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

To: expatpat

"One reason why there is so much fire in these discussions is that there is a kind of circular reasoning going on. The pro argument: IF prices don't go up, then workers will need less gross pay and the embedded tax cost will cancel out the added sales tax. OTOH, if workers expect that same gross salary, then prices will go up by roughly the same amount as the sales tax. Which do you think is most likely?"

Neither. There are employee borne costs, the elimination of which will allow employees to receive their entire paychecks without deductions. In essence, a raise in net take home pay.

There are employee borne tax costs, including (but certainly not limited to) payroll taxes. The compliance costs of the current system, for example, are simply staggering.

Employee borne cost elimination will lead to an increase in net take-home pay.

Employer borne tax cost elimination will lead to a decrease in (pre-tax) prices to consumers.


407 posted on 03/04/2005 2:31:51 PM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies ]


To: phil_will1
The compliance costs of the current system, for example, are simply staggering. That's nonsense. I refer you to my post #300, in particular:

the cost to business is outrageously over-estimated. I ran a $25M business and not even my accounting personnel spent 20% of their time on taxes, and they were only a fraction of my total labor and plant costs.

Pure bullsh*t!

There are employee borne costs, the elimination of which will allow employees to receive their entire paychecks without deductions. In essence, a raise in net take home pay.

Now you have joined the snake-oil guys!

411 posted on 03/04/2005 2:44:31 PM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies ]

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