Posted on 01/31/2005 7:12:16 AM PST by bmweezer
Then we never ever get rid of it, they just add to it in the next "crisis". Then we have the National Sales Tax, AND the Income Tax along with all the other myriad of taxes and hidden taxes and fees we are burdened with.
Don't go there. Don't let this Camel's Nose in the Tent. This is really a very very BAD idea, because what I have described is exactly what would happen, without a scintilla of a doubt. There is a tax on all our phone bills added in 1800 something for a war. I think it's still there. I rest my case.
Let's wrestle with the devil we have in the ring. Don't let a second devil in the ring. If you do, the first devil will sneak back in the ring after a generation when the old guard has relaxed or passed on and memories have faded.
LOL......no apology needed.
That little anecdote gives much insight into why we moved out of Delaware....we were living in the same school district he went to and graduated HS more than 30 years ago from.......we didn't want our daughter going there.
I've been talking about sales taxes and income taxes on this thread and it just hit me, exactly why I should be in favor of this proposal.
I do my grocery shopping in the same supermarket chain as I did when I lived in Delaware, which boasts no sales tax. In Virginia there is sales tax, even on food. Food items that I have always bought on a regular basis, pasta and rice come to mind, that I know the price of are more than 40 cents a package less here in Virginia than in Delaware. The sales tax on it means nothing to me, because I'm still paying less than in Delaware.
Delaware has what is called the gross receipts tax, which is actually a hidden sales tax. Every business in the state must pay it based upon the GROSS revenue they receive each year. It winds up being built into the prices. I've actually been able to prove to friends here it is not worth the gas to drive the 60-70 miles to Wal-Mart in Delaware to save the 5% Maryland sales tax (there is no WM in this part of VA, we have to go to MD).....the prices at the nearest WM in Delaware are higher than in Maryland, even after the sales tax is added.
As I said earlier - you've got a convert here...
He will cite some economic study that assumes employers will drop wages. It is just that, an assumption and he believes it with all of his heart. If you get an explantion from him of exactly why that will happen in the real world please ping me. Inquiring minds.
Are 20-30% of your prices due to taxes (not including your employee's taxes)?
I suppose if you only pay the scheduled payments. And now that I think about it I would expect that is more common than how I was thinking about it. But to many, tax free principle is more desirable than tax free interest.
He will cite some economic study that assumes employers will drop wages. It is just that, an assumption and he believes it with all of his heart. If you get an explantion from him of exactly why that will happen in the real world please ping me. Inquiring minds.Just like you assume prices will drop with nominal wages staying the same. The difference is that your assumption is your's, "mine" is actually the opinions of a vast array of economists.
The tax on your phone bill is the "Gore tax" that was supposed to wire every classroom to the internet. Not only was the tax illegal but now we find that school districts, like Atlanta, have wasted tens of millions of those dollars on computers that are outdated and sit in warehouses. Your statement about the possibility of a double taxation down the road is sensible , but remember, the fair tax proposal repeals the income tax amendment. It would require a constitutional amendment to re-institute an income tax. Fat chance of that ever happening again.
The vast array of economists that predict end of year prices each year for the Wall Street Journal are wrong 9 out of 10 years. The studies you posted mention that wages will have to drop. But wages don't just drop. They have to be cut by an employer. The vast array of economists don't seem to have any good reason why an employer would cut those wages. They just say it will happen. I can't for the life of me see why. If you would explain it for all of us here then we can debate it. Otherwise it is just economic nose dribble.
the fair tax proposal repeals the income tax amendment. It would require a constitutional amendment to re-institute an income tax. Fat chance of that ever happening again.
Unfortunately the Fair Tax Act cannot repeal the income tax amendment, it can only set up the conditions where repeal can be seriously considered to be a viable action. With the repeal the federal income tax statutes, and a viable tax system taking the place of income taxes, the way is open for the Article V, amendment procedures to go forward in the form of an independant proposal to the states by 2/3 of both Houses of Congress as is required under the Constitution.
With income tax the primary means of collection federal revenues over the last 100yrs, the mere dependance upon the income tax infrastructure has been one of the dominant obstacles in the way of an amendment to prohibit the use of taxation on incomes.
That's why I said the fair tax proposal repeals the amendment.
Why in heaven's name would an employer drop wages?
The way I am understanding this the employer will actually be laying out less money by not having to pay all the insidious taxes on the wages.
It seems wages would at worst stay the same or go up depending upon the employer. If I were the employer and given the choice of the current system, or not dealing with it, I'd give my employees the difference.
$100 plus 8% state/local tax = $108
$108 plus 29.87% (federeal sales gross payment tax) = $140.26 (gross payment) or 40.26% total tax.
23% "of the gross payment" = $32.26 or 32.26% federal sales gross payment tax.
`(b) Rate-`(1) FOR 2005- In the calendar year 2005, the rate of tax is 23 percent of the gross payments for the taxable property or service
$108 plus 29.87% (federeal sales gross payment tax) = $140.26 (gross payment) or 40.26% total tax."
Where does it state that federal sales taxes will be paid on state sales taxes? C'mon.
BTW, you should explain your "gross payment" notion to those who are new here. It is well documented on the fair tax site but you seem to use it as a 'gotcha'.
?????????????????
>Does this mean that I'm human? ;-)<
Not only are you human, Badray, but you are also a gentleman. God bless!
"With federal income tax, the projected income of the federal government is fairly predictable and relatively fixed while an income based upon consumer spending may vary."
Actually, quite the opposite is true. Historically, consumption has been more stable than income.
I don't want to accuse lewislynn and Your Nightmare. They know how I stand and they are well informed people. I do want to throw out a possibility that many of us hadn't thought of before and that it one of business. It would make sense to me if those two had payroll businesses that are heavily dependent on the existence of a complicated tax policy. There used to be a company called MyBenefitSource.com that was bought by H&R Block. Their business model was heavily dependent on complicated tax policy and I am sure there are others out there. Smell the money and you'll soon see the reason.
It's self explanatory to anyone who understands what "gross" and "payments" mean when used in conjuction with each other...I don't get my informaation from the pretty words at the fairtax website, I read the legislation.
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.