Shock and awe not only for Iraqis {The "Fair" tax cometh}

WorldNetDaily ^ | 4/16/2003 | By Joan Veon

[lewislynn]

Compliance costs are the costs of compliance to the tax code.

We might be getting somewhere now. What percentage of prices is "compliance costs" exactly?

Oh and if you're going to "scrap the code" how come you're only reducing "compliance costs 90%"?

[manic4organic]

COURTESY OF CONSERVATIVE ALERTS.COM

Congressman John Linder (R-GA) has once again introduced the "FairTax" bill (H.R. 25). The FairTax is one of the most exciting proposals to ever reach the American people. It offers long-needed tax relief -- in the form of lower prices, nearly nonexistent compliance costs, and the ability to choose how much to spend in taxes -- to all Americans, while eliminating the income tax and allowing Americans to keep 100 percent of their paycheck.

The FairTax will dramatically reduce prices, protect and ensure funding of Social Security and Medicare, empower the low-income earners, and put choice and control back into the hands of every American. All the crucial elements are in place: a public that is eager and ready for a fairer tax system, and a Congress willing to seriously consider genuine tax reform. To be competitive in the next century and to renew the American dream, we must change the way we fund our national government.

The FairTax Act:


Repeals all corporate and individual income taxes, payroll taxes, self-employment taxes, capital gains taxes, estate taxes and gift taxes.

Imposes a revenue-neutral national sales tax on all new goods and services at the point of final purchase for consumption. Business-to-business transactions and used products (which have already been taxed) are not subject to the sales tax.

Rebates the sales tax on all spending up to the poverty level.

Results of the FairTax:


Dramatically reduce the costs of goods and services by 20 to 30 percent.

Allows you to keep 100 percent of your paycheck, pension, and Social Security payments.

Gross Domestic Product will increase by almost 10.5 percent in the first year after enactment.

Compliance costs would decrease by 90 percent.

Real investment would initially increase by 76 percent relative to the investment that would be made under present law. While this increase would gradually decline, it remains 15 percent higher than under the existing tax structure.

Exports would increase by 26 percent initially and would remain more than 13 percent above the level under the current tax system.

Real wages will increase.

Increases incentives to work by as much as 20 percent in many households, leading to higher economic growth and efficiency.

Interest rates will fall 25 to 35 percent.

Isn't it time for REAL change in our federal tax system? We need to support this bill TODAY!

ACTION ITEM: Rep. Linder has announced that he has added more than 20 co-sponsors -- including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) -- to the FairTax bill. "The momentum behind the FairTax continues to build, and Majority Leader DeLay's co-sponsorship is just the latest signal that support for the FairTax is growing," said Linder. "The bill now has 21 co-sponsors -- more than any other fundamental tax reform legislation in the House -- and they represent a bipartisan coalition of members from across the nation. Not only do my colleagues recognize the harm done to the American people by the overly intrusive and burdensome income tax code, their constituents recognize it every April 15th," continued Linder.

This bill needs DOZENS more co-sponsors, and needs to be moved OUT of the Ways and Means Committee, to be voted on by the whole House of Representatives. Click "Go!" above to send your Congressman a personal message, asking him or her to support the FairTax bill to abolish all federal income taxes, death taxes, capital gains taxes, and payroll taxes, and replace them with a national retail sales tax.

NOTE: Please be sure to click below to send this Alert to everyone you know who believes that it's time to REPLACE the income tax with a FAIR TAX. Thank you!

[lewislynn]

Payroll TAX costs are not COMPLIANCE costs.

So when you do your required by law payroll taxes you aren't really complying with any laws then?...got it.

Tax costs are the costs of the tax.

What does that mean exactly, it keeps getting muddier and muddier around here...

OH wait, it's not mud...IT'S BULLSHIT!

[Principled]

Oh and if you're going to "scrap the code" how come you're only reducing "compliance costs 90%"?

I'm not doing any of this. It's HR 25 that will do such.

Compliance to tax laws cost money. You can find out yourself how much compliance to the income and payroll tax adds to prices, reduces wages, and decreases ROI....you don't need or want information from me. There are dozens of experts out there who have published research on the topic.

And yes they say 90% of compliance costs will be eliminated. I won't bother you with a link, again, as you've asked not to be "spammed" with links (even thou you ask for them first!).

By "scrapping the code", as you put it, the cost of complying with tax laws is reduced by 90%.

Of course under the NRST it is the business, not the consumer, who is responsible for keeping receipts, so they will still have that expense. Under the income tax, business AND consumers must provide receipts on demand by IRS.

It would be nice to be able to eliminate 100% of compliance costs, but I'm still waiting for that bill to be introduced.

[Principled]

Business will also still have the expense of reporting wages to SSA... I omittied this from previous post..

[Principled]

Thanks manic. The bill has 25 cosponsors now. It may take another 15 years, but this will happen in spite of those who will do anything to stop it.

[Zon]

George writes: Z, Joe and Jane "Sixpack" don't influence politicians. Millionaires do. If people making millions of dollars had to pay the same rate as on their income, they would be clamoring to get that rate lowered. While sipping their favorite beverage, under the NRST, they would probably talk about the government supplied amenities we "all" should have. Concert halls, museums, ballparks and arenas, race tracks, etc and conclude that the tax rate needs to be raised. It's already happened. It caused the Boston tea party. Your utopia just don't exist. Peace and love, George. 178

Zon: The fact of the matter is, politicians need votes to get elected and reelected. Joe and Jane "Smith" are in the majority and their votes can keep any tax-rate raising politician from being elected. Their massive number of votes can also elect a politician that will lower the tax rate. It seems all too clear that you're implying that votes don't matter and the only way politicians would lower the tax rate was if multi-millionaires bribed them. 205

Most times, Politicians make their most odious votes as "lame ducks". They don't care if they get re-elected. Some make "mistakes" like the former Bush. And, it really doesn't matter if the odious politicians get re-elected anyway. Most times if not all, their replacements are odious politicians with the BIG government ideals.

Yeah sure George, politicians don't get voted into office by the massive number of poor and middle class voters. And politicians don't care if the get reelected. They just look like career politicians. Sure George, whatever ever you say George.

[Zon]

You "crapped" in Jim Robinson's "living room" (post 163). The mess you left behind has been cleaned up by the moderator. And all you can do is plead monkey see, monkey do. Grow up!

[Zon]

Okay, so I was wrong, Social Security is a tax. And maybe under the NRST income from interest, dividends and capital gains is subject to social security tax. It's a fact that, for tax incentive purposes the IRS does snoop around in many people's financial affairs.

I made an error, I'm human. Big deal. I acted responsibly as a mature adult and acknowledged the correction.

[Semper911]

For those who have enough savings to live off of their income, this is a windfall

Dead wrong. This is the person who stands to lose the most under the plan.

Savings have already been taxed. Now the retiree who starts to spend what he has saved will be taxed again. In a big way.

[Always Right]

You "crapped" in Jim Robinson's "living room" (post 163). The mess you left behind has been cleaned up by the moderator. And all you can do is plead monkey see, monkey do. Grow up!

Oh puh_leeez get off you friggin hypocritical high horse. You keeping crapping on Jim's living room by bringing this up. If I called you a commie bastard or something what would you say, "thank you sir may I have another"? I had already politely asked Mr. Jesup to refrain from personal attacks in post 153. But no, he had to keep going with more personal attacks. And you have the nerve to get on my case. You seem to have no problem with NRST crapping all over. Give it a rest.

[Always Right]

actually post 154, not 153.

[Zon]

You "crapped" in Jim Robinson's "living room" (post 163). The mess you left behind has been cleaned up by the moderator. And all you can do is plead monkey see, monkey do. Grow up!

[Always Right]

You "crapped" in Jim Robinson's "living room" (post 163). The mess you left behind has been cleaned up by the moderator. And all you can do is plead monkey see, monkey do. Grow up!

So what's your excuse for crap you continue to spew in here. I am a good American who responds when someone attacks me. You seem to expect me to roll over and take it like a Frenchmen. I don't play that game, maybe you do.

[Principled]

And maybe under the NRST income from interest, dividends and capital gains is subject to social security tax.

No. That's not right. Interest and dividends are not taxed under the nrst.

[Principled]

Savings have already been taxed. Now the retiree who starts to spend what he has saved will be taxed again.

The savings will be taxed again regardless of whether the nrst is enacted or not...because under the income tax, prices are inflated by embedded income taxes. So those who have done the right thing and saved money will be in no worse position regarding amount of tax to be paid on savings.

[Zon]

And maybe under the NRST income from interest, dividends and capital gains is subject to social security tax.

No. That's not right. Interest and dividends are not taxed under the nrst.

I said maybe. So I assume you didn't mean that the maybe was no. And that you didn't mean the maybe was wrong. Thanks, for letting me know that those things aren't taxed.

[Zon]

You "crapped" in Jim Robinson's "living room" (post 163). The mess you left behind has been cleaned up by the moderator. And all you can do is plead monkey see, monkey do. Grow up!

[Always Right]

You are like the whinny snotty-nosed little brat that just won't shut up.

Waaaaa!, Waaaaa!, Waaaaa!, Waaaaa!............

[Bigun]

Oh and if you're going to "scrap the code" how come you're only reducing "compliance costs 90%"?

90% is 9000 times better the 0% looie!

Here is an excert from remarks made by The John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University, Dr. Walter E. Williams, in March of is 2002 to a standing-room-only crowd of students, faculty, and guests at Hillsdale College's Constructive Alternatives Seminar:

"...Keep in mind that a working definition of slavery is that you work but do not have any rights to the fruit of your labor. Taxation and regulation constitute confiscation of some or all of the freedom to own and use property. This confiscation has reached unprecedented proportions. In 1902 expenditures at all levels of government totaled $1.7 billion, and the average taxpayer payed only $60 per year in taxes. In fact, from 1787 to 1920, federal expenditures never exceeded 4 percent of the Gross National Product (GNP), except in wartime. Today federal expenditures alone are $1.8 trillion - almost 30% of GNP - and state and local governments spend over a trillion more. The average taxpayer now pays more than $8,000 a year, working from January 1 to May 8 to pay federal, state, and local taxes. In addation to the out-of-pocket cost, Americans spend 5.4 billion hours each year complying with the federal tax code-roughly the equivalent of 3 million people working full time. If it were employed in productive activity, the labor now devoted to tax compliance would be worth $232 billion annually. The federal cost of hiring 93,000 IRS employees is $6 billion. If these Americans weren't fooling around with the tax code, they could produce the entire annual output of the aircraft, trucking, auto, and food processing industries combined..." Emphasis added

I am unaware of Dr. Williams being affiliated with ANY tax reform organization Looie. What do you think he is talking about in the highlighted part of this Looie? I RELLY hesitate to post anything with numbers in it to you Looie because we have ALL seen the effect they have on you bu I'm going to just once more for the heck of it.

George W. has proposed 760 Billion in Tax Cuts over 10 years. I'm ALL for that in the short term but if that would do good things for the economy, as I believe it SURELY would, how much MORE good would eleminating 90% of the compliance costs associated with the current income tax system do Looie?

Let's assume, for the purpose of this exercise, that Dr. William's numbers in the above article are correct (I personally think he errs on the conservative side) and compliance with the income tax consumes $232 Billion per year. 90% of that is $208.2 Billion per annum. Multiply that number by 10 and you come up with $2.08 TRILLION Looie!

That is 2.08 TRILLION with a T currently wasted dollars which would be put to productive use in the economy Looie! I say that would have a huge and beneficial effect Looie!