" must be increasing government revenue (i.e. increasing taxes.)


26 posted on 12/19/2004 2:20:50 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Principled
"They further mislead the reader stating that seniors would ... have to pay tax on drugs, hospital, and nursing home care, as well as doctor visits."

Has something changed? I thought all of the above were going to be taxed. What's going on?

27 posted on 12/19/2004 2:21:00 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nj26
The FairTax taxes consumption: the best measure of one's ability to pay.

Taxes paid as a function of some concept of annual taxable income or adjusted gross income or net income is the way in which the Democratic staff would prefer to look at the distribution of taxes. However, it is a flawed way.

Often wealth – which itself may or may not be a fairer determination of one’s ability to pay – is not even captured in the income tax. Individuals rich in personal wealth may have very little income. That is because wealth is defined in assets that they hold – their homes, properties, securities, collectibles, and other items – which may or may not have been earned by them and which may or may not generate income. These wealthy individuals can often choose whether or not to create taxable income, since they can restructure their affairs to avoid receiving current taxable income. Far more than the poor or the middle class, the wealthy have the ability to control income flows (as we legally define it) appreciation vs. consumption. It is one of the reasons why Mrs. Kerry paid at a tax rate that is less than a college student on a summer job.

How much income someone happens to make in any given period is, at best, an incomplete measure of one’s ability to pay. In individual cases it is not even roughly accurate. Proponents of a consumption tax propose that there is no greater measurement of the equity of a tax system than what one individual consumes for their own personal well-being over the course of their lifetime. When you think about it, why would we ever tax income in the first place? Why punish what we need – work, savings, production, and self-sufficiency? If, instead of consuming his income, a rich person gives his money to charity or builds a job-producing factory, why should we punish that choice by taxing it?

We should tax what people take out of the economy for their own personal use, not what people produce for society. That's exactly what the FairTax does.

If income is not consumed, then it is either saved or invested or provided to charitable causes (or government) to fund the consumption of others. The return on savings and investment will either be used to fund future consumption or reinvested to increase productivity and output. If it is saved or invested and is not profitable, it has at least been available to the economy. If we tax income and savings, we have simply taxed deferred consumption. And those that are deferring consumption are doing so because they elect not to consume it for themselves immediately, but to make the resource available for others.

28 posted on 12/19/2004 2:22:17 PM PST by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis

My wife and I are retired supporting ourselves and our one son. The way I read this, I would get a rebate up to the Federal poverty level? What about state sales taxes? They aren't affected and would remain in place? Here in The Peoples Republik of Illinois, our sales tax rate in DuPage County is just under 7%. So I would pay roughly a 30% tax on all purchases!? Doesn't sound good to me.


29 posted on 12/19/2004 2:23:40 PM PST by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: teletech

If you don't mind me asking, do you own your own home? And if so, is it paid off?


30 posted on 12/19/2004 2:25:08 PM PST by Remember_Salamis (Freedom is Not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: teletech

"So I would pay roughly a 30% tax on all purchases!?"

As I understand it, the "Fair Tax" would be a 30% federal sales tax (or 23% of your income, if you spend all of your income on consumption.)

So you're looking at a 37% sales tax in Illinois.

The "Fair Tax" benefits people who don't spend all of their income. It's a consumption tax. If you have a lot of money left over at the end of the month, it will be good for you. If you don't have a lot left over, you'll probably pay more.


31 posted on 12/19/2004 2:25:55 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Remember_Salamis
If you don't mind me asking, do you own your own home? And if so, is it paid off?

Yes, and yes.

32 posted on 12/19/2004 2:29:54 PM PST by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: nj26
So you're looking at a 37% sales tax in Illinois.

And Seniors on a fixed income would support this plan!? WHY!

33 posted on 12/19/2004 2:31:38 PM PST by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: RVN Airplane Driver
Where is it written in stone that the tax would be 23%? I have also heard 18% bantered about... Also on a $77.00 purchase the tax @ 23% would be $17.71...at least where I went to school that's what I was taught....

That would be what you think, but what I said was 100%accurate.

34 posted on 12/19/2004 2:32:18 PM PST by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: teletech

"And Seniors on a fixed income would support this plan!? WHY!"

Wealthy seniors that don't spend most of their income would support it.

It all comes down to how much of your income you spend.


35 posted on 12/19/2004 2:33:47 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: nj26

when you buy an item now you are paying taxes on that item--imbedded payroll, SS taxes that the company has to pay.
there is no transfer of wealth but there is a better, fairer way...sorry that it was not thought of sooner



36 posted on 12/19/2004 2:33:49 PM PST by socialismisinsidious ("A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: socialismisinsidious

"when you buy an item now you are paying taxes on that item--imbedded payroll, SS taxes that the company has to pay.
there is no transfer of wealth but there is a better, fairer way"

There are imbedded taxes on items you buy today. Employers have to match employee's social security contribution at 7% of income.

But employees are paying 20-35% income tax and 7% payroll/SS tax. That part isn't embedded today.

So prices might fall a little (due to no employer match of SS contribution), but not more than a few percent.


37 posted on 12/19/2004 2:35:58 PM PST by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nj26
Wealthy seniors that don't spend most of their income would support it.

It all comes down to how much of your income you spend.

I'm NOT wealthy and what little income I have I usually end up spending. I fail to see how this plan would help seniors like me on fixed incomes.

38 posted on 12/19/2004 2:38:59 PM PST by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Principled
It is also going to decrease to 20% inclusive/25% exclusive next year.

Is a 25% sales tax rate supposed to excite us?

39 posted on 12/19/2004 2:41:45 PM PST by lewislynn (The meaning of life can be described in one word...Grandchildren)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nj26
why would you think that it isn't embedded today...how can one tell? I can't see a "producer" paying any amount of tax and not passing that onto the "consumer"
40 posted on 12/19/2004 2:44:12 PM PST by socialismisinsidious ("A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 701-715 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson