Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Winners and Losers under the 'FairTax'
hripka | September 28, 2005 | self

Posted on 09/28/2005 12:14:25 PM PDT by hripka

A change in a tax affects that area of the economy . . . and beyond. Taxes hurt whatever is taxed. Income taxes hurt income (production). Sales taxes hurt sales (consumption). Higher rates have higher effects.

After having read "The FairTax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS" by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder, I realized that the 'FairTax' proposed by Boortz and Linder would change EVERYTHING. The 'FairTax' is not tax reform, it is tax upheaval. Since it taxes consumption instead of income, consumption WILL fall, and incomes WILL rise. All of the incentives (and penalties) enacted into the current tax code would, at least be neutralized, or perhaps go into reverse.

A frugal person might be in favor of a 'FairTax' (National Retail Sales Tax, NRST) because the United States is consuming too much and needs more income. Considering our multiple deficits, (federal budget, international trade, consumer debt, etc.) cutting consumption and increasing income might not be a bad thing, but only to a point. However, the 'FairTaxers' assume minimal transition costs. They are VERY mistaken. The day of the change itself would be minor, but then the 'FairTax' would change EVERYTHING.

A list (in no particular order) put together by an amateur, not a tax professional:

List of those who would benefit under the 'FairTax' plan:

1. Business/production in general

2. All income-producing activities that were previously taxed, dividend payers, capital gains, etc.

3. Savers. Thrift and frugality will now be rewarded.

4. Activities that were formerly penalized: Alternative minimum tax payers, estate tax payers, gift tax payers, etc.

5. Corporate bonds, as compared to government bonds

6. Cash and bartering transactions

7. eBay for handling used transactions, also flea markets, second-hand stores, rummage/garage sales

8. Current owners of houses, cars, clothes, household goods. The answer on pg. 162-163 ignores existing houses. It states that *new* houses will decline in price, but go right back up again due to the 'FairTax'. And existing houses?

9. Companies will start a Company Store for tax-free employee benefits

10. Home-based activities: sewing, knitting, cooking, fruit and vegetable gardening at home, home repair, do-it-yourself, self reliance

11. Refurbishing of standing 'used' real estate

12. Smuggling, especially of portable high-value goods

13. Warren Buffett, who doesn't sell due to capital gains taxes which are now eliminated

14. Indian tribes could offer tax-free stores, and their casinos aren't affected

and others ? ?

List of those who would be hurt under the 'FairTax' plan:

1. Consumers/spenders in general

2. All retail establishments

2a. less impacted: those catering to home-based activities such as groceries, home improvement, etc.

2b. Internet-based retailers

2c. most impacted: portable high-value goods such as stamp, coin, jewelry dealers which might even close due to smuggling

3. Federal Government temporarily, due to initial tax simplification

4. IRS employees, tax accountants and lobbyists, HR Block, Intuit, etc.

5. Government bonds, (no longer tax-advantaged) as compared to corporate bonds

6. Roth IRA account holders (despite pg. 120-121 that a principle of the 'FairTax' that everything should be taxed only once)

7. Charitable donations to charities and churches, due to loss of tax deductible giving

8. All currently tax-exempt organizations, their comparative advantage is reduced.

9. Home real estate in general due to loss of tax deductible interest, a major selling point.

10. New real estate developments - especially near cities with old housing

11. Residents of states that don't currently have a sales tax, those states will enact their own sales tax

12. Taxpayers living in states or cities with high income or high property taxes, which are no longer deductible

13. Anything currently tax-advantaged through credits and deductions, i.e. conservation efforts, high medical bills, victims of casualty and theft losses, child and adoption tax credits, capital losses, etc.

14. Tax-advantaged 401k's, no reason to have them ? though savings in general will increase

15. China, Japan, etc., countries that currently export to us

16. All non-Indian casinos and lotteries. Casinos have to pay in effect a 23% income tax on gross profits (gross receipts minus payoffs and other taxes)!? My reading of Section 702(e).

and others ? ?

Remember, this is a list put together by an amateur, not a tax professional. Are there others affected, positively or negatively? Where am I wrong? Read my tagline.

A tax hurts what is taxed. That is how I came up with this list.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: boortz; fairtax; flimflam; hr25; irs; linder; nrst; scam; scientology; snakeoil; tax; taxfraud; taxreform; withholding
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-450 next last
Three questions:

1. I am not sure how purchases made abroad by Americans are taxed. Section 101-d-1 of HR25 implies that the 'FairTax' is a Use Tax. I have seen other information that purchases made abroad are 'FairTax'-free. If it is the latter, then foreign purchases by Americans will skyrocket. See also the US Supreme Court decision of North Dakota vs. Quill Corporation regarding the use tax.

2. I read Section 102-a-2 to mean that (initial public offerings) IPOs are not taxed, but would investment real estate be taxed?

3. Also, if a 'FairTax' is only levied on final retail sales, the 'fair tax' rate will have to be MUCH higher than 23% (inclusive) or 30% (exclusive rate). Today the feds spend 2.5 trillion. The GDP is over 11 trillion. Approximately two-thirds of that (7.26 trillion) is consumer spending. 2.5 trillion divided by 7.26 trillion is a federal sales tax rate of 34%. To say that government will pay taxes to itself is a circular argument. On a 77 cent item, everyone pays $1. When the government pays for it, it goes back into its own pocket. Sure a dollar comes out of the government's right pocket, but 23 cents goes immediately into the left pocket. If that isn't the epitome of an 'embedded' tax, then what is?

1 posted on 09/28/2005 12:14:32 PM PDT by hripka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hripka

Add to those that it will HURT

Drug Dealers

The Mob

Anyone that currently works "Under the Table"

Trust Fund Babies (folks like Paris Hilton, John Kerry etc)

Employees of the IRS

Offshore Banking (Or any Institution that is in the business of "Hiding / Laundering Money"


2 posted on 09/28/2005 12:22:55 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hripka
3. Savers. Thrift and frugality will now be rewarded.

This is not true. The resulting increase in the money supply will decrease the value of savings at transition by the tax rate. That is, if you have $20,000 in savings, it will by 23% less after the creation of the so-called "Fair Tax".

3 posted on 09/28/2005 12:25:51 PM PDT by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide
it will by 23% less

it will buy 23% less

4 posted on 09/28/2005 12:26:56 PM PDT by SolidSupplySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hripka; ancient_geezer
First, you have a few things right but most things wrong. The loss of deductions has NOTHING to do with it. The fact is that charitable giving goes up in good economic times (which will come with the fair tax). There will be no income tax so deductions are a moot point. Second, you talk about government vs corporate bonds. I assume you mean municipal bonds. US Treasury bonds are only exempt from state taxes and that would not change.

I'll let others wade in here.

5 posted on 09/28/2005 12:30:26 PM PDT by groanup (shred for Ian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hripka

Your list of those "hurt" by the Fair Tax is bogus.

The average worker will IMMEDIATELY see his paycheck jump by 25% or more (think gross pay instead of net pay). The sales tax on the first $25,000 of it will be rebated monthly so that low income folks are not hurt by it.

Businesses and industries who are thinking of moving (or who recently moved) to other countries to take advantage of lower taxes and wages will now reconsider and MANY of them will crunch the numbers and realize that financially it no longer makes sense to move to Mexico or Indonesia.

Giving to charaties for the deduction it would bring is stupid. Why would I want to give $1000 to a charity just so I could reduce my taxes by $280? Charities existed before the income tax and will exist after.

As for tax exempt organizations being in the "losers" column, I see it as a gain. No longer do they have to kowtow, shut their mouths, and kiss the ass of the IRS for fear of losing their tax exempt status. One of the most horrible pieces of unconstitutional legislation ever passed was the one that threatened the tax exempt status of the churches if they DARED to be involved in politics as they had been since our country began.


6 posted on 09/28/2005 12:31:07 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hripka
4. IRS employees, tax accountants and lobbyists, HR Block, Intuit, etc.

This is bad how?

7 posted on 09/28/2005 12:31:32 PM PDT by RetiredArmy (All democrats are ENEMIES of the Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hripka

There are some questions about the fair tax details. I don't think that is in dispute. However, on the grander scale of Pros Vs Cons (some or yours are valid many are not), simply removing the burden of our current federal tax system and the obvious business advantages that brings company's racing to set up shop in the US says I lean in favor. When workers are in demand, salaries go up, income goes up, spending goes up, etc. (and yes, sometimes inflation too). Add to the mix more disposable income for each citizen, which adds buying power, and I am a believer.

I am still trying to understand if 23% is the right amount and how it will effect the economy in the immediate aftermath of implementation, but I am fully on board with it being a long run HOME RUN!


8 posted on 09/28/2005 12:32:44 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hripka
How can both be true? Consumption will fall and income will rise. If all capital goods are taxed as consumption, such as homes, cars, trucks, and the machinery of commerce, and if people don't buy those items because of the tax burden, then why would anyone spend to increase production, and, if production is curtailed, how can incomes grow?
9 posted on 09/28/2005 12:33:15 PM PDT by Final Authority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide

in the long run, compounding savings will allow one to consume much more...


10 posted on 09/28/2005 12:33:46 PM PDT by fooman (Get real with Kim Jung Mentally Ill about proliferation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hripka
Helped: Those who are in debt from past purchases and will be able to repay with untaxed income.

Hurt: Those who have saved in the past in non-tax deferred accounts. They paid income tax on the money before saved and will have to pay again when spending it.

11 posted on 09/28/2005 12:34:10 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (We need a strict constructionist - not someone who plays shadow puppet theater with the Constitution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SolidSupplySide

"This is not true. The resulting increase in the money supply will decrease the value of savings at transition by the tax rate. That is, if you have $20,000 in savings, it will by 23% less after the creation of the so-called "Fair Tax"."

Theoretically, this balances itself out rapidly. This is one of the points I am not yet completely convinced. However, the logic does say competitive capitolism will drive the correction to about pre-tax pricing. What may devalue the dollar (inflation) could be the additional spending that Amercans can afford especially if international businesses start setting up shops and factories and there becomes a shortage of workers, which drives salaries, which drives demand, which drives costs.....

There are worse things the country's economy could do.


12 posted on 09/28/2005 12:36:27 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Final Authority

"How can both be true? Consumption will fall and income will rise. If all capital goods are taxed as consumption, such as homes, cars, trucks, and the machinery of commerce, and if people don't buy those items because of the tax burden, then why would anyone spend to increase production, and, if production is curtailed, how can incomes grow?"

One expectation is that American products become much cheaper to get to our export docks and therefore much cheaper for other nations to import. Our inport/export defecit is suppose to change radically as more businesses move production to the US. So if there were to be any loss in American consumption, our exportation of products would still drive demand for workers. Workers in demand drives price up as the supply is reduced.


13 posted on 09/28/2005 12:42:30 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Dems: "It can't be done" Reps. "Move, we'll find a way or make a way. It has to be done!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Final Authority
How can both be true? Consumption will fall and income will rise

The savings rate will rise.

14 posted on 09/28/2005 12:43:11 PM PDT by hripka (There are a lot of smart people out there in FReeperLand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RetiredArmy
"4. IRS employees, tax accountants and lobbyists, HR Block, Intuit, etc."

This is bad how?

Who said bad?

15 posted on 09/28/2005 12:44:31 PM PDT by hripka (There are a lot of smart people out there in FReeperLand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Regarding charities:

From the book, pg. 165: "With taxes at the 39 percent level, why would they spend $1000 to save $390?"

Saving $390 (or my marginal income tax rate amount) reduces the impact of my giving the $1000. It sure affects my thinking when I write out a check to a charity. And Boortz pooh-poohs this? It must affect others as well.

Regarding currently tax-exempt organizations:

I mentioned that their comparative advantage is reduced.

16 posted on 09/28/2005 12:50:15 PM PDT by hripka (There are a lot of smart people out there in FReeperLand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tenacious 1
I can not see how this would reduce, rather than increase, the tax collecting bureaucracy.
How do people accommodate for the massive shift required in collecting and record keeping? There is no way to keep people, like savers, from being burdened by the lag time in the economy change, without more bureaucratic growth and stupidity, as far as I can see.
Also, in a representative gov't it is a certainty that some good will be exempted, and then some more, and then some more...
I think that smugglers will boom - sure, they may have to pay taxes on things they buy, but if they are willing to sell without taxing, they will, a whole barter smuggling economy is bound to spring up, making the current underground economy pale in comparison. How will the feds stop this form happening? Will they be keeping a record of every receipt you turn in for your exemptions?
What happens, if we push to have a system like this put in place, only to find it worse than the one we have now? Will the gov't not say, this is what you asked for - much like similar 'misunderstandings' of the tax situation in pre-Revolutionary America. Such an upheaval could lead to massive disobedience and rebellion, as it did before. How would we resolve it?
I don't like the current system, but I am not sure that tossing it for the potential evils of one we do not understand is the right idea.
17 posted on 09/28/2005 12:55:31 PM PDT by Apogee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hripka
Savings rate is not income. If savings only can buy highly taxed products then there is no incentive to save but to spend anyway. If one could save expecting lower taxes when savings are spent, then that would be an incentive.

With respect to savings, or retirement set-asides, what is certainly true that under a consumption tax the tax rate will be higher than if there was an income tax only.
18 posted on 09/28/2005 12:57:59 PM PDT by Final Authority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: hripka
I'd just assume we didn't change the tax laws. I understand the advantages /incentives (loop holes) that currently exist. I do a very good job of minimizing my tax burden through investment, charity etc. The rates described will raise my taxes substantially.... unless I just quit buying things.
19 posted on 09/28/2005 1:02:28 PM PDT by kjam22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Final Authority

The incentive to save and not spend is simple... do I want to have my money to pass on to my children, or do I want to give it to the government so that they'll re-build New Orleans?


20 posted on 09/28/2005 1:03:51 PM PDT by kjam22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-450 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson