Posted on 01/30/2006 2:31:32 PM PST by groanup
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, January 30, 2006
Isakson Introduces Legislation to Repeal Tax Code by 2008 Requires Congress to Reauthorize Current Tax Code or Replace It with New System
Flat Tax and National Sales Tax Must Be Considered Among Options
WASHINGTON – Declaring that it's time to give relief to American taxpayers, U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) has introduced legislation to repeal the U.S. tax code by 2008 and to force Congress to vote to reauthorize it or replace it with a new system.
Isakson's bill also creates a commission that would be required to examine and to recommend to Congress plausible replacements for the tax code. A flat tax and a national sales tax must be among the options it examines, under Isakson's legislation.
“The average person spends over 13 hours completing IRS Form 1040, and nearly three in five tax filers have to hire help to complete their taxes,” Isakson said. “The time has come for us to give some relief to the American taxpayer through a complete overhaul of our burdensome, confusing and overly complex tax code.”
The Tax Code Termination Act, S.2182, would terminate the current tax code on December 31, 2008. To ensure a smooth transition to a new system, Congress must approve a new tax code by July 4, 2008. If a new system is not approved by July 4, 2008, Congress would be forced to vote to reauthorize the current tax code.
“History has taught us that if we don’t impose a deadline and terminate the tax code by a date certain, overhauling our inefficient system is nearly impossible,” Isakson said. “All options should be on the table and the only way to fairly consider all of them is to start from scratch.”
To help Congress choose the best replacement system, Isakson's bill creates a commission to analyze reform options and report its findings to Congress. The commission would review the impact of the current tax code on the economy, families and workers; the compliance costs to taxpayers, small business and corporations; and the Internal Revenue Service’s ability to administer the current code.
The commission would be required to consider specifically whether the income tax should be replaced with a flat tax, a national sales tax or another option. The commission also would be required to identify the transition costs associated with any change to the present federal tax code.
The commission would also be required to report on the potential impact of any new system on the U.S. economy and on the government’s ability to collect revenue. Additionally, the potential impact of any new system must be presented and reviewed from both static and dynamic scoring models.
The bill will create a National Commission on Tax Reform within the legislative branch, consisting of 15 members. Two of the members will be required to come from businesses with less than 50 employees. The commission will be appointed by the president, the Senate Majority Leader, the Senate Minority Leader, the Speaker of the House and the Minority Leader in the House.
You mean fargin icehole bastage liar!
Thanks for the clarification. I guess I'm just not in touch with the subtleties of northerner's politics. (ducking)
My thots two.
I'm sorry but my input to my congressman, a co-sponsor of the Fairtax bill and a member of the ways and means committee, will be that we don't have any need for more commissions to study this issue. We simply need to move the fairtax bill forward!
If someone besides Johnny put it in, I'd think differently but still oppose it. THere is absolutely no reason for a commission. There is also no reason to think a single senator or congressman who will vote to end the tax code without a replacement. THat's how we got here today. THe date certain can't get any votes until we've decided on a replacement - hence the recent tax commission (worthless) and the recent debate/discussion about various proposals (flat income, consumption...).
So IMO it's a purposeful waste of time on Johnny's part. He is a liar.
The only reason he is doing anything is because of an upcoming election.
...it wouldn't be very hard for me to get a very obstreperous bandwagon on Isakson's butt if he is trying to pull something here...
He is pulling your chain. Don't trust this guy.
I'm not as cynical as you guys but I'll not be tampered with by this guy.
You will be soon. Apparently you and Johnny haven't had much time together. He told me personally during his campaign that he would sign onto HR 25 if elected. He also said it publicly. But after the election, he won't do it.
He lied to the voters to prevent us from voting for Hermann Cain - who is one of the strongest supporters of HR 25 save Linder.
He knows the strong support HR 25 has in Georgia, so he lied and promised to support it. But he does not want it. He wants to keep what he sees as special tax favors for real estate trading in the income tax code. He doesn't really want tax reform. Wouldn't his behavior differ if he did?
I am not alone in this sentiment about Johnny. I'm suprised you haven't seen the anti- Isakson movement more. THere are a lot of us pubbies who despise the liar.
Go ahead and give him a chance - but you've been warned.
Naive.
You mean Johnny's pretend bill, or HR 25 that already has about 50 folks signed on in the House?
Ranting and raving like I do on these threads is one thing, moving something through congress is another.
Like movinG HR 25 thru? Why do you suppose that moving Johnny's bill is as good as continuing movement of HR 25?
Doesn't HR 25 accomplish everything that Johnny's bill would and more? Why do you think he'd propose less than HR 25?
LOL thanks you're right!
We had a book (that's nice) now we have a bill.
They already have one bill. Now they have two. Or did you forget about HR25 and S25 that they already have.
We have have a lot of support for HR25 and S25. We have little support for this new bill.
Think about it. Of the general population what percentage don't want major tax reform -- real tax reform, not tax reform-lite?
We already have the general population on our side. What percentage of congress members have joined our side? What percentage have not joined our side? We hold the high-hand.
Yet the large majority of congress is not yet on our side. For them, they have this new bill and it's a bluff. Why do you suppose they haven't come to our side and instead they introduce a different bill that includes a commission and wide area for compromise. Compromise our high-hand, not their weaker hand.
I am not ready to jump on their weaker hand and support it. I may, as events unfold finagle a means to use them and their new bill to our FairTax advantage. At this juncture holding pat is best.
Principled, I'm really impressed you saw through this obvious political ploy. This legislation has zero chance of being passed but it allows this clown to run ads next campaign saying he introduced legislation to repeal the tax code. This guy's a politician.
Okay. But I really don't see the bad side of legislation who's first priority is a date to abolish the IRS and second priority is to force congress to re-authorize the IRS.
S2182 sets a deadline to abolish the IRS. I see a big difference. I also see a big bandwagon. Even on these threads you can find anti FT's who'd like to abolish the IRS.
Between the two bills, which do you suppose K street would favor? There's another clue. Gotta run. But will return.
I would think K street would pale before either. I know it would prefer a flat tax to a fair tax but abolishing the IRS is K street's worst nightmare.
Is there an immediate need or urgency to start a S2182 bandwagon to jump on? I see a need to stand pat. Trying to stop momentum can be harder than getting it going in the first place. I'd like to hear John Linder weigh in on it.
The point is that Isakson knows neither FairTax nor Flat Tax would result from his bill.
A commission studies proposals, can't reach agreement, and then Congress is "forced" to re-authorize the existing code to "avoid a disruption in funding the government". In the meantime, nothing happens on the FairTax HR25 because "everyone is waiting for the commission to finish up its study".
The President's Tax Reform Panel was a big disappointment, but another commission would be no different.
When I saw "dynamic scoring" in Isakson's PR, I was hopeful, but I wasn't familiar with his last campaign promises then. If Principled's take on his last campaign is right, then this guy is the worst sort of politician and I have to interpret this bill on that basis.
The day it's passed S2182 sets a date for the income tax to end.
The day it's passed, HR 25 actually eliminates the income tax that day.
THe difference I note from your post is that upon passage, HR 25 immediately and indeed by passage the income tax is gone. That's different than the Isakson bill, which after passage sets a future date to eliminate the income tax.
The hold up you'll see on a bill like johnny's is pols will refuse to support it until we have an agreable replacement. That's why we're discussing the various reform proposals.
We've been thru this before.
Well I haven't. I didn't notice anything in the SOTU address tonight about tax reform. As far as I'm concerned that is the most unfinished business of this administration and we got nothing (unless I missed it). I'll take HR 25 and S 2182. Frankly, you, me and all the rest of us have nothing else. HR 25 languishes with 40 sponsors. Whoop-de-do!
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.