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

To: ancient_geezer
For, "A wage tax is not an income tax", YN tells us so.
Hmm. Under a flat tax a person could have millions in income and not pay a penny in personal tax.
132 posted on 05/30/2005 7:06:17 PM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies ]


To: Your Nightmare
Hmm. Under a flat tax a person could have millions in income and not pay a penny in personal tax.

Hmm. Under the current income tax a person could have millions in income and not pay a penny in personal tax. Oh, that's what you just said.

Under a NRST that couldn't happen unless the person spends NO money.

Under a VAT no one would pay any tax, right? Everything would be free and the government would run of fumes. But then again, a wage tax is not an income tax.

137 posted on 05/30/2005 8:04:55 PM PDT by groanup (http://fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: Your Nightmare

Hmm. Under a flat tax a person could have millions in income and not pay a penny in personal tax.

Not unlike many who receive only municipal bond interest today under the current income tax.

However, should that same person be a wage earner he/she will indeed be subject to income tax provisions of the "Flat Tax",

H.R.1040 Summary
Title: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide taxpayers a flat tax alternative to the current income tax system.
Sponsor: Rep Burgess, Michael C. [TX-26] (introduced 3/2/2005)

"Calculates taxable income for individual taxpayers by subtracting a basic standard deduction and an additional standard deduction for each dependent from the total of wages, retirement distributions, and unemployment compensation. "

The Flat Tax; Chapter 3, by Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka

Here is the logic of our system, stripped to basics: We want to tax consumption. The public does one of two things with its income—spends it or invests it. We can measure consumption as income minus investment. A really simple tax would just have each firm pay tax on the total amount of income generated by the firm less that firm’s investment in plant and equipment. The value-added tax works just that way. But a value-added tax is unfair because it is not progressive. That’s why we break the tax in two. The firm pays tax on all the income generated at the firm except the income paid to its workers. The workers pay tax on what they earn, and the tax they pay is progressive.

 

not to mention the additional tax on wage income for SS/Medicare taxes.

For indeed your "Flat Tax" is far from the what of most folks think it to be, taxing all individual income with no exceptions:

Why Flat Tax Isn't A "True" Flat Tax
http://www.cac.psu.edu/ur/archives/BUSINESS/flattax.html
2-23-96
Charles R. Enis, Associate Professor of Accounting
Penn State's Smeal College of Business Administration


139 posted on 05/30/2005 8:16:46 PM PDT by ancient_geezer (Don't reform it, Replace it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies ]

To: Your Nightmare

Depends entirely upon the provision of the flat tax involved ...

Now, take your Nightmare Flat tax for example ... (oops, I forgot, it doesn't exist so we CAN'T tell anything about it).


168 posted on 05/31/2005 10:35:54 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | 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