Just more empty nonsense, John. You still need to bring it before Congress as a tax bill as I said.
Until you do that, it's still piffle.
And all of the comments I've made about the flaws still apply unless you somehow have something in your bill to overcome them.
I look forward to your showing your revenue neurtral calculations, too.
Until then, get lost. Testifying before Congregational committees counts for nothing. Nor does trying to claim you have the only constitutional idea. The FairTax is definitely constitutional also. And it does provide for revenue neutrality which the President has set as one of the requirements. You'll have to figure a way around little things like that. You're just wasting your own time (and mine too) with such nonsense.
As to the revenue neutral feature of H.R. 25 which you boast about, that revenue feature is nothing more than a provision to insure the continuance of existing big government without any of the checks and balances our founding fathers intended when granting power to tax consumption as is explained above [see post 435]. Truth is, your tax idea is a welcomed plan by socialists and the friends of big government.
As to H.R. 25 being constitutional, sorry pal, you are wrong again because Congress does not have authority to tax property unless the tax is apportioned among the states and that is what is being taxed under your proposal . . .property, and , the value of the property being sold determines the amount of tax to be paid, which contravenes the constitutional requirement that direct taxes are to be apportioned among the states.
JWK
ACRS
The only stinking tax reform we need is for the American People to demand their employees in Washington add the following words to our Constitution, bringing us back to our founding father‘s original tax plan:
“The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay “any” tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money.”