Skip to comments.
CAVUTO REPORTS THAT BUSH CONSIDERING SCRAPPING THE IRS CODE!!!
Fox News Channel
| November 6, 2002
| n/a
Posted on 11/06/2002 1:39:57 PM PST by Tree of Liberty
Neil Cavuto just interviewed Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., the director of the OMB, and Neil let it be known that he's hearing rumblings that Pres. Bush is considering a total re-write of the tax code and that SecTreas O'Neill is strongly pushing a national retail sales tax!
TOPICS: Breaking News; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 16th; amendment; bigsavingsaccts; fatpaycheck; goodbyejune5th; holdyourankles; internal; irs; liberalsscreechin; national; nrst; pipedream; putneckonhrblock; retail; revenue; sales; service; sixteenth; slavery; socialengineering; tax; taxcode; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500 ... 1,081-1,088 next last
To: cdefreese
What about taxes paid by business?
To: palmer
"Only a small amount of imagination needed: imagine I pull up behind a truck at the side of the road in a rural area. The truck contains merchandise that was bought wholesale maybe right even on the dock in L.A. What will stop me from buying and not paying the sales tax?"
Unless the goods are smuggled in or you are dealing with someone selling stolen goods, you will have to purchase from a legitimate company. All our suppliers require our tax ID numbers before selling us goods for resale. You sign a form declaring they are for resale and that you will collect required taxes when you sell them.
I you never send in any taxes and you buy goods wholesale, they will come looking for you.
462
posted on
11/06/2002 6:13:18 PM PST
by
Route66
To: Zon
Zon, do you realize that if the so-called Fair Tax (NRST) is implimented that we will be forced into a complete socialism? Do you see the process?
To: snopercod
Also, they feds will have to ban cash transactions to implement a NRST. Otherwise, I might sell you my car, house, or airplane for cash.Silly, there would be no NRST on your used stuff.
464
posted on
11/06/2002 6:15:40 PM PST
by
carenot
To: TC Rider
The thing I like about a NST or a flat tax, is the accountability factor. Absolutely. A big red "17%" at the bottom of every receipt would really change people's thinking about government spending.
To: coloradan
watching them only is better than watching everyone. Sorry, but I don't see how watching every retailer can't be used to watch every retail purchase. It seems like every item manufactured here or abroad would have to be tracked until it is sold at retail. Every item would have to be tagged and tracked lest it be diverted from the wholesale stream and sold at retail without tax.
466
posted on
11/06/2002 6:19:26 PM PST
by
palmer
To: palmer
As one example, think about the difficulties of collecting sales tax on illegal drugs.Yeah, good point. I really would hate to lose all the tax money we get from the sell of illegal drugs.
467
posted on
11/06/2002 6:20:21 PM PST
by
carenot
To: SupplySider
Absolutely. A big red "17%" at the bottom of every receipt would really change people's thinking about government spending. The part I like is when they have to tell people it will go from 17% to 27% to pay for senior drug benefits.
To: Tree of Liberty
If this is true-- WOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOO!!!
469
posted on
11/06/2002 6:20:38 PM PST
by
mafree
To: Tree of Liberty
Makes sense. The purpose of the tax code should be to raise revenue, not direct social policy. A consumption tax rewards saving and investment. This is what is called a fresh idea.
470
posted on
11/06/2002 6:22:50 PM PST
by
Nakota
To: Taxman
If this happens wouldn't it be a fitting memorial to our dear departed pal CHIEF Negotiator?
(RIP Chief- think of you often and miss you)
471
posted on
11/06/2002 6:23:08 PM PST
by
mafree
To: Jim Robinson
No income testing. Just exclude basic food items and housing. We want the government out of our personal papers.Dang it! What is basic food? Beans? What is basic housing?
472
posted on
11/06/2002 6:23:23 PM PST
by
carenot
To: Irene Adler
The "black market" is already here. It has been here for as many years as the state sales tax and mandatory sales permits have been around. Those people running these types of business DO NOT report their income to the IRS today! With a sales tax they will have no choice but to pay some of their income in the way of sales tax to reputable businesses and thus the government.
473
posted on
11/06/2002 6:26:55 PM PST
by
DH
To: Route66
Unless the goods are smuggled in or you are dealing with someone selling stolen goods, you will have to purchase from a legitimate company. All our suppliers require our tax ID numbers before selling us goods for resale. You sign a form declaring they are for resale and that you will collect required taxes when you sell them. I you never send in any taxes and you buy goods wholesale, they will come looking for you. That makes sense. What if I manufacture goods in my cottage industry? I buy lots of handcrafted items at the flea market directly from the maker. If I knew them better I could special order and pick them up at his house. Are we going to send out federal agents to do this to make sure these people charge tax? How is that less intrusive than employers witholding income tax?
Also, how will I buy ammo from a private seller or small retailer without the government tracking it?
474
posted on
11/06/2002 6:27:11 PM PST
by
palmer
To: Gorest Gump
If clinton got it done he would like to mount rushmore
475
posted on
11/06/2002 6:27:21 PM PST
by
al baby
To: aristeides
That discrimination against the poor can be eliminated by exempting necessitiesThat would work, but there might be something to be said for no exemptions, though it would probably never fly politically. The poor would all become anti-tax, anti-spend Republicans.
To: DH
Has it sunk in that if the tax cheats start paying the same tax as you that your tax bill would go down? Currently I would guess that for each taxpayer there is one cheat not paying anything and not reporting their income.
If they passed the national sales tax and peoples' taxes did not go down there would be a revolution!
477
posted on
11/06/2002 6:29:38 PM PST
by
DH
To: Action-America; agitator
Thanks A-A for making that clear and agitator fopr bringing it up.
I have a question though. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says "uniform throughout the United States", and the Preamble's statement of overall limiting scope says "promote the general welfare" -- which precludes (in theory) any laws or regulation that do not apply uniformly, that is do not favor a class or subgroup of folks over another.
Isn't a "progressive" income tax short of that mark? It hits the class of rich people with a more onerous rate -- a multiple measure system.
And in the states they often have enterprise zones where the sales tax is less or none -- would such tax rate zoning also run afoul of those two Constitutional restraints?
478
posted on
11/06/2002 6:30:20 PM PST
by
bvw
To: carenot
"Somebody's probably alread said it, but I wish Chief Negotiator were alive to read this."
"Yes, I do too.
But he was murdered, Oct 4, 2001.
We were trying to solve it. But it was covered up."
Not deep enough, care.
Give me some more time.
I'm just stretched too thin right now.
479
posted on
11/06/2002 6:32:42 PM PST
by
COB1
To: carenot
You are proving my point. If we can't stop illegal drug sales, it means we probably can't tax it either, whether home made, home grown or smuggled. If we set up a high retail sales tax, the same thing can happen with almost any merchandise.
480
posted on
11/06/2002 6:32:47 PM PST
by
palmer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460, 461-480, 481-500 ... 1,081-1,088 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson