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.
I think one paid poster in the past, Chief Negotiator is no longer with us.I have a very strong suspicion that phil_will1 is paid by the AFT, also.
WHat is "coincidental maybe"? Your post is not clear on that. Would you elaborate?
I think it was an arson/murder. I think the prime suspect was a neighbor who had a rather large criminal record. That was tragic, and Chief was otherwise a good fellow.
I read your last reply. One word, ingenious.
When Gene Malove was killed in CT last year it was labeled unresolved. I do not think that was a coincidence. If the chief's demise is resolved then I guess there is no issue here.
Malove S/B Mallove
Except it would be a federal offense.
What would be a federal offense?...
Compensating a CEO of a corporation would be a federal offense under your sales tax plan?
How would anyone know what form of compensation a CEO is receiving if there are no audits or agents to audit them...Won't all the IRS agents be fired?
I missed your answer on how the feds would know if a corporation was doing the purchasing for their CEO's as compensation...
Would there be audits of corporations like CNN for example who aren't subject to a sales tax and the CEO's who work for them or not?
Without audits, how would you catch them?
It all goes back to the understanding that the IRS or a similar administrative body will remain with us as long as the US Treasury needs our property as they have none of their own. If one is going to keep the IRS then why get rid of the really egregious parts of the income tax code so the weak, the stupid, the poor and the liberal can still tax us "rich" folks at an even more progressive rate? Does it work for you?
"I have a very strong suspicion that phil_will1 is paid by the AFT, also."
LOL You have a lot of suspicions. I have my suspicions about you, also. Where does that get us?
How is your Nightmare tax plan coming along? Got any co-sponsors lined up yet?
"How is your Nightmare tax plan coming along? Got any co-sponsors lined up yet?"
What about Always Right, Final Authority, LewisLynn, and Willie Green? Have you convinced any of them yet? They can't co-sponsor, of course, but they could help you drum up support.
"That's not a very artful dodge there Phil."
It isn't a dodge at all, Louie. If you check posts #507 and 6, neither have anything whatsoever to do with the point that you raised.
I will have to admit, tho, I'm not in your league as a dodger of questions.
BTW, when does Larken Rose's trial start? Or has it started already?
So do you work as a college teacher or as a bureaucrat? Because it's obvious from your above statement that you have never worked in the business sector of the economy because if you had you would know that your above statement was complete BS because businesses factor in ALL their costs when they price their products and services.
LOL You have a lot of suspicions. I have my suspicions about you, also. Where does that get us?But I have stated that I have no affiliations with any organization and that I certainly aren't being paid by any organization. You have refused to if you are being paid by the AFT.
Cascading, as I understand it, is what would happen with the APT tax, Feige's proposal. 1% on every electronic payment.....
I'm under a deadline......I'd love to FREEP, but I must work on my JD instead.........Free-mail me your e-mail, and I'll send you a spreadsheet.
Good to know that your Nightmare VAT/Flat backers think so highly of your plans.
Just for the record (and before you start your accusations) I am neither affiliated with nor paid by the FairTax folks. I merely recognize it as the best plan with a solid bill behind it, with any hope of passage, and with a lot of impetus behind it.
You really should read the bill looey so you can grasp what you're talking about.
Perhaps you think CNN does not sell things at retail, eh?
I don't recall anyone saying it was unresolved. What is the post # were that was stated?
So far as I know it is still unresolved.
Cascading, as I understand it, is what would happen with the APT tax, Feige's proposal. 1% on every electronic payment.....I understand cascading taxes. Pigdog was trying to describe "cost cascading." I've never heard of "cost cascading" or "cascading costs." Have you?
I am not clear exactly what you are saying in this post.
Any economist will agree that changing the assumptions of a model means that the reactions of the dependent variables within it will not necessarily be the same after the change as before.
Don't know what changing the wages of employees would have to do with increasing demand for the company's product or how a choice of increasing wages vs decreasing prices is relevant to anything I have said.
Nor have I argued for any "arbitrary" actions on behalf of employers.
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.