Posted on 06/10/2005 11:13:37 AM PDT by Always Right
But under the nrst, he pays 100% of his taxes when he buys stuff. He will no longer escape paying his taxes.
AW: Except the 23% of his gross which you seem in denial about.
DENSE!
First, he isn't going to charge any extra for the nrst - as you note, he doesn't pay income tax now, so he doesn't inflate his price in order to pay them. He won't collect the nrst on the sale either - he won't increase his price. HIs price is already at the tax free level and will remain there.
The dealer doesn't pay his tax based on his income! He pays his tax when he spends!
DENSE!!!!!
I see you now agree that embedded tax costs are about the same as the nrst. Progress.
But that isn't what you wanted to say! You did it by accident trying to perform mental gymnastics to prove a point that isn't proveable! LOL
The original point is that under the nrst, the drug dealer will pay more of his taxes. The original point was not whether the same would be collected by the gov't - but that it will be more fair under the nrst... because under the income tax he doesn't pay but a part of his taxes - the part embedded in prices.(... we have to make up the part of his taxes he doesn't pay via higher rates on honest folks). BUt under the nrst, he pays ALL his taxes - meaning we don't have to make up the difference.
Dang!
I said "state employees", not private firms. And the amounts are anything but miniscule ... try CA or NY.
It's the same exact principle and NOT something the states would be willing to try since it would embroil them in a raft of legal and financial dificulties and paralyze their own operations.
Not a chance!! They're not that foolish - and certainly wouldn't want to shut themselves down.
"It's called the 'foot in the door.'"
No; it's called "you head up your ... " oh, never mind.
And it not a "newly renamed IRS". The IRS is eliminated under the FairTax bill. It is also defunded just in case you can't understand "eliminated". In addition the IT records are required to be destroyed.
You obviously have no conception of the trouble that the state would cause itself with that sort of childishness.
Not denying history at all; just saying that the Articles of Confederation no longer apply (and applied to a completely different set of circumstances than today.
You're trying to whitewash a barn with red paint.
There is no IRS under thae FairTax - and no "quarterly check".
You send your monthly payment (and two line report) to the sales tax administering authority of your state.
Absolutely untrue and it is clear from the bill itself that it is not as you rant about.
You should read the bill - which you have obviously not done.
Nutso-boffo if ever I heard it.
Read the bill before continuing to make a fool of yourself.
YOU DON'T LIKE DISHONESTY??? AFTER POSTING ALL THOSE UNTRUTHS AS THE LEAD-IN TO THE THREAD???
Who do you think you're kidding? Not most of the Freepers reading here.
Would you like to make a bit of a wager on that? Few if any will keep it at all and those that do will certainly have nothing like its present form.
The FairTax arguments were never - NEVER - about taxing illegal income ... that was always the SQL crowd trying to raise straw men.
(Did I say NEVER!!!)?
One portion of my post was about using stolen money to purchase drugs - which is pretty common.
It isn't "counterfeit", but the thief is not a legitimate source for the money - or perhaps you think he is so you can try to further your flawed argument?
The current system gets very little of the money "going in". The FairTax clearly does a better job of capturing tax revenue from not only drug dealers but the underground economy period.
Don't forget that illegal aliens are also part of the underground economy and the income/payroll tax system captures very little in the way of tax revenue from them (either) "going in". And keep in mind there are millions and millions of foreign visitors who likewise pay no tax at present and similarly have little in the way of tax revenue captured.
No one (except the SQL crowd) ever said ALL taxes were embedded in prices.
All those in the underground economy fare much better under the IT system since all they have to do is disguise their income rather than their consumption.
Houses, cars, etc. are a lot tougher to hide than income = and a lot more obvious.
For one thing, because it would be the law. For another, the 0.25% represents some very big bucks for the state, And yet a third thing is because many of the states will decide to conform their sales taxes to the FairTax law also.
How many states at present do you know of who are stealing/withholding payroll tax from the state employees because they "don't care" if the feds get it???
How many such states have started your wonderful "whisper campaigns"?
The tax base of the two is quite different. The IT system has INCOME as a base and the FairTax has the much larger CONSUMPTION as the base.
The purchase under the IT system using the illegal income will only provide a very small portion of tax revenue to the government, if any, whereas the FairTax will provide the full 23% on retail taxable purchases.
Your beloved Dale Jorgenson says so :
Dale Jorgenson, highly regarded economist of Harvard Univ., has found that 20 to 35 percent of U.S. goods and services are "embedded" taxes; that is, for that $10 item you are buying today, $2.50 is "rolled up" or embedded taxes. This happens because a business must recapture all its costs, plus a little profit, in order to stay in business. So businesses aren't the real "payer" of taxes, they're customers are.
Dale Jorgenson's assumption is what most the NRST analysis is based on. If you accept his assumption, you accept today that a drug dealer pays 20-35% tax on every purchase today. It is a wash.
The rest of the world knows that, in the unlikely event that FT were ever passed, it would look very different from the form its fanatics insist you read.
Game, Set, Match
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.