Posted on 01/31/2005 7:12:16 AM PST by bmweezer
"John Galt, is that you?"
You forgot the double dog sarcasm tag!
"The NRST only benefits local manufacturing."
"That would be ugly nativism rearing its ugly head, economics be damned. Its like adopting Buchananism without looking at his greased up head."
That would be true if the FairTax introduced a bias in favor of US producers into our tax system. That would also cause problems with the WTO and our trading partners.
In fact, what the proposal does is remove a bias in favor of foreign competitors which has become enshrined in the US tax system. We can point out that we are taxing foreign consumption items the exact same way that we are taxing our own. It is pretty hard to argue against that from any perspective.
Has anyone figured out the total cost for the prebates and the impact that has on the tax rate? To ask another way, how many % of the 30% (exclusive) tax rate is attributable to the prebate?
A fair estimate based on the CATO policy analysis paper below, is that the prebate adds ~5.6% to the tax exclusive amount for a 30% tax-exclusive tax rate (proportionate to 26.7% TE rate calculated below.)
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-272.html
In the previous section we defined the total consumption tax base for the national sales tax in calendar year 1995 as $5,978 billion. Now we ask, What rate of sales tax would need to be imposed to collect the same amount of revenue that was gathered from the income tax? Table 2 shows the total amount of federal revenues collected from taxes that would be replaced with the national sales tax. In fiscal year 1995 those revenues amounted to $803 billion ($1,293 billion if payroll taxes are also included).
Putting together the information in Tables 1 and 2, we discover that an NST with no rebate could collect the same amount of revenue ($803 billion) as the current income tax regime with a tax inclusive rate of 11.8 percent, as shown in Table 3. This tax inclusive rate with a rebate to fully protect the poor from the tax (as discussed below) would bring the rate to 14.2 percent. Throughout this study we use a rate of 15 percent, [HR 2001] which would offset any losses from tax avoidance beyond the amount that occurs with the current income tax.
Table 2
Tax Revenues to Be Replaced by National Sales Tax, 1995 (billions of dollars)
Income tax $759.9 Estate and gift taxes 15.1 Excise taxes (estimated) 28.0 Subtotal 803.0 Payroll taxes 490.3 Total $1,293.3 Source: Federal Receipts,
Analytical Perspectives,
FY 1997 Budget of the United States Government.
Calendar year basis.
Table 3
Calculation of National Sales Tax Rate
Tax Base
(billions)Revenues to
Be Collected
(billions)Tax Rate
(tax exclusive)Tax Rate
(tax inclusive)No rebate, excluding payroll taxes $5,978.2 $ 803.0 13.4% 11.8% With rebate, excluding payroll taxes 4,841.1 803.0 16.6 14.2 No rebate, including payroll taxes 5,978.2 1,293.2 21.6 17.8 With rebate, including payroll taxes 4,841.1 1,293.2 26.7 21.1 Source: National Income Product Accounts, Survey of Current Business, August 1996;
Federal Receipts, Analytical Perspectives,
FY 1997 Budget of the United States Government.The 23% tax inclusive rate [HR 2525] would offset any losses from tax avoidance beyond the amount that occurs with the current income tax.
OK...if you don't really care, if your money isn't a big deal, if you don't sweat it...then why would care about tax reform at all?I said I don't sweat every penny. I'm not going to save a receipt from a book I bought for work just so I can save 34 cents on my taxes.
"...Would you be willing to sacrifice your lifetime contributions to SS to allow for it to be comletely torn apart?..."
Yes, and I have advocated for complete privatization of the system for some time, have been published on the subject. I am 42 years young, and when I retire in 20+ years I don't want to be a burden to my children....either through confiscatory payroll taxation or by looking to them directly for my care and maintenance. I've chosen to live very frugally now, paying the taxes extorted from me, and providing for my own retirement in gross total.
What does Dr. Jorgenson say about your rate calculation?Dr. Jorgenson has calculated rates for both a flat tax and a VAT. But the IGEM model he uses is flawed so what do I care what he has to say?
Oh, I forgot, you don't have a rate calculation yet.
Why? It's very straightforward. Nothing convoluted about it.
And I have never been able to find any source which even documents your preferred form of tax reform, much less any economic studies.You've never seen an economic study of the flat tax or the VAT? You really need to get off FairTax.org sometime soon.
Post a link to your preferred form of tax reform.What do you mean?
And while you are at it, tell us again that you aren't fighting for the status quo.I'm not. Why are you $pending your time $upporting the FairTax?
It doesn't matter what type of tax system they come up with there are two things it won't be.
It won't be fair and it won't be less money for Uncle Sam. They may shift the burden around but you can bet it's going to be more money for them to spend.
With government growth and spending out of control there is no way that these jerks are going to reduce their glutinous intake or restrict their ability to buy votes and back door monetary support from big business and special interest groups.
Ask yourself when was the last time that the government ever spent less money than the year before?
State sales taxes exist. I asked/challenged you to show me an example of the total (gross) cost of a product in a state with a sales tax, that excludes state sales taxes...
Nothing was said about your non-existant sales tax in my challenge, though it's interesting how on the one hand you act as if your sales tax is concrete, then when confronted with logic you declare it's non-existant and can't be proven.
HELLO, ANYBODY HOME???!!!
From you? Don't make me laugh.
Besides, I provided you with an example already.
That's why I posted the link. They should read it and move on to something else. There really is no argument here. The percentage figure for the tax is still being debated and the numbers I have seen vary anywhere from 19 to 30 percent. You can drive a truck through that spread. The number is a long way from being finalized. I don't think this opposition is idea based but agenda based.
I'm still waiting to hear how wages must decline if the fair tax comes to pass.
D'oh!
You're right.
That's why I posted the link.
And that's why I then commented that we had already seen the link and:
-- "If you read the last hundred posts or so, you would discover that many of us here are discussing that "very open explanation", and rejecting it as overly convoluted BS."
They should read it and move on to something else.
Indeed they should.
But they won't, because they have a statist quo agenda.
*chuckle*
What is somewhat of a bummer is that the mods always have the best material.
We can be naturally weird, but they always get a leg up on us simply by being mods and having access to the troll thread in ways we cannot understand.
;-)
Freudian slip on the malapropism there?
I'm still waiting to hear how wages must decline if the fair tax comes to pass.No. Wages must drop for prices to drop ~20% or prices can stay the same, exclusive of tax, and people can take home their check with no withholdings.
I'm a little confused. Weren't you the one who mistakenly thought the tax exclusive rate was 23% and wasn't I just correcting you? That was you, right?They should read it and move on to something else.Indeed they should. But they won't, because they have a statist quo agenda.
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.