Not once have I defended the IRS on here.
But when I see the words "National Sales Tax" then right along side it "27%" and then right alongside that "state and federal contract, but the feds will get the lions share"
It doesn't matter how you rip people off if in the end you're still ripping them off.
It's clear that no one who ever devised any tax scheme has ever thought it true, that's why it all becomes so convuluted eventually.
"Actually, consumption (sales taxes if you will) are more stable a tax base than income tax so that there will be fewer revenue fluctuations, not more"
Here's a little primer on recession, when there is recession, people will consume less, no more than what they have to spend.
Most of our sales tax windfall items are not necessities, so if people are nervous about the economy, they stop spending, and revenue stops entering
Now, the income tax sucks as does the capital gains nonsense (that's the one I wanted burned in a vat of acid), but the thing about the income tax is. You can use withholding, accountants, etc, so while you are paying money, you don't have to come face to face with it on a daily basis that you're getting squeezed
With a sales tax, you are reminded on a daily basis about taxes, you are reminded every day that it's the government's fault that no price advertised is an actual price, etc. You still have the exact same hatred for the tax man we have today, except you get to be reminded about it every 6 hours.
And another thing, no one has yet addressed my point about sales taxes and credit. Credit purchases are generally taxed just like anything else.
But when I see the words "National Sales Tax" then right along side it "27%" and then right alongside that "state and federal contract, but the feds will get the lions share"
Hmm, where do you see 27%, I see a provisional 23% and that was determined back in 1999 under a somewhat higher rate of federal taxation.
The same legislation, once updated for revenue neutrality before enactment is possible as is required by the President's criteria for all tax reform measures (not tax cut measures), is headed somewhat lower provided there is any fair expectation of achieving permanent tax cuts out of this, or the next, Congress:
refer Tax Freedom Day 2005 report PDF: Special Report No.134, April 2005
|
Total Effective Tax Rates by Level of Government |
|||
| Year | Federal | State | Total |
| 1996 | 21.3% | 10.4% | 31.6% |
| 1997 | 21.8% | 10.3% | 32.1% |
| 1998 | 22.4% | 10.4% | 32.8% |
| 19990 | 22.5% | 10.4% | 32.9% |
| 2000 | 23.1% | 10.4% | 33.5% |
| 2001 | 22.2% | 10.5% | 32.7% |
| 2002 1 | 19.6% | 10.2% | 29.8% |
| 2003 2 | 18.8% | 10.1% | 28.9% |
| 2004 3 | 18.4% | 10.2% | 28.6% |
| 2005 | 19.0% | 10.1% | 29.1% |
| Notes: Leap day is omitted to make dates comparable over time. Since depreciation is not available to pay taxes, GDP is an overstatement of spendable income for the purpose of measuring tax burdens. Depreciation is netted out of NNP. "Overall, NNP provides the best statistical representation of the common notion of “spendable” resources. In 2004 NNP was $10,371.6 billion. Like GDP and PI, NNP is a component of the National Income Product Accounts (NIPA). These accounts are computed and compiled annually by the Commerce Depart-ment’s Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)." 0 First year introduction of HR2525(Fair Tax legislation). 1 Economic Growth and Tax Reform Reconciliation Act of 2001 Sources: Office of Management and Budget; Internal Revenue Service; Congressional Research Service; National Bureau of Economic Research; Treasury Department; and Tax Foundation calculations. |
|||
Now, the income tax sucks as does the capital gains nonsense (that's the one I wanted burned in a vat of acid), but the thing about the income tax is. You can use withholding, accountants, etc, so while you are paying money, you don't have to come face to face with it on a daily basis that you're getting squeezed
Oh, its alright if the squeeze you, just don't bother you with the knowledge so you might have to do something about it. I see.
Your desire to hide taxation from the eyes of the individual citizen it deplorable. Playing the ostrich will not make it go away, trying to pass it on to the other guy will not make it go away, in fact experience has shown that such manner of taxation inevitably rises until it so burdens an economy that a nation is driven to stagnation.
Ostriches may be a somewhat successful species by making themselves look like a bush or tree hiding their head in the sand. Unfortunately low flying buzzards roost in trees and sh't all overthem.
With a sales tax, you are reminded on a daily basis about taxes, you are reminded every day that it's the government's fault that no price advertised is an actual price, etc. You still have the exact same hatred for the tax man we have today, except you get to be reminded about it every 6 hours.
Now you catch on, you are not supposed to like or tolerate high taxes, you are supposed to be mad enought to do something about it.
If you want smaller govenment there is only one way to achieve it, remind voters daily just how expensive big government really is personally and up front and in their face.
And another thing, no one has yet addressed my point about sales taxes and credit. Credit purchases are generally taxed just like anything else.
What's your question, I haven't notice it.
Yes you pay the NRST on credit purchases, Yes finance companies will carry the risk of default on that tax as any tax not paid in the service of the debt will be credited back to the lender.
So what precisely was your issue, if that does not answer the question?
Please ... I made no such claim. I'm trying to help you with information to counter some of the misinformation (such as the 27% you quote - nor is it 37%; it is 23% tax inclusive which corresponds to an income tax bracket of 23%) on the lead-in post to the thread.
Yes, absolutely in a recession people can spend less although they do not stop consuming. In a recession, people - many of them - lose their income completely ... yet thay still consume (while the government loses income tax revenue). A family with no income will borrow or, if necessary, steal to be able to consume and feed their family.
Let's see - is it that you are in favor of MORE government spending by having such an easily-manipulated tax system as the present one? I would think you'd appreciate lowered tax revenues to force spending cuts.
I'm afraid I don't think the "not getting squeezed" idea is too good a one. I WANT people to see how much they're being squeezed on each and every receipt on everything they buy. That will help us get to lowered government spending quicker than anything when it's combined by a bill such as the FairTax. Please, please - read the bill.
No question that credit card debt is bad and that the interest rates are too high, but that's more a function of the present tax system (and personal profligacy) than anything else. In fact, the FairTax will help there also since one of the things it clearly does do is lower interest rates by a couple of percentage points - and on home mortgages, too. That may not wean the current plastic generation completely from their plastic, but it will help to lower their expenses and, with the fact that saving and investing is no longer penalized (or even taxed at all) under the FairTax, it will certainly allow a good percentage of those who have the will and insight to get up a rung or two on the economic ladder.
Staying on the present tax path is merely a recipe for disaster. Credit card purchases are just purchases and SHOULD be taxed, but the costs to people of mis-using their credit as at present will be lower and make no mistake, that helps them (and the country) financially.
You simply ignore all the empirical data on consumption being more stable than income throughout history. Odd tactic.