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 ...
Do you mean money? The amount of tax collected is directly related the the behavior of the taxpayer. If the taxpayer doesn't work he pays no income tax. If the taxpayer doesn't but anything, he pays no sales or excise tax.
Works great (but only for those who can/will read.And drink the Kool-Aid.
Would you like a sip, My Pretty???
Got it. Thanks.
Now who's being naive? Yes. I've even been through one. If you'd can your put-downs and biases we might have a discussion.
Otherwise, if you just want berate people who may not agree with you, you don't need to reply to my posts.
NO. I don't. I work in the service sector like your plumber, your doctor, your investment broker. The sector of this economy that seems to be the elephant that nobody's talking about in this thread.
I don't have retail purchasers. I work in the service sector. My customers are not billed alike. In fact, what my customers get billed changes on a daily basis depending on market factors and my best judgment of the work involved on their order.
Federal revenues have gone up in the last few quarters, while we had tax cuts in the last two years.
Ancient Geezer has disputed that many times on these threads...
Really, Lewislynn?
Perhaps you aren't looking at the same sources I am, tax rates relative to NNP are lower, federal revenues rise as the economy grows overcoming lower tax rates. Or haven't you noticed?
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-ments 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. |
GDP & NNP are now growing with consequent growth in federal tax receipts with the tax cuts implemented by the Bush Administration.
Table 1.7.5. Relation of Gross Domestic Product, Gross National Product, Net National Product, National Income, and Personal Income [Billions of dollars] Seasonally adjusted at annual rates |
|||||||
Today is: 8/17/2005 Last Revised on July 29, 2005 Next Release Date August 31, 2005 |
Line | 2003 III |
2003 IV |
2004 I |
2004 II |
2004 III |
2004 IV |
2005 I |
2005 II |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 11,087.4 | 11,236.0 | 11,457.1 | 11,666.1 | 11,818.8 | 11,995.2 | 12,198.8 | 12,376.2 | |
2 | the world |
344.3 | 384.9 | 380.0 | 401.2 | 418.1 | 462.4 | 462.3 | --- |
3 | the world |
277.0 | 291.7 | 297.0 | 354.5 | 369.6 | 425.6 | 422.9 | --- |
4 | 11,154.8 | 11,329.2 | 11,540.1 | 11,712.8 | 11,867.3 | 12,032.0 | 12,238.2 | --- | |
5 | 1,337.2 | 1,352.5 | 1,371.1 | 1,393.8 | 1,534.1 | 1,442.0 | 1,448.4 | 1,456.1 | |
14 | 9,817.6 | 9,976.8 | 10,169.0 | 10,319.0 | 10,333.2 | 10,589.9 | 10,789.8 | --- |
Table 3.2. Federal Government Current Receipts and Expenditures [Billions of dollars] Seasonally adjusted at annual rates |
|||||||
Today is: 8/17/2005 Last Revised on July 29, 2005 Next Release Date August 31, 2005 |
Line | 2003 III |
2003 IV |
2004 I |
2004 II |
2004 III |
2004 IV |
2005 I |
2005 II |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1,808.9 | 1,887.9 | 1,917.8 | 1,951.4 | 1,975.4 | 2,054.6 | 2,201.5 | --- |
Interesting how that works isn't it?
For the purposes of the FairTax it may be that your services ARE taxable (but not all services are). If you provide what would be an end use aervice to a final consumer rather than something to, say, a business, then the service might be taxable. Since you haven't even generally described it, it's really not possible to guess or give examples.
I'm afraid, too, that you may be reading in too much complication and too much effort on your part as well as too much big-brotherism. The FairTax is a dramatically simple scheme and any collection and reporting you will do (a once a month two line report sent to the state sales tax folks with the amount you've collected) you will be well-paid for. There's no per-customer detail information as you are concerned about - none. Just the two line report indicated in Sec. 501 of the bill.
At any rate, IF the services are taxable (or some part of them) there's no requirement at all that they be all billed the same amount at all for the same (or different) services. That's completely between you and your customer as it should be.
In #502 just above, I posted two sections from the bill. Sec. 509 basically says you have to keep a record (paper or machine) of your receipts for a period of time and the receipts themselves are defined in Sec. 510. In describing the sevice - that description is yours alone; something meaningful to your business as general or specific as you like. There's no requirement about identifying the customer nor how much time you might have spent nor why you charged what you did. That's all between you and the customer.
I think you can quickly see that there will be many preprinted Invoice forms at Staples, etc. with preprinted numbers, and perhaps some of the oher information, too to save you time. It will basically be you recording the date, (assuming the vendor number, vendor name, and perhaps even the rate are preprinted), "Service A" as a name, the price tax-included, and then the amount of tax paid (23% x the tax-inclusive price). Give our customer a copy, keep a copy. That's the recordkeeping (period).
Then once a month, you add up the tax inclusive prices of he invoices (called "gross payments" in the bill and the amount of tax paid (called "tax collected" in the bill) and send that with your payment that equals the tax collected to the state sales folks. For this monthly "terribly big chore" you are paid a minimum of $200 or 1/4 of 1% of the tax collected - whichever is more. ou might make an esimate of your current service business and get at least a rough idea of how much this would be. The prebate you receive is, of course, a separate thing.
I was actually hoping that you would make use of the links we've given to both read the bill and some of the explanations on he FairTax website but you apparently haven't had time yet, but please do so. the website explains things well (better than I) and you can check other points that may concern you.
It is a gloriously simple tax sytem; far more so that the preesent one. Please invest a few minutes of your time.
You got it brother.
The squirrels raiding my bird feeders are giving me the finger as we speak. They also seem to be sharpening their claws.
I've heard from some Appalachian friends that fried squirrel is pretty tasty ... wonder about fried Squirrel?
You're a mindreader, Finial??? You KNEW he meant "gist" instead of "gest"??? Amazing, since the word "gest" could very well apply since it means a series of adventures - which could perhaps be his intended meaning.
Maybe YOU should lighten up. With either meaning I think most readers will get the drift of what he said. Sounded fine to me.
Ya made my heart warm up a bit---thanx.
Don't mention it - just seemed like an appropriate observation.
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.