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

Skip to comments.

"Fair Tax" Promotes Better Compliance, Smaller IRS
db Digitalburg.com ^ | Apr 14, 2006 | Ben Pierce

Posted on 04/16/2006 7:49:45 AM PDT by Eaglewatcher

The FairTax replaces the income tax and all other federal taxes with a national consumption tax. The FairTax is levied only once, at the point of purchase on new goods and services.

The group admits it will be difficult for legislators to face down entrenched special interest groups, but they initially proposed replacing the current system with U.S. Senate bill S. 25 and U.S. House of Representatives bill H.R. 25. The next step would be to repeal the 16th Amendment to the constitution allowing the Federal government to levy an income tax.

Signatories to the original petition include noted academic economists and practitioners who feel the current tax code cannot simply be fixed. The current regs include 54,000 pages, approximately 2.8 million words of mind-numbing rules, exceptions and special interest loopholes. This tangled web would be replaced by a simple national sales tax similar to that paid to the county, city or, in the case of our own Hawthorne TDD, the subdivision.

But what about poor people? The FairTax provides every family with a rebate of the sales tax on spending up to the federal poverty level (plus an extra amount to prevent any marriage penalty). The rebate is paid monthly in advance. It allows a family of four to spend $25,660 tax free each year. The rebate for a married couple with two children is $492 per month ($5,902 annually). Therefore, no family pays federal sales tax on essential goods and services and middle-class families are effectively exempted on a big part of their annual spending.

(Excerpt) Read more at digitalburg.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: economy; fair; fairtax; fraudtax; scam; tax; taxation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 next last
There is more and more coverage. Hopefully this will catch on and pass. It would be one of the bigest boons to our economy in history.
1 posted on 04/16/2006 7:49:46 AM PDT by Eaglewatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher
ut they initially proposed replacing the current system with U.S. Senate bill S. 25 and U.S. House of Representatives bill H.R. 25. The next step would be to repeal the 16th Amendment to the constitution allowing the Federal government to levy an income tax.

Well, this is backwards. The repeal of the 16th amendment must come BEFORE any new tax is introduced. The reason is obvious; we don't want to end up with a NST and a federal Income Tax.

2 posted on 04/16/2006 8:06:04 AM PDT by The Shootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher

Ahem... I thought that one of the most important reasons for a "Fair Tax" in the first place was to ABOLISH THE IRS, not merely make it "smaller." Sheesh.


3 posted on 04/16/2006 8:12:49 AM PDT by pbmaltzman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher

I couldn't agree more. Unfortunately I don't think this will ever happen. Entire industries are dependent on filing tax returns and the complexity involved.

The other thing that worries me is.....when has any federal agency ever been abolished? The IRS being put out of business?

Well here's hoping, but I seriously doubt it, sad to say.


4 posted on 04/16/2006 8:29:11 AM PDT by Dazedcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Shootist

I would think a sales tax for all people plus an income tax for those with assets over 1 billion dollars or income over 100 million would be workable.


5 posted on 04/16/2006 8:37:20 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher

Never going to happen.
The ruling political class and elites will make sure of it. The current system gives them the power.


6 posted on 04/16/2006 8:56:51 AM PDT by cp124 (They will buy what we don't make anymore. - Globalist Manifesto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
I would think a sales tax for all people plus an income tax for those with assets over 1 billion dollars or income over 100 million would be workable.

Why do you think? Clearly, any assessments on the uber-wealthy serve only to satisfy the envious; the impact would be infinitessimal.

7 posted on 04/16/2006 9:03:38 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher
Here is the Contstitution Party's stance on taxes:

The Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, gives Congress the power "to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States."

In Article I, Section 9, the original document made clear that "no Capitation, or other direct Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census of Enumeration herein before directed to be taken." It is moreover established that "No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State."

Since 1913, our Constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property have been abridged and diminished by the imposition on each of us of Federal income, payroll, and estate taxes. This is an unconstitutional Federal assumption of direct taxing authority.

The Internal Revenue Service is the enforcement arm of the Federal government's present unjust tax system. Citizens, both in groups and as individuals, have repeatedly sought responses from the IRS bureaucracy as to the basis for the agency's tax policies and procedures. No answers have been forthcoming although a responsible government must be answerable to the people and has a duty to those it is supposed to serve.

We propose legislation to abolish the Internal Revenue Service, and will veto any authorization, appropriation, or continuing resolution which contains any funding whatsoever for that illicit and unconstitutional agency. We are opposed to the flat-rate tax, national sales tax, and value added tax proposals that are being promoted as an improvement to the current tax system. The Sixteenth Amendment does not provide authority for an un-apportioned direct tax.

Moreover, it is our intention to replace, with a tariff based revenue system supplemented by excise taxes, the current tax system of the U.S. government (including income taxes, payroll taxes, and estate taxes.)

To the degree that tariffs on foreign products, and excises, are insufficient to cover the legitimate Constitutional costs of the federal government, we will offer an apportioned "state-rate tax" in which the responsibility for covering the cost of unmet obligations will be divided among the several states in accordance with their proportion of the total population of the United States, excluding the District of Columbia. Thus, if a state contains 10 percent of the nation's citizens, it will be responsible for assuming payment of 10 percent of the annual deficit.

The effect of this "state-rate tax" will be to encourage politicians to argue for less, rather than more, federal spending, and less state spending as well.

To the extent permitted by the Constitution, we believe that the taxation of corporations is an appropriate source of government revenue. The Supreme Court has defined "income" as a "gain or increase arising from corporate activity or privilege." People are not corporations, and corporations need not be treated as "people" for the purposes of taxation.

There is substantial evidence that the 16th Amendment was never legally ratified. When elected, we will act to cease collection of direct Federal personal income taxes. We also support ratification of the Liberty Amendment which would repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, and provide that "Congress shall not levy taxes on personal incomes, estates, and/or gifts."

We support the use of motor fuel excise taxes, at rates not in excess of those currently imposed, to be used exclusively for the erection, maintenance, and administration of Federal highways. These taxes should never be used for "demonstration projects", mass transit, or for other non-highway purposes.

We support the use of excise taxes to curb the use of tax dollars for media advertising, and to provide so-called "tax abatements," "tax incentives," and "economic development grants," which are pretexts to raid the public treasury and rob the workingman for the benefit of wealthy interests favored by the politicians.

8 posted on 04/16/2006 9:09:35 AM PDT by rodeocowboy (Vote Constitution Party in 2006 to send a message to the Republican Party for 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher
I'd like to point out that a consumption-based tax would also help us deal with the drain that the criminal illegal aliens put on us. Illegals would not be able to get away with not paying a consumption-based tax, and because they are not citizens, would not (legally) be eligible for any proposed "rebate" for low income folk.

Perhaps they'd finally start paying some of their own freight.

 

9 posted on 04/16/2006 9:21:12 AM PDT by zeugma (Anybody who says XP is more secure than OS X or Linux has been licking toads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rodeocowboy
The effect of this "state-rate tax" will be to encourage politicians to argue for less, rather than more, federal spending, and less state spending as well.

I don't think so. A state will still want pork in their state so everyone else pays.

10 posted on 04/16/2006 9:29:58 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher
The rebate is paid monthly in advance

which makes it a "prebate", and that's what it is called.

It would be one of the bigest boons to our economy in history.

not to mention personal freedom! No more gestapo - er, IRS hovering over our shoulders, no more April 15th! -

the GROSS pay check in the pocket - small business unfettered from matching emp. taxes and bookkeeping - able to hire more people....It's a win-win. Even the super wealthy gets the prebate but after the "living allowance' - they'll actually pay taxes! Want that shiny new yacht, pay the taxes. It's only on the "wants' not the "needs".

Illegals wont get the prebate and will be paying the tax from dollar one!

And second hand goods are NOT taxed. Buy a good second had car - NO tax. Print this out and READ it - and email to everyone. The only way we;ll get this through is to DEMAND it.

http://www.geocities.com/cmcofer/ftax.html

http://www.fairtax.org/

11 posted on 04/16/2006 9:31:40 AM PDT by maine-iac7 ("...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time," Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
I really want to support the Fair Tax but I was surprised by the debate last night between Neal Boortz and a tax professor on CSPAN last night.

The biggest stunner was the discovery that the Fair Tax taxes interest above the Fed Rate on mortgages, credit cards, etc.

Evading the Fair Tax sounds like it would be shooting fish in a barrel. Form an offshore web site, sell whatever, ship in to the US, voila no collection of the tax.

I can even imagine boats just outside the three mile limit surrounding the country selling anything and everything "tax free". Likewise I can see rich people making their money here and then spending it abroad to avoid the consumption tax.

There is no doubt the current system is terrible.

Also discussed by the tax prof is the history of Congress turning every tax law into a Christmas tree. As he correctly pointed out there is no reason to believe they wouldn't amend the Fair Tax to death to exempt A,B,C and D which in turn would raise the rates on everything else.

The current system is an abomination.

The Fair Tax would be an improvement.

But everyone needs to keep their head here--there are big big issues that have not been resolved with this proposal.
12 posted on 04/16/2006 9:42:12 AM PDT by cgbg (When you hear the words "gender" or "stakeholder" run for your life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher
"Fair Tax" Promotes Better Compliance, Smaller IRS

Eight years ago it was supposed to rid us of the IRS. I give it one more year before the propaganda reads: "It only creates one more giant police state type bureaucracy". LOL!

13 posted on 04/16/2006 10:06:43 AM PDT by eskimo (Political groupies - rabid defenders of the indefensible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher

Thanks for the post. I agree with you entirely that the Fair Tax Act would be the most beneficial legislation ever enacted, and it would not cost the government one red cent. In fact, the government would raise even more revenues on the deal.


14 posted on 04/16/2006 10:15:46 AM PDT by n-tres-ted (Remember November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cgbg
The biggest stunner was the discovery that the Fair Tax taxes interest above the Fed Rate on mortgages, credit cards, etc. What is the source for this? I believe it is a false statement, and I have read the legislation. In fact, interest income is untaxed by the Fair Tax, which is why interest rates are projected to decline by about 25% (to tax exempt rates) when the Fair Tax is enacted.
15 posted on 04/16/2006 10:20:16 AM PDT by n-tres-ted (Remember November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: n-tres-ted

ancient_geezer; Bigun; Principled; groanup; pigdog


16 posted on 04/16/2006 10:21:26 AM PDT by n-tres-ted (Remember November!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: n-tres-ted

Yes with a little shrinkage on the spending side they might even pay off the national debt!


17 posted on 04/16/2006 10:31:37 AM PDT by Eaglewatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: n-tres-ted
The source for the info was the Tax Prof on CSPAN last night. He was not talking about interest income. He was talking about the payment of interest as being subject to a sales tax if it was above the Fed rate.
18 posted on 04/16/2006 10:32:54 AM PDT by cgbg (When you hear the words "gender" or "stakeholder" run for your life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
I really like the Fair Tax, except for the rebate/prebate.

One of the positive aspects of the Fair Tax is to relieve the gov't of the need to monitor personal income, but the rebate will maintain this gov't intrusion into our personal business.

Also, the rebate is ripe for abuse, & will require a huge bureaucracy to administer. Actually, it is just a mirror image of the current system, & I don't like what I see in the mirror.

The rules of the rebate will be manipulated by pols, as the current system is now. I see it is already being manipulated, as the reference to the marriage penalty is new to me. This is stupid to me, as it is obvious that married couples will have a tax advantage over 2 single people when purchasing anything that could be shared such as appliances, furniture, housing, etc.

I would much prefer that some sales are not taxed, such as food, shelter, & medical, etc. This is currently being done in some states with sales taxes, & has worked well for years. This treats EVERY citizen equally, & any changes to what is taxed cannot be used to target groups or constituencies - the changes apply to everyone.
19 posted on 04/16/2006 10:59:13 AM PDT by Mister Da (Nuke 'em til they glow!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Eaglewatcher; Taxman; pigdog; Principled; EternalVigilance; rwrcpa1; phil_will1; kevkrom; ...
A Taxreform bump for you all.

If anyone would like to be added to this ping list let me know.

John Linder in the House(HR25) & Saxby Chambliss Senate(S25) offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and SS/Medicare payroll taxes outright and replace them with with a national retail sales tax administered by the states.

H.R.25,S.25
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.

Refer for additional information:


20 posted on 04/16/2006 11:27:15 AM PDT by ancient_geezer (Don't reform it, Replace it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-132 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