Posted on 04/24/2017 4:46:06 AM PDT by Kaslin
The “role” of the IRS (it will be renamed!) under the FAIRtax will be to ensure that each state collects, accounts for and remits the proper amount of taxes each reporting period.
Policing of sales tax FRaud will be the job of the individual states, and they will be paid for their efforts.
What kind of person are you to advocate for laws that discriminate for or against the USA?
How do you think we got into the wars (both trade and shooting) we have been in over the years?
We need laws that DO NOT DISCRIMINATE!
FAIRtax does not discriminate!
That is why we call it FAIRtax!
The "progressive" income tax is an Tyrannical abomination, and a central plank of communism.
Every patriotic American should oppose income taxation in both theory and practice.
The only way were getting rid of the federal income tax is a collapse of the federal government itself.
So get used to it.
F--k that s--t...
I ask you this, what kind of person was George Washington who signed the first tariff act in 1789. Here is the preamble to it:
"Whereas it is necessary for that support of government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encouragement and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid on goods, wares and merchandise:"[1]
George and I are solid.
Very moving testimony re: IRS. This is one amazing woman.
Exclusive - Former IRS Agent, Sherry Peel Jackson Exposes Income Tax/Federal Reserve Connection
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r86xuJ024c
Ole George had it right!
This is 2017!
Back in George’s day, protective tariffs made sense - they do not make sense today, because, as noted, the USA can compete with ANY country in any manufacturing endeavor and deliver better quality products at competitive prices in a timely manner!
Protective tariffs, as noted, cause trade and shooting wars. We need neither!
Grow up! All America needs is a level playing field, and the FAIRtax provides it!
The tariff on Harley Davidson exported to Japan is 100%! Get that? That is just one example.
You miss my point and I see no reason to continue this discussion.
The founding fathers established a way to change the constitution, the amendment process. So once an amendment is passed it is ipso facto constitutional.
Now you can make the argument that it is not something the founding fathers would have approved of and many would agree with you.
F—k that s—t...
That's what Zimbabwe did. Sandwiches soon were priced about Z$100 Trillion (or so.)
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.