Posted on 08/15/2005 5:55:06 AM PDT by OESY
A major domestic battle looms this fall, when tax reform-- a centerpiece of the president's bold domestic agenda-- will finally be on the table. The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform is expected to release its findings by the end of September. After the political shellacking the White House took on Social Security, the administration will be strongly tempted to take a conciliatory path that supports only superficial reforms, essentially preserving the status quo of our hideous income tax code.
Such a course would have perilous consequences, economically and politically. In fact, the administration has an opportunity here to boldly retake the initiative, to recover lost political support and thrust an already decent economy into high gear and, at the same time, make America better able to meet intensifying competition from China, India and others. How? By junking the entire federal income tax code and starting over with a flat tax. A growing number of countries are doing this -- and so should we.
The current system is beyond redemption, a beast whose complexity, confusion and outright unfairness have corrupted our economy and society. Americans waste more than $200 billion and over six billion hours each year filling out tax forms. They engage in all kinds of useless economic activity intended to take advantage of the code's complicated maze of deductions and to reduce taxes -- from deducting donations of old socks to making unwanted investments. The waste of brainpower -- at a time of increasing global competition -- is incalculable.
The code corrupts our system of government by encouraging the crassest political conduct and by creating a massive, intrusive federal bureaucracy. One-sixth of the private-sector employees in Washington are employed by the lobbying industry. One-half of their efforts are directed at wrangling changes in the tax code....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What? That's a new one on me.
You speak of treating each other with civility??? Great s-test!! You might take note of some of your own postings.
I perefer to think of FR as a forum for free expression of ideas some of which will conflict with yours in a "hurtful" manner apparently.
If you don't wish to return the post, then don't. You might as well stop lecturing me like a six-year old, too. I'm far too old for that to be effective especially from someone whose views are obviously so different from my own.
The tax base for a NRST is the tax on sales or on the products thereof, not individuals, so it is important if we are to discuss a subject to get the definitions correct, or, as it is done in a legal document, set the definitions beforehand, for if we wish to engage in constructive discourse we must have a mutual understanding of terms, even if that means you are incorrect. Or if you wish to write in a language other that English, be my guest.
You might as well stop lecturing me like a six-year old, too.Stop acting like one.
You can look for them, I have discussed the revenue neutral calculations and asked questions there.
I have never brought up homes, or any of the other stuff shich I understand the FairTax opinion on these items.
Actually none of this other stuff matters unless prices at the retail level go down by enough to alow the FairTax to be added with no net effect. So that is where I am concentrating my study at the moment.
If prices don't nosedive by 20-25% within a month of the FairTax starting we'd be screwed.
You mean you would rather the government know you have X dollars invested with Your Broker, Inc. than to know you shop at Wal-mart? There's no comparison, in my book.
I don't remember seeing anything about currency in the Forbes article. Where was that, exactly?
This is my favorite typo of the afternoon, by pigdog, the post checker.
Help me understand this. Isn't the reporting of income just for the reason of letting the government know how much to credit you for SS purposes. If so, I would think people would be happy to go to that trouble. It is not as if they have to send in money. However, wouldn't we have to maintain records to validate what we report?
You know the CPA and tax lawyer lobby will fight the flat tax big time...they are the leading opponents for it.
That's funnee, Rob ... good on ya'.
Under FairTax I will write out the same check for $1 million but it will all be to my employees directly. My payroll costs haven't changed. How am I able to reduce my prices by 20%+ allowing prices to stay the same when the 30% FairTax is added?
You didn't write checks for $1,000,000 before. You wrote checks for $1,075,000, because the employer FICA isn't withheld from the employees' paycheck. That's $75,000 savings you can pass along right there. You also have to take into account the reduction in prices your suppliers are able to give. And, most importantly you have to consider the income taxes and FICA taxes on your own income, whether self-employment tax or the FICA tax on the salary you give yourself.
I believe you may have said before that you didn't want to be a tax collector for the feds? Do you realize from your example that you already ARE a tax collector for the feds? $350,000 worth.
Also, you are using the tax inclusive rate on your prices dropping but the tax exclusive rate for the Fair Tax rate, which makes your claim appear more "impossible" in your eyes, and in the eyes of those you are trying to influence.
That's 80% of income taxes.
They won't and we will be. Your previous analysis of the impact on business is correct and even if you look at businesses with low labor costs the results are very similar.
You didn't write checks for $1,000,000 before. You wrote checks for $1,075,000, because the employer FICA isn't withheld from the employees' paycheck. That's $75,000 savings you can pass along right there.If the FairTax is truly revenue neutral, there can be no overall savings by someone not paying a tax they were paying before. If they aren't paying with the FairTax, somebody else is - most likely RobFromGa's employee's and RobFromGa himself. They will need the money you say than can use to reduce prices to pay the tax they will now be paying directly.
It's up to the employer(business) to maintain the records and report wages (or, for some, self-employment income - the wage equivalent).
Other types of income, though, are not reported - and, you're right; no payments.
There is nothing that says this money will have to be paid to the employee.
Certainly there can be Nightie, you jus haven't thought that one through I guess.
And therefore my feeling that the CPA's will come out of this okay.
Certainly there can be Nightie, you jus haven't thought that one through I guess.Maybe you would like to explain how.
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.