Posted on 03/31/2002 1:15:58 PM PST by DennisR
Well, I am almost finished with the most flagrant waste of my time--doing my Federal taxes. Just look at Schedule D to enter the worst nightmare of your tax-paying lives. For years, I have thought a flat rate would be best. The only deduction would be for charitable deductions, nothing else. Even Russia now has a flat rate tax of 13%! I think that's about 3% too high, but, hey, it's a step in the right direction.
Anyway, last night I came up with a great idea that might help politicians realize that they have to do something to end the insanity of a 46,000-page tax code. The idea is this: after sending in your 2001 tax return to the IRS, take your 2001 tax booklet and write "I want a 10% flat tax implemented by 2004," then mail it to one of your federal representatives. If they received tens of thousands of these booklets each year in their mail, maybe they would get an idea that we want simpliciation instead of punishment and distress.
Further, revenue neutrality is required.
The 23% tax inclusive is revenue neutral ... and would lead to spending/tax cuts by pols who want to be reelected. And you know how pols want to be reelected!
This sir, bears repeating!
Corporations do not pay taxes.ONLY Consumers pay them.
Although you will find a select few on this forum who refuse to accept this, it is demonstably true.
Enlighten me. Revenue currently received from the income tax would have to come from the NRST. How will a new sales tax not cause price increases?
I don't trust the politicians to lower the rate on their own. If they could be trusted, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in. The tax change must be locked into a Constitutional Amendment. The 16th must be repealed. The new rate must be locked at 10%. Revenue neutrality would be part of the transition with a mandated decrease every year until 10% is achieved.
1) Prices ALREADY include a tax component of an amount ggreater than 23%. Any income tax system passes tax costs along to the next step in production - just as any other cost is passed along. Tax costs include the taxes themselves and associated compliance costs. Tax costs alone come to 22% of prices (geezer can give a link). Of course some tax and compliance costs manifest in lower wages, but there is still at least a 23% increase in price due to the costs of the income tax.
2) If all the costs of the income tax were eliminated... that means eliminating income tax and eliminating associated compliance costs, profit margins could soar.
3) We live in a competitive market environment. In any competitive market, prices will fall to the lowest level possible to still have the business make the required return. If a company chose NOT to lower prices, it would lose market share fast- 23% is a big savings.
4)When tax costs are eliminated from prices, prices will become lower by the amount of the tax costs (very nearly).
5) Then add the 23% nrst and prices come right back up to where they were.
So, prices won't change because prices are first affected by a decrease (eliminated taxes and compliance costs) before the nrst is added.
But now folks have their paychecks free of federal deductions.
Hope this is expressive. I'm awfully tired... long drive today w/ sick child.... arghhh.
How I wish for no payroll tax.
Right now the pols don't have any reason to lower the rate, do they? Name one!
Under an nrst, every single individual will pay a federal tax on purchases of new goods for retail consumption and on services. That will create the reason for pols to be concerned with taxes.
There are obviously no guarantees. I would rather live in a tax world in which pols have a vested interest in preventing tax increase and even reducing taxes - such as the nrst.
We currently live in a tax world in which pols have no reason whatsoever to reduce tax. Can you name one reason?
In today's income tax world, with different rates and rules for everyone, pols have a great incentive to increase spending ... and have a minority pay for it.
more... tomorrow....
zzz nnn zzz zzzzzzzzzzz
| Steve Forbes is a "true conservative with original ideas," as you stated, and that's why I supported him. He was the only GOP candidate to truly speak out on issues, and he has continuously done so for the past eight years. He has done a lot for the GOP and deserves to be heard. Remember, he is working in the background. | |
|
|
GOP_Lady |
No, I do not work for a US company, and the 'nationality' of a company would seem of little relevance here. American workers at Honda plants in the US benefit indirectly from infrastructure and government decisions in Japan; should these US workers be required to pay Japanese taxes?
Are you in a country that could be hostile to the US? Then if you have problems, I believe the US would bail you out.
US embassies are not known for their usefulness to Americans overseas (and are more likely to be targets than refuges in time of trouble), and actions taken by the US government and local responses thereto pose the greatest single danger to expatriate Americans as a whole. Far from having to pay 'protection money' to the US government, we should be receiving compensation for the trouble the US government causes us.
You might not drive on the roads all the time, but where do you drive when you visit the US?
I don't visit the US. Are you suggesting, however, that all visitors to the US be forced to file and pay income taxes to drive on the roads?
US citizens are taxed on their worldwide income, regardless of source, for the sole reason that the US government considers its citizens chattel slaves to be exploited at its discretion.
Let's say that I make money in Singapore and then invest it in the Hong Kong stock market. As long as I don't bring any of my capital gains back to Singapore, Singapore assesses no taxes on those gains, and since I am not resident in Hong Kong, taxes would not be withheld there either. Explain to me, then, why the US government believes it is entitled to a hefty share of my profits though it does not share in the risk, does not put up any of its own capital, and does not offer any services or protection whatsoever related to my investment. In addition, if an American living in, say, France were to trade in the US stock market, he would have to pay taxes on all his gains, whereas his French neighbor could make the very same trades on the very same markets and not pay any US tax (and no French tax as long as he doesn't repatriate the money).
You should also know that US citizens who give up their American citizenship may, at the discretion of the IRS, have their US-based assets taxed for up to ten years thereafter as if they were still citizens. And some dare to call Americans a free people?
Becasue they can. Because our Congress has given the IRS the power to do so.
I'd settle for that over any other phony/misleading sales tax proposals out there right now...
Tax costs alone come to 22% of prices (geezer can give a link).
Refer to the section of the following article about the Income/Payroll tax system and its impact on our economy "A. Hidden Upstream Taxes. " paragraph 39.
"[39] Dr. Dale Jorgenson, Chairman of Harvard University's Economics Department, believes that the price of goods and services are inflated by about 20 percent or more by upstream taxes consumers ultimately bear. In a recent paper Dr. Jorgenson estimated the built-in taxes contained in the price of goods and services. /22/ In the chart above, he quantified the hidden component of tax, estimating that producer prices would fall on repeal of upstream taxes an average of about 22 percent."
Looking at the accompanying chart, the range of values from industry to industry appears to be about 12-25%.
Economists Gary and Aldonna Robbins of the Texas-based Institute for Public Policy examined the case of dry cleaning a shirt, with a particular eye toward uncovering the hidden costs of taxes in price.
The Robbin's attributed over 33.6% of "consumer prices" to be due to federal taxation passed on to the customer.
The Federal Tax System
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=2125&sequence=0&from=1#pt1
From the Table 1 we may extract the proportionate contributions of each sector of taxes as they contribute to consumer price for the year 2000.
Those tax components which will not change prices as a consequence of enactment of HR2525
============================
Adjust for a conservative $600billion(1995 figure, AGCA '00, Payne '95, PillaBartlettNorquist '95 ) interest & cost of compliance effects.
Estimated change in consumption prices as consequence of enactment of a National Retail Sales Tax, repealing all business income and payroll taxes:
33.6*(1186.5/1945) = 20.5% in consumption prices
Which compares well with the Jorgenson empirical study of 22% fall in producer prices.
The two sources are in reasonable agreement, and I see 20-23% a reasonable value to expect prices to fall not only for customers here in the United States, but in our exports as well making them far more competitive on international markets.
Yep, the little gravy train that could. "We're sure we can, we're sure we can..."
There are proposals out there that would change this.
The same plan has HJR 45 - an amendment to repeal the 16th AND make the taxation of any kind of income unconstitutional.
Every retailer in the country that employs anyone is already a tax collector - income "tax" and "social security" tax. I agree it is very immoral. The employers do government work without just compensation.
There is a plan that eliminates ALL taxes on ANY income, deufnds the IRS, destroys existing income tax records, and erases the entire income tax code. It's HR 2525. Do a thomas-loc search and read it.
Ahhh! Save him some effort, here's the links plus some more that's worth paying attention to.
HR2525 Kill the individual&corporate income taxes and SS/Mediscare payroll taxes both:
H.R.2525
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 07/17/2001)
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
Refer: http://www.fairtax.org & http://www.salestax.org
Billy Tauzin offers another solution for those looking for something closer to 10%, a 15% retail sales tax that replaces all income taxes though it doesn't touch SS/Mediscare payroll taxes, that comes close to meeting the essentials of what it takes to the reverse trend:
H.R.2717
Sponsor: Rep Tauzin, W. J. (Billy)(introduced 8/2/2001)
Title: To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity for families by repealing the income tax, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
Other bills, moving in the proper direction are:
To get the ball rolling and focus Congress Critter's attention:
H.R.2714
Sponsor: Rep Largent, Steve(introduced 8/2/2001)
Title: To terminate the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
A bill to prohibit he imposition of any tax by the Internal Revenue Code: (1) for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2005.
the modification then enactment and ratification of:
H.J.RES.45
Sponsor: (introduced 4/25/2001)
Latest Major Action: 5/9/2001 Referred to House subcommitte.
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the Untied States Government from engaging in the business in competition with its citizens.
(Modified to prohibit all income, payroll, gift estate taxes as HR2525 calls for, or we will see European VAT style hidden taxes along with payroll excises to take over in the place of the of the current individual income tax(i.e. personal income tax) that Ron Paul amendment prohibits.)
And to keep em reminded that there is indeed a Constitution to pay attention to:
H.R.175
Sponsor: (introduced 1/3/2001)
Latest Major Action: 2/12/2001 Referred to House subcommittee
Title: To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.
You are a link machine... I'd like to play Pebble Beach with you!
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.
