Posted on 05/12/2005 7:46:54 PM PDT by Your Nightmare
Members of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform on May 11 expressed concerns over the FairTax national retail sales tax, a plan that has emerged as an alternative with a major grass-roots push.
Panel chair Connie Mack, vice chair John B. Breaux, and other members worried the plan would be difficult to enforce, would be regressive, and would require a high rate in order to take in enough money to fund the government.
Breaux raised concerns that the proposed 23 percent (tax-inclusive) rate would not be sufficient to raise the revenue necessary to fund the government. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would take as much as a 57 percent (tax-exclusive) rate to be revenue-neutral. Further, Breaux said he thought exemptions that would be carved out to make the sales tax progressive would also complicate it.
Mack, who raised concerns similar to his fellow panelists', said he was "intrigued" by the plan. "But if it's such a great idea, why haven't other political entities around the world pursued it?" he asked.
Americans for Fair Taxation Executive Director Tom Wright emphasized that the plan emerged after "thorough academic research" and "thorough polling" The strong grass-roots push has resulted in some of the group's 600,000 members appearing at each of the panel's hearings and has inspired a large comment-writing campaign to the panel in support of the plan.
Sales tax advocates were among the 20 witnesses who gathered before the panel for a full day of testimony on tax reform proposals. Although the group has held several other hearings in Washington and around the country, the May 11 meeting was its first hearing on specific reform plans since Bush appointed the panel in January. The panel has been charged with identifying tax reform proposals that are progressive, encourage charitable giving and home purchases, and are revenue-neutral. The proposals are due by July 31.
Among the tax replacement and reform plans presented to the panel were the value added tax, consumption-based tax, and the flat tax, as well as proposals that would use the current income tax as the foundation.
Witnesses generally claimed that theirs was the fairest, simplest, most flexible, most transparent revenue-neutral proposal that would improve economic growth and savings while meeting the president's criteria of encouraging charitable giving and home buying. Witnesses presenting consumption-based plans praised their overhaul as taking millions of low-income taxpayers off the rolls, being easy to transition to on a worldwide basis, and including safeguards to prevent new loopholes that would result in increased complexity down the road.
Tax reform panel members, who agree the current tax system needs to be fixed, grilled witnesses without revealing whether they will ultimately endorse a consumption- or income-based tax or a different mixture of the two.
The worst part of any type of national sales tax is the TRANSITION phase. There will most likely be a phase-out/phase-in of different tax systems. Then, by golly, there will be a CRISIS, and can't we just keep the income tax just a little bit longer?? Thanks a lot sales-taxers, we will then have TWO major methods competing for our money, (in addition to other taxes we will still have)
I bet the committee members have not read the following paper:
J Heckman, L. Lochner and C. Taber, "Tax policy and Human Capital Formation," American Economic Review, (May 1998), 88(2), 293-297.
Don't hold your breath for the committee or any opponent to actually read it.
Don't hold your breath for the committee or any opponent to actually read it.
Maybe they did read it but decided it, like the Fairtax, isn't the last word on the subject.
They seem to be a company that makes money by selling information on the IRS Income Tax Code. For example, here is one of their products; http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/website.nsf/Web/Onedisc?OpenDocument
Taxanalysts would go bankrupt if the U.S. switched to a Nation Retail Sales Tax (Fairtax). This is why they made this hit-piece attacking the Fairtax.
Fair Tax will penalize those on Social Security since they will not realize any income increase if the income tax is abolished because no withholding is taken on SS payments.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but even though there's no withholding, SS recipients still pay income tax on their SS income, do they not?
Amazing isn't it?
If they did read it, then I have to conclude that the purpose of this cmte is purely political. I am not opposed to people coming up with better ideas. I just haven't seen one.
http://www.fairtax.org/
http://www.geocities.com/cmcofer/fca4.html
If we want to get rid of the IRS - and their storm troopers - we need to start rattling chains - LOUD - let those on the committee - and all other reps - know we want the IRS GONE...
We would be free for the first time in our lives...
I am not opposed to people coming up with better ideas. I just haven't seen one.
Coming up with a good idea is one thing. The possibility of it working is quite another.
They seem to be a company that makes money by selling information on the IRS Income Tax Code.They seem to be a company that makes money by selling information on the IRS Income Tax Code.------
Taxanalysts would go bankrupt if the U.S. switched to a Nation Retail Sales Tax
They'd be right there to make it as complicated as possible. The fairtax already gives them a head start. If you don't beleive that, for starters just look at the confusion they've caused in the rate itself.
Of course, I wonder why YOU want to keep the IRS in place...
Fairtax is just as simple as State Sales taxes.Can you actually give an example?
Of course, I wonder why YOU want to keep the IRS in place...
You said that, not me. Why does it always have to be about me?
Is the fairtax the only alternative?...Some people on the Presidents commission don't think so.
I see you have problems calculating percentages.
Is the fairtax the only alternative?...Some people on the Presidents commission don't think so.
The Fairtax is the only viable alternative. A Flat Tax (which the Federal Income Tax was originally) would allow the IRS to continue existing. A Value Added Tax (VAT) would be worse than an Income Tax because it taxes products and people at EVERY stage of a products production. A VAT is a worse 'hidden' tax than Income Tax.
That leaves the Nation Retail Sales Tax (Fairtax) as the only workable option left on the table.
Now, you are just upset that I pointed out taxanalyists conflict of interest on this issue.
They already have that. HR 25 would prevent it.
What's silent is your pings to fair tax supporters. You didn't want them around?
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.