Huckabee campaigning for 23% sales tax

The Los Angeles Times ^ | December 24, 2007 | Janet Hook

[Alex Murphy]

WASHINGTON — Mike Huckabee, one of the most conservative Republicans in the 2008 presidential race, has embraced one of the most radical ideas on the campaign trail: a plan to abolish all federal income and payroll taxes and replace them with a single 23% national sales tax.

The idea -- dubbed the "fair tax" by proponents -- has been a political asset for Huckabee; its well-organized backers have helped catapult him from the back of the presidential pack to its top tier.

Sales tax proponents have tapped into seething voter hostility toward the Internal Revenue Service to become a below-the-radar political force, popping up at campaign events and candidate forums in Iowa and elsewhere.

The efforts on Huckabee's behalf by sales tax advocates helped spur his surprise second-place showing in an August Iowa straw poll -- the breakthrough that marked the beginning of his rise in the state and nationwide.

He is the only major presidential candidate to make the idea central to his campaign. "The first thing I'd love to do as president: Put a 'going out of business' sign on the Internal Revenue Service," he said at one debate.

Some wonder, however, whether his embrace of the plan eventually could turn into a liability.

The sales tax proposal has been around for years but languished on the fringes of practical politics and policy. Tax professionals generally regard the idea as impractical, regressive and even "crackpot," as one critic puts it.

It has gone nowhere in Congress. The 2005 Presidential Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform soundly rejected the idea. And many politicians shy away from it because it is easy for opponents to portray it as a huge tax increase -- as Democrats did in a 2006 Senate race in South Carolina.

[kjam22]

23% is above the historic levels of taxation over the last 20 years..... Can you say tax increase?

Currently we put about 50% of what we make away for our retirement. (which isn't that many more years out... bummer). But if I put 50% away and pay 23% on the 50% I spend..... it seems like the effective tax rate is about 11 1/2 percent. And while the 50% I put away makes more money I only pay taxes on what I spend of it.

The plan makes a lot of sense for my particular position.

[AppyPappy]

It hasn’t been decided yet. I’m pretty sure it will be around 20%.

Actually, I am sure it will never happen.

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you don't spend the money.

LOL! This is going to get me to support the sales tax?

You spend the money that it makes.

I want to be able to spend it all, but that's just me.

[Toddsterpatriot]

It hasn’t been decided yet.

Are you brand new to this debate?

I’m pretty sure it will be around 20%.

Did you miss the title to the thread? Did you miss the discussion on the math?

Actually, I am sure it will never happen.

I'll agree with you there.

[kjam22]

The trick to spending it all is knowing exactly how long you have to spend it.

[Toddsterpatriot]

The trick to not running out is not adding a new 30% tax on spending, after my income and savings have already been taxed.

[Polybius]

" Tax professionals generally regard the idea as impractical, regressive and even "crackpot," as one critic puts it..."

They are right! On this tax the poorer you are the worse it hurts.

Don't forget those of us who have worked hard all of our lives and have saved serious money because we do not want to be depending solely on Social Security when we retire.

The "Fair" Tax people have made no attempts to address the fact that those of us with substatial money saved outside of 401-K's, SEP's, etc. will have paid a hefty chunk of income taxes on that money when we earned it in 2007 and will then be expected to pay an additional 23% sales tax when we spend it under the "Fair" Tax in 200?.

When I have raised the issue before on Fair Tax threads, the response of the hard core Fair Tax advocates has boiled down to:

1. Nobody saves serious money anymore.

2. The Fair tax will magically make prices drop 23% so you will break out even.

If you, like the Grasshopper, have never saved any significant amount of money, have maxed out your credit cards and have home equity loan debt up to your eyeballs, the "Fair" Tax is a dream come true as you will have bought your stuff with borrowed, untaxed money and will be paying off that debt with untaxed money.

If you, like the Ants, have saved serious money and are debt free, Huckabee is asking you to pay an obscene percentage of tax so that the Grasshopper's can have the last laugh.

[AppyPappy]

When did Huck say it was 23%? I asked that earlier and no one seemed to know.

The math is, of course, not carved in stone. There are some variables that have a big impact on the revenue generated. When I worked for the Keyes campaign, 20% was the expected number.

[Toddsterpatriot]

When did Huck say it was 23%?

He said he supported the FairTax. Are you new to this debate?

The math is, of course, not carved in stone.

A $100 purchase would cost $130 after the FairTax is added, that's the source of my 30% claim. 30%, not 99%.

When I worked for the Keyes campaign....

LOL! That might explain your confusion.

[kjam22]

I figure if they did put in a flat tax..... it would be negotiated. You’d end up with deductions for basic services (food etc). You’d have deductions for people making under 20k per year. You’d have deductions for seniors spending it on health care and retirement services etc. No way that it would be truly a consumption tax.

[AppyPappy]

A $100 purchase would cost $130 after the FairTax is added, that's the source of my 30% claim. 30%, not 99%.

Funny I wasn't aware the Fair Tax has passed. You are ASSUMING 30%. Congress will set the rate. Wouldn't a 30% Fair Tax be better than a 60% income tax? While we are making up numbers, let's make things a little more even.

The debate is not over the rate but the concept. Would you rather pay an income tax or a sales tax? Remember, Congress can change any of the rates whenever they like. With a sales tax, YOU decide how much you will pay by making choices. With an income tax, the government decides how much you will pay.

[Polybius]

So I'm not taxed again on money that I've already been taxed on 2 or 3 times, unless I spend it? Wow, great deal!!

So you don't spend the money. You spend the money that it makes.

In other words, "Screw you, saver."

This exchange between Toddsterpatriot and kjam22 perfectly illustrates the point I made in Post 467.

"You are a fool, Ant. I now pay for my stuff with untaxed borrowed money. When the Fair Tax comes, I will pay that debt with untaxed money and you, Ant, will get screwed if you spend that apple you are now saving."

[kjam22]

I guess it’s different for different people... but for me... at my stage of life etc., the consumption tax makes a LOT of sense.

[kjam22]

If you plan is to save X dollars and then spend them in your old age, you didn’t plan well. In any tax scenario you didn’t plan well.

[Polybius]

The debate is not over the rate but the concept. Would you rather pay an income tax or a sales tax?

I would like to pay one or the other but not both.

See Post 472.

For those of us who have saved serious money under ther income tax system and don't want to be taxed twice, Fair Tax advocates simply sneer and say, "Well, don't spend your saved money if you don't want to be taxed twice, fool."

[Toddsterpatriot]

Funny I wasn't aware the Fair Tax has passed. You are ASSUMING 30%.

I'm discussing the FairTax, where a $100 item would cost $130 after the tax is added.

Wouldn't a 30% Fair Tax be better than a 60% income tax?

For sure, especially when prices stay the same, income taxes are 0% and I get a prebate. LOL!

The debate is not over the rate but the concept.

And you need numbers to examine the concept.

Would you rather pay an income tax or a sales tax?

It depends.

Remember, Congress can change any of the rates whenever they like.

Even with a sales tax? I'm shocked!

With a sales tax, YOU decide how much you will pay by making choices.

You can do the same, up to a point, with your income.

With an income tax, the government decides how much you will pay.

And now that I saved after tax money, I should happily pay a new sales tax when I spend it?

[longtermmemmory]

The LA Times SKIPS THE MASSIVE PREBATE ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM.

www.thomas.gov has the entire HR 25.

It is pure left wing wet dreams with
taking from all producers to give to all accordign to government sanction “need”.

(just wait for the “living prebate”)

Huckabee is a nanny state lunatic and this selective yellow reporting is just to help this RINO along.

[longtermmemmory]

but the left thinks it is UNfair for you to stop paying taxes till you die.

Warrent buffet supports the death tax because he sells death tax insurance to pay the tax on death.

likewise,

The fairtax scammers want you to pay for THEIR entitlement prebate check from the government.

Like all good left wing ideas, the goal is to punish success.

[AppyPappy]

You can do the same, up to a point, with your income.

Really? How?

[kjam22]

He hasn't really thought this through. In our current tax state, it isn't as easy as I save money and spend it when I get old with no tax consequences.

I say that as someone who is managing two estates of retires who aren't able to manage it on their own.