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

Skip to comments.

FairTax: Double Taxation, An Admission
Townhall ^ | January 23, 2008 | By Hank Adler

Posted on 01/23/2008 3:28:27 AM PST by xcamel

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560561-575 next last
To: meyer
This is why I prefer a simple, low flat income tax. Low rate, no exceptions, no deductions, no credits. Everybody pays the same rate.

The following is from The Heritage Foundation site YOU referred me to: Consumption-Based. A tax code that does not discriminate against saving and investment is con­sidered a consumption-based tax system, regard­less of whether taxes are deducted from the paycheck or collected at the cash register. In this respect, a flat tax is a type of consumption tax. The difference between a flat tax and a national sales tax is where the tax is collected. A flat tax is levied on income—but only once and at one low rate—as it is earned. A sales tax is levied on income—but only once and at one low rate—as it is spent.

Both the flat tax and the sales tax differ dramati­cally from the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The current tax code has numerous forms of double taxation, such as its treatment of saving and corpo­rate income. The current tax code also has several forms of wealth taxation or asset taxation, such as the capital gains tax and the death tax. (These also are forms of double taxation since the assets were acquired with after-tax dollars.)The current tax code even has provisions that force taxpayers to overstate their income, such as forcing businesses to “depreciate” the cost of new investment instead of allowing immediate and full deduction (a policy known as “expensing”) when costs are incurred.

None of these forms of double taxation, wealth taxation, or overtaxation exist in either a flat tax or a national sales tax, which is why public finance economists categorize both systems as consump­tion-based taxes.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1866.cfm

541 posted on 02/06/2008 1:22:05 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20 (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: meyer
This is why I prefer a simple, low flat income tax. Low rate, no exceptions, no deductions, no credits. Everybody pays the same rate.

The following is from The Heritage Foundation site YOU referred me to:

Consumption-Based. A tax code that does not discriminate against saving and investment is con­sidered a consumption-based tax system, regard­less of whether taxes are deducted from the paycheck or collected at the cash register. In this respect, a flat tax is a type of consumption tax. The difference between a flat tax and a national sales tax is where the tax is collected. A flat tax is levied on income—but only once and at one low rate—as it is earned. A sales tax is levied on income—but only once and at one low rate—as it is spent.

Both the flat tax and the sales tax differ dramati­cally from the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. The current tax code has numerous forms of double taxation, such as its treatment of saving and corpo­rate income. The current tax code also has several forms of wealth taxation or asset taxation, such as the capital gains tax and the death tax. (These also are forms of double taxation since the assets were acquired with after-tax dollars.)The current tax code even has provisions that force taxpayers to overstate their income, such as forcing businesses to “depreciate” the cost of new investment instead of allowing immediate and full deduction (a policy known as “expensing”) when costs are incurred.

None of these forms of double taxation, wealth taxation, or overtaxation exist in either a flat tax or a national sales tax, which is why public finance economists categorize both systems as consump­tion-based taxes.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg1866.cfm

Make up your mind.

542 posted on 02/06/2008 1:31:00 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20 (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: College Repub
I could care less about Fidelity, or any other brokerage. I care about people who will have lost HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in money they could have invested elseware that will now be taken from them in an illegal government grab.

How?

543 posted on 02/06/2008 1:47:25 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20 (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 536 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

If you have put $500,000 into accounts that either are or have been converted and rolled into Roth vehicles, and you were at the highest income tax rate, you have already paid 125k+ in taxes. In fact, you’ve paid much more than that in real terms when you factor in inflation and the opportunity cost of not having the taxed money to invest separately. Someone could have 500k in traditional vehicles AND also have had the 125k+inflation to invest all along

***THIS MEANS THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS CONFISCATED 25-33% of my money from the past -— more when you count the inflation and opportunity costs lost. This confiscation WOULD NOT have taken place in other vehicles such as traditional IRAs and 401ks. People made choices to pay taxes at an earlier time by using a ROTH with a guarantee from the government that they would not pay federal taxes later.


544 posted on 02/06/2008 5:20:17 AM PST by College Repub (http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20
The following is from The Heritage Foundation site YOU referred me to:...

Could you provide the link that shows that I referred you to that information?

Regardless, I don't think that the "fair" tax will ever fly, and it certainly wouldn't please me if it isn't applied equally to ALL taxpayers. The scheme being tossed around now allows for a "rebate" based on the number of individuals in the household, and claims to be "progressive". I won't even consider any plan as being fair if it also claims to be progressive.

Here's a quote from the "fairtax" FAQ: "Under the FairTax Plan, poor people pay no net FairTax at all up to the poverty level!" Which means essentially that the same democRAT deadbeat base still get a break while the rest of us pay for it. If they can't shake out the socialism and income-redistribution from the scheme, how can they even think of calling it fair?

545 posted on 02/06/2008 6:29:22 AM PST by meyer (Illegal Immigration - The profits are privatized, the costs are socialized.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: meyer
Could you provide the link that shows that I referred you to that information?

My error. I don't know how it got addressed to you -- it was meant for our resident know-it-all, 'xcamel'. Regardless, I don't think that the "fair" tax will ever fly, and it certainly wouldn't please me if it isn't applied equally to ALL taxpayers. The scheme being tossed around now allows for a "rebate" based on the number of individuals in the household, and claims to be "progressive".

It is one helluva lot more fair than the present one, because it applies to everyone. And it's "prebate" not "rebate."

I won't even consider any plan as being fair if it also claims to be progressive.

Pardon my saying so, but that has got to be the worst reason I have seen so far for rejecting anything. So, it leaves you with the present monsterousincome tax. Are you happy with it? Here's a quote from the "fairtax" FAQ: "Under the FairTax Plan, poor people pay no net FairTax at all up to the poverty level!" Which means essentially that the same democRAT deadbeat base still get a break while the rest of us pay for it. If they can't shake out the socialism and income-redistribution from the scheme, how can they even think of calling it fair? So, the use of the word "progressive", and the fact that the new law would still relieve the poor from paying taxes up to a certain level, as at present (a feature that will never die, regardless of what changes are attempted in tax laws), has blinded you to the vast improvement of the Fair Tax over the present system, and the tremendous permanent boost it would give the country??

PS: Remember you would also get a prebate. Do you dislike it so much that you would give it back?

546 posted on 02/06/2008 8:23:58 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20 (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; All
Folks that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo (mostly a pack of accountants and lawyers, as far as I can tell) should be required to state that they have a vested interest when they post FairTax FUD and lies.
547 posted on 02/06/2008 8:33:26 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway; All
Using your logic, all pro fairtax people would have to be criminal tax cheats, with a vested interest in not getting caught...
548 posted on 02/06/2008 8:42:50 AM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; All
Using your logic, all pro fairtax people would have to be criminal tax cheats, with a vested interest in not getting caught...

FairTax people have a vested interest in the United States of America.

Smaller government. Less intrusion in private lives. Taxes that are NOT collected at gunpoint. Etc.

Indulge us all this, xcamel; Do you or do you not have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo tax system? (Another dodge on this question will be taken as a YES.)

549 posted on 02/06/2008 8:56:09 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway

So, being a tax cheat, you’ve been forced to pay your taxes at the point of a gun? Please tell us more...


550 posted on 02/06/2008 9:02:57 AM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 549 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
So, being a tax cheat, you’ve been forced to pay your taxes at the point of a gun?

You too are forced to pay your taxes at the point of a gun. Even under the FairTax, when you make a puchase, you will be forced to pay taxes at the point of a gun, you just choose when to make a purchase and that decision is NOT made at the point of a gun. Don't you understand that?

551 posted on 02/06/2008 9:10:01 AM PST by groanup (Don't let the bastards get you down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; All
So, being a tax cheat, you’ve been forced to pay your taxes at the point of a gun? Please tell us more...

First, I'm not a tax cheat. If you have evidence otherwise, feel free to post it publicly here, on FR. Those are serious charges. Either prove your charges or retract them. If you can't prove them and you don't retract them, then I'm requesting that the mods ban xcamel.

Second, do you think that there would be the level of compliance if the government didn't have guns?

Since you dodged my question.....again, let it be known that xcamel has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo tax system.

All further anti-FairTax postings from xcamel should be ignored. (assuming that you, xcamel, retract your baseless charges of federal criminality and aren't banned)

552 posted on 02/06/2008 9:18:08 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway
You keep insisting I’m invested in the income tax, I’ll keep insisting you’re a tax cheat plain and simple - same goes with your (and groanup’s) paranoid ‘black helicopter’ delusions..

Until you produce tangible evidence that I, or anyone here has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo tax system, knock it off, or continue being branded an “Ed Brown/Wesley Snipes” tax cheat.

553 posted on 02/06/2008 9:37:55 AM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
I've repeatedly asked you a direct question that you have repeatedly refused to answer. It's relevant because if you are a tax lawyer, accountant, etc., then your bias in favor of the income tax will be understood and your postings can be seen for what they are.

On the other hand, you have made baseless charges against me that you refuse to retract.

I am asking the mods to ban xcamel if he does not retract his baseless charge against me in his next post.

554 posted on 02/06/2008 9:56:50 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway
No more of a baseless charge that you levy - like all of your claims about the wonders of the FT, and the nefarious hellspawn characteristics of those who refuse to believe in a plain born from lies, misdirection, and obfuscation.

Knock off your baseless accusations, and I’ll knock off mine.

555 posted on 02/06/2008 10:04:58 AM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 554 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

No you won’t.


556 posted on 02/06/2008 10:20:09 AM PST by Turret Gunner A20 (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20; xcamel
No you won’t.

I agree. He won't.

557 posted on 02/06/2008 11:17:09 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
Knock off your baseless accusations, and I’ll knock off mine.

I did not make any accusations. I asked you a direct question that you have refused to answer.

Once more. Either retract your accusation that I am a tax cheat or I will go directly to the mods with a request that you be banned forever.

558 posted on 02/06/2008 11:20:52 AM PST by cowboyway ("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
same goes with your (and groanup’s) paranoid ‘black helicopter’ delusions..

Why didn't you ping me with this?

559 posted on 02/06/2008 11:31:34 AM PST by groanup (Don't let the bastards get you down.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: cowboyway

good luck with that... Remember... the mods can read too..


560 posted on 02/06/2008 12:04:57 PM PST by xcamel (Two-hand-voting now in play - One on lever, other holding nose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 558 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560561-575 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