Posted on 10/19/2006 5:11:50 PM PDT by pigdog
As specified in Congressional bill H.R. 25/S. 25, the FairTax is a proposal to replace the federal personal income tax, corporate income tax, payroll (FICA) tax, capital gains, alternative minimum, self-employment, and estate and gifts taxes with a single-rate federal retail sales tax. The FairTax also provides a prebate to each household based on its demographic composition. The prebate is set to ensure that households pay no taxes net on spending up to the poverty level.
Bill Gale (2005) and the President’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform (2005) suggest that the effective (tax inclusive) tax rate needed to implement H.R. 25 is far higher than the proposed 23% rate. This study, which builds on Gale’s (2005) analysis, shows that a 23% rate is eminently feasible and suggests why Gale and the Tax Panel reached the opposite conclusion.
This paper begins by projecting the FairTax’s 2007 tax base net of its rebate. Next it calculates the tax rate needed to maintain the real levels of federal and state spending under the FairTax. It then determines if an effective rate of 23% would be sufficient to fund 2007 estimated spending or if not, the amount by which non-Social Security federal expenditures would need to be reduced. Finally, it shows that the FairTax imposes no additional real fiscal burdens on state and local government, notwithstanding the requirement that such governments pay the FairTax when they purchase goods and services.
(Excerpt) Read more at people.bu.edu ...
What difference is there wrt purchasing power between a 23% income tax and a 23% nrst yn?With the income tax all income is not taxable income, disposable income has already been taxed.
With a NST all income is taxable, there's no disposable income unless you live in a cave, grow your own food and buy someone elses used crap.
It's been pointed out to you hundreds of times that your bogus guess of "50% rate" for the FairTax is based on nothing at all but wishful thinking and your own smokescreen. And that is clearly shown by the carefully arrived at derivation of 23% in the paper where all reasoning and mathematical work are shown.
In contrast the "work" you depend upon to spew out such senseless blather is that of William Gale and the President's tax Panel which not only had no reasoning or mathematical derivation, but merely blurted out numbers based upon questionable presumptions and showed nothing of their work to allow checking by real economists.
There is no "40-50% sales tax" except in your dreams. You should pursue your career as a salesman as you'll obviously never make it as an economist.
Someone with the initials pd, the official spokesperson for the fairtax.
Please show the post where you claim I said that.
I have attacked the trash you continually spam these threads with. The fact that YOU take that as a personal attack in no way makes it so.
Obviously you haven't read the conclusions of the paper which clearly show that here is no increased burden for state/local government and that not only their taxable purchases but the 23% tax the must pay on their non-educational gross wages are considered in forming the 23% revenue neutral figure.
No one gives a rat's rear end as to what YOU "want to see" because reforming the tax system is not all about you (as you seem to suppose). Instead it's about helping out most American taxpayers and the economy as a whole.
So as the paper clearly shows, there's no massive increase to 90% or more in taxes (as some opponents have claimed) ... it's a revenue neutral 23% (period). And even that may be lower with a decent dynamic analysis of he economy.
That's what the black market is all about.
You did not attack my arguments, you attacked me personally, there is a difference.
Then it is a complete crock. Because of course there will be an increased burden on state/local governments when they have to add a 30% tax to all their non-educ purchases, salaries and benefits.
With a little ingenuity, you too can enjoy the promised FairTax market efficiencies.
So I should spend the next hour digging through all the crap you have posted over the last two weeks so you can deny that is what you said or say 'that is out of context' even after I show it to you. Nope, been through that process way too many times with you. If you fess up to pigdog's boldface lies here I might find some time to do it.
The FairTax exists only in your dreams.
No. I responded to the frustrations another poster was having trying to make sense of your posts by expressing my opinions of those posts. YOU take that as a personal attack but it is no such thing.
Actually RobFromGA, your pal Boortz is no better an economist than you so quoting him makes your judgment questionable indeed.Interesting. This would be the same Boortz who wrote a book with Fairtax sponsor Congresman Linder about how wonderful life would be after the Fairtax? The same Boortz holding Fairtax rallies?...
A sure sign of desperation when the Fairtaxers start eating their own.
"Most recently the FairTax commission found that the FairTax Rate was grossly understated by the FairTax people and that the actual rate would have to be MUCH HIGHER than 29.87% exclusive "
Aside from this particular gross misstatement of fact about the non-existent "FairTax Commission" the supposedly factual information is wildly incorrect as can be easily seen by reading the paper in the lead-in post.
Ignoring all of the self-serving spam and vanity postings of this poster - which for some reason the Admin Moderator continues to allow even though it clearly violates FR Posting Guidelines - the facts he presents are wildly off-base and have been refuted by others many times ... yet he still persists in posting them yet again. Perhaps he's like those who think that saying "I can fly, I can fly" enough times will make him sprout wings and rise off the ground.
I have personally refuted all of the claims he makes in his capitalized paragraphs (as have others) and won't waste time repeating them except to show one example. The heading "FAIR TAX RATE:" where he throws out a 36% plus rate )obtained from his hip pocket apparently) is roundly and completely refuted by the serious economic study presented in the lead-in post which shows that a 23% rate would be just fine - and this is a static analysis which always favors the status quo. With a decent dynamic analysis, it's very likely the requisite rate will be lower yet. Government spending on purchases and their own employees wages (taxed at 23%) are also considered and included in deriving the 23% rate.
If you are so childish as to try to drag that argument onto this thread to renew it, let me point out to you that is against FR posting guidelines. You FairTax haters apparently believe the Admin Moderator will let you get away with anything.
"The FairTax exists only in your dreams. "Nope. In fact the FairTax exists as two bills - one in the House (HR25) and one in the Senate (S25). And as we move along it will become the tax law of our country.
"FairTax Commission" should have read President's Tax Reform Commission.
My facts are not wildly off base, and the FairTax proponents have backed off many previous claims due to the work of me and others who are exposing the double-counting and lies of Boortz and Linder, and the entire FairTax shill community. A little over a year ago, you were all still promising 100% paychecks and prices staying the same.
You have personally attempted to refute many of my arguments, and you have been wrong on almost every single count. Your only wins are the occasional inadvertent error such as me calling the President's Commission the FairTax Commission. That's all you've been able to win.
Your beloved FairTax is dead. It is exposed for the misrepresentation of the truth that it is. Deal with it.
"President's Tax Reform Commission"
That's at least as bad since that panel - as is pointed out in the Kotlikoff/Suffolk U paper in lead-in post, offered no information about its methodology and no mathematical derivation of their "work". That means they pulled their opinions and numbers (which you rely and even boost upward) out of a hat just as you've been doing. And their "conclusions" are no better as the lead-in paper clearly shows.
"... the FairTax proponents have backed off many previous claims due to the work of me and others who are exposing the double-counting and lies ..."
Don't slobber on your shirtsleeve while kissing your own wrist. What you and your buds have done is properly described as anything but "work" ... a lot of other adjectives come to mind instead. One has only to read the Kotlikoff et al paper to see how terribly wrong you all are.
If you are so wonderful as you think you are, then give us a rigorous refutation of the mathematical and logical derivations in the lead-in paper. Anything else is just you blowing more of your salesman's smoke.
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.