My example is "crap"??? Better check your own Nightie since the federal government DOES tax other entities right now (including even itself) through the existing tax system and you seem unaware of that.
The tax on an individual IS in effect a tax on his employer who must raise his expenses to pass on the money for the employee to pay the tax.
In addition, the governmental unit is also taxed in another manner by having to pay for example the ER portion of withholding at 7.65% ... or perhaps you think all governments are somehow not obligated to pay this to the feds (or even the feds themselves by shorting their employees of that payment)?????
That certainly puts the lie to your "crap" statement and it's something you Squirrels ALWAYS ignore when attempting your Chicken Little approach to tax-terrorization of the uninformed. You seem to think that 7.65% of all government wages is chopped liver. Got news for you - it ain't! In addition, as has been pointed out to you more than once by other posters, not all governmental employees' wages would be subject to the FairTax ... but you've chosen to ignore that too and go on pretending 100% would be taxed while the ER portion is merely ignored.
And you SQLers talk about FairTax supporters double-counting and misstating!!! That's exactly what you do. You merely try to warp the Income Tax Unfree Lunch all out of proportion.
The tax on an individual IS in effect a tax on his employer who must raise his expenses to pass on the money for the employee to pay the tax.So if the state employee was exempt from the FairTax, the state could pay them less - but they're not. So, using you logic, the state is paying the FairTax when their employees buy something and, on top of that, the state has to pay additional FairTax on those wages. That sounds like double taxation...
In addition, the governmental unit is also taxed in another manner by having to pay for example the ER portion of withholding at 7.65% ... or perhaps you think all governments are somehow not obligated to pay this to the feds (or even the feds themselves by shorting their employees of that payment)?????I bet you weren't aware that any state that pays Social Security on their employees wages (there are some that don't) does so voluntarily. They have signed a "Section 218 Agreement" with the SSA. The federal government taxing the state government brings up constitutional intergovernmental tax immunity issues. These agreements get around that issue. Making the states pay FairTax may actually be unconstitutional (you do believe in federalism, don't you).
That certainly puts the lie to your "crap" statement and it's something you Squirrels ALWAYS ignore when attempting your Chicken Little approach to tax-terrorization of the uninformed. You seem to think that 7.65% of all government wages is chopped liver. Got news for you - it ain't!I know that 7.65% is not chopped liver. I also know that 29.87% is larger than 7.65%.
Got news for you - it ain't! In addition, as has been pointed out to you more than once by other posters, not all governmental employees' wages would be subject to the FairTax ... but you've chosen to ignore that too and go on pretending 100% would be taxed while the ER portion is merely ignored.I bet you also didn't know that these Section 218 Agreements are irrevocable. States aren't paying employment excise because of the IRC laws repealed by the FairTax, the are paying them based on irrevocable agreements made under Section 218 of the Social Security Act. Would they still pay that excise if the FairTax became law? The FairTax bill does not address this issue at all.
In addition, the governmental unit is also taxed in another manner by having to pay for example the ER portion of withholding at 7.65% ... or perhaps you think all governments are somehow not obligated to pay this to the feds (or even the feds themselves by shorting their employees of that payment)?????Interesting. pigdog, temporarily out of a schizo moment, is saying the ER portion of the payroll tax is part of the employee wage yet never brings that up in any of the "100% paycheck" arguments. That would put him at odds with his bosses at AFFT and his cohorts (and himself) who use the ER portion for their price reduction calculations.That certainly puts the lie to your "crap" statement and it's something you Squirrels ALWAYS ignore when attempting your Chicken Little approach to tax-terrorization of the uninformed. You seem to think that 7.65% of all government wages is chopped liver. Got news for you - it ain't! In addition, as has been pointed out to you more than once by other posters, not all governmental employees' wages would be subject to the FairTax ... but you've chosen to ignore that too and go on pretending 100% would be taxed while the ER portion is merely ignored.
Just exactly what is included or not included in a "100% paycheck"?