This is true. In recent years, federal revenues have be 21% of GDP.
This is the amount that the FairTax is intended to generate. It is a little less than the 23% rate due to the quirky rebate scheme. (The rebate scheme serves no economic purpose. It exists only to make the rate progressive.)
Notice that in recent years that the federal share of GDP has decreased. That is the result of the Bush tax cuts. We are getting more revenue on a lower percentage because the economy has grown. FairTax proponents have not adjusted their claim to 21% of GDP. In effect, the adoption of the FairTax would be a tax increase over today's rates.
Notice that in recent years that the federal share of GDP has decreased. That is the result of the Bush tax cuts. We are getting more revenue on a lower percentage because the economy has grown. FairTax proponents have not adjusted their claim to 21% of GDP. In effect, the adoption of the FairTax would be a tax increase over today's rates.
As the bill stands at present, you are correct. As the true revenue neutral rate should be closer to 19% taking the Bush tax cuts into account. Howerver, since the Bush tax cuts have not been made permenant and they all expire by 2010 the bill has not been adjusted for obvious reasons.
I would suggest you get on the ball and make sure those tax cuts are made permanent. To do so will drop the FairTax rate considerably.
The 23% rate is based on pre-1999 tax and NIPA/GDP data when the legislation was first introduced, refer to the CATO's description of Calculating the Tax Rate.
A more current calculation based on current tax law (Bush tax cuts in effect 2003) is provided below:
http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/tax_system.html
|