[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

All, Joan has written well about the coming tax system. Except, if it IS a "VAT", the "21 to 27 percent" paid on purchases WILL be many times more. The "value added" for each transaction from producer through many government mandated middlemen will HAVE to be added on to the final purchase price. That is how a VAT works. Peace and love, George.

[Black Bart]

the full tax plan of $726 billion

What does this mean? Our federal government is going to operate on a paltry $726 billion? Am I dreaming?

Or did the author mean the plan to CUT taxes by $726 billion? Shoddy, shoddy writing. I am disappointed in WorldNet for publishing this low quality article.

[JohnGalt]

Joe and Jane Sixpack are hooked on cheap credit; why would a self-proclaimed anti-gloablist not hold them accountable and merely blame the leasure class for essentially, holding stock in American companies?

[George Frm Br00klyn Park]

Lastly, it's time to examine what George Bush stands for, because it appears he is trying to harmonize our tax laws with the other countries of the world. There has been no clarification – let alone an announcement – that the Bush administration is changing the tax code. Why keep truth from the American people? What happened to the country that the colonists fled to from the British and European feudalistic systems?
---------------------

Guys, I have written many times that the "fair" tax is a system designed by the wealthy for the wealthy and their moneyhandlers. I have also written that the NRST is DESIGNED to destroy the middle class in this country, and that "step on the ladder" from "rags" to riches that has been a hallmark of what the U.S. of A. has done so well over the last two hundred plus years.

It is DESIGNED to put the onus on those who are starting out, and must buy EVERYTHING in order to JUST get by. It is EVIL!!

What WAS the "popularity" rating of Bush the senior after the first Iraq war?? Peace and love, George.

[Polybius]

Our current tax system does not necessarilly tax the "wealthy" such as the the Kennedy Trustafarians. It taxes the "earners" that are busting their butts to earn enough money to become wealthy.

Yesterday, 15 April 2003, I mailed off the final payment for $103,000.00 that the U.S. Government taxed me for the priviledge of earning money during Tax Year 2002.

I propose that a wealth tax on the trust funds of the truly wealthy, such as the Kennedys and John Kerry's wife, be instituted so that some of the tax burden can be shifted from the not-yet-wealthy hard workers to the wealthy non-workers.

[lewislynn]

Under this VAT (value-added tax), every time a purchase is made, there will be up to a possible 27 percent tax on it. This tax could replace the tax on income, making only consumption taxable while all forms of income are tax-free.

Just exactly what we all knew. IF a consumption tax was introduced it would be in conjuction with the income tax...The only way it will pass is if the Democrats know it will suck more of our money.

The first Bush Presidency was cancelled because of his lie, "read my lips, no new taxes". This Bush is spending money like a drunken Democrat and not just on war and terror...history repeats itself?

[Jotmo]

Once again the “Static Model” amateur economists have come out to play. This article is so full of holes I hardly know where to begin.

I’ll start with this. He seems to think “Old Money Harry” will get all the benefit because his trust fund wont be taxed, but conveniently forgets that he will be PAYING more when he spends his ”Old Money”. How many people does he think are living off of trust funds and not working? Could it possibly be more than 100,000?

It may be true that peoples spending habits will change, like they’ll SPEND LESS and SAVE/INVEST MORE because it wont be taxed.

Oh the horror.

Taxes on items you purchase will go up, but with businesses freed of their odious tax burden, don’t you think they might lower prices to gain market share? Wouldn’t that help offset the tax and not put such a damper on spending?

Not to mention all of the capital companies would have when everyone realizes there’s no tax on income from capital gains and starts buying stock by the truck load.

I’m highly disappointed in WND. I expect a lot more from them.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I really hate it when morons claim that the deficit is caused by lack of income instead of the real culprit: uncontrolled spending on unconstitutional programs.

Governments like the VAT because it HIDES the tax somewhere in the manufacturing process and the consumer never knows how much he is paying in taxes. A national sales tax paid when you spend your money is fair if you rebate the tax on the first $20,000 or so and you know EVERYTIME YOU BUY SOMETHING how much you are paying in taxes.

[heckler]

I suspect that some people will confuse this with the "Fair Tax" as proposed at the web site http://www.fairtax.org.

There is a huge difference between a national retail sales tax and a "Value Added Tax"

[MalcolmS]

All, Joan has written well about the coming tax system. Except, if it IS a "VAT", the "21 to 27 percent" paid on purchases WILL be many times more. The "value added" for each transaction from producer through many government mandated middlemen will HAVE to be added on to the final purchase price. That is how a VAT works.

I don't believe this to be true. We have business interests in Canada which has a 7% GST (Essentially a VAT). Here's how it works:

Jim cuts down an oak tree from his woodlot and sells it to a mill for $1,000 + $70 GST. He deducts $40 to cover GST he has paid on his truck, chainsaw etc. and remits $30

The mill cuts the lumber and sells the boards to a furniture company for $2,000 + $140 GST. It deducts the $70 GST it has already paid and remits $70

The furniture company manufactures several dining room suites with the wood, and sells it direct to consumers for a total of $4,000 plus $280 GST. It deducts the $140 GST it has paid on the wood, and remits $140.

So the government gets a total of $140 (from furniture mfr) + $70 (from lumber mill) + $30 (from Jim) + $40 (from Jim's suppliers, truck, chainsaw etc) = $280.

So the government gets only the $280 total--it's not multiplied.

There are advantages to this for business if it replaces income tax. Goods coming into the country have VAT applied at the border. So US business can compete on a level playing field with lower taxed foreign competitors.

Remember that US business are burdened by three tax disadvantages.

1) A corporate tax rate that is no. 3 in the world, soon to be no. 1 as the two higher european countries are planning on lowering their rates.

2) A tax on worldwide profits. The US is, I believe, the only industrialized nation to do this. US firms operating overseas must pay taxes in the foreign jurisdiction as well as to the IRS. In some cases, tax treaties reduce double taxation.

3) Double taxation on dividends, which halves the attractiveness to investors of companies which have a great ongoing business which is not high-growth (i.e. no capital gains).

Note that this is a simplified example since the furniture company would also get to deduct GST paid on machinery and supplies.

[Principled]

This is all hogwash George. Nothing is subtantiated, claims are made with no factual basis and no research, and the article ignores volumes of research already in the literature.

Steaming pile alert. Not worth my time.

Basic fact #1: the Fair Tax is NOT a vat... our current graduated income tax and the oft proposed flat income tax ARE both VATs. THis guy has his head in his arse.

[citizen]

bttt for later

[Principled]

Take a look at this crapola.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

I want some of what you and the author are smoking.

Current unconstitutional income tax is already a VAT. Manufacturers pay taxes on raw materials to make into products, then they're taxed again when they're sold to sellers.

Taxes are again levied on those finished goods when they're sold to consumers.

The Fairtax completely eliminates all these hidden taxes, producing a single tax levied on the final good or service sold to consumers.

Would you rather be taxed on your income or on what you spend? Under a Fairtax, prices on most goods and services would actually DROP because there is no hidden taxes built into the product.

[Dick Bachert]

George, George, George! The flat tax you profess to prefer is STILL an INCOME tax Karl Marx laid out in his Communist Manifesto, Plank Two. And though it MAY start out flat, so did the current mess. How long do you think it will take for the new cute little monkey to morph into the huge 800# gorilla we face each April 15th?

Is your hatred and envy of the EVIL RICH -- whom the statistics prove are NOT a fixed, static group -- such that you would embrace Marxist SOCIALISM and the wealth redistrubution Bastiat called "legalized plunder" to get at them?

Tsk, tsk, tsk...

IF YOU WANT THIS MAN – AND MEN LIKE HIM – TO REMAIN IN CONTROL OF YOUR ECONOMIC AND PERSONAL DESTINY, CONTINUE TO TOLERATE THE CURRENT MARXIST INCOME TAX SYSTEM.

ONE MORE TIME:

IT’S ABOUT

P O W E R AND C O N T R O L!!

SIGN THE PETITION AT HTTP://WWW.VOTR.ORG. Then find out how you can do more to end America’s peculiar SPRING MADNESS.

[11th Earl of Mar]

Bush is globalizing our tax laws

And our present graduated income tax system is one of the ten basic principles for a communist society. [See the Communist Manifesto].

In that light the VAT does not sound so bad. And at least it is somewhat voluntary- you pay the tax only if you purchase the item in question. The income tax is regressive, punitive and compulsary.

[samuel_adams_us]

Let the government do this, when the middle of america goes bust so will the entire world. At that point in time the dollar will only be good used as toilet paper and the poor will rise up against the rich and destroy them. If you don't believe this just ask the French what happened to the king a couple hundred years ago. The rich who would think this plan would work are stupid, the poor out number them 100 million to one and once the poor start starving they will start feasting on the rich.

[Question_Assumptions]

All I'll say here is that unless they make income taxes unconstitutional again, I think that any attempt to replace the income tax with a sales tax is a non-starter. Why? Because the sales tax won't replace the income tax for ever. It will only be a matter of time before we have both.

[Windcatcher]

The article also failed to mention that, in the case of an NRST, Donnie and Suzie could buy an ALREADY EXISTING house and pay ZERO TAX on it. They'd make out far better than under the current system, where you can only write the interest off. So, they don't buy a NEW house. Well, gee whiz...we already know that new construction costs a premium; how many young couples can afford them as it is? Besides, does anyone think that developers will just sit by and watch people flock to existing construction? Of course not; they want to sell houses. They'll immeiately start trying to get their costs down to stay competitive.

Same for cars. Perhaps Donnie and Suzie should buy a two-year lease return instead of a new car. I'd consider that good advice in any case, and it's even better advice under the FairTax, since they'd pay zero tax on it. Automakers would likely have to lower the price of new cars to remain competitive.

John and Jane? Excuse me, but where does it make sense to stretch yourself such that you're spending everything you make? Doesn't anyone else think that's imprudent, dangerous even? The FairTax encourages saving and investing. It encourages building a nest egg instead of blowing it on expensive cars or buying beyond your means. Isn't this a good thing?

[iconoclast]

Bump for a later read.

[rwfromkansas]

Can someone explain what this article is about?

The Fair Tax.......not what this article talks about...calls for a 23 percent NRST. Also, the other matter raised, the Senate cutting of Bush's tax cut, does not call for a NRST.

I did not read the entire article, but I am not going to waste 10 minutes reading an article by an author who can't make their point. This author appears to have been smoking pot when writing.

This is truly one crappy piece of writing....absolutely dreadful beyond comprehension. I re-read the beginning and Joan actually is saying the Bush tax cut would install a VAT!

This article needs to be a lesson for us all. Don't down the gin when trying to get your column in by deadline.