[FairOpinion]

It's definitely a major step in the right direction. Maybe if people keep bringing it up enough, it may pass at some point.

I think this credit to everyone is overdoing it -- just give those few, who are really poor some extra help, or don't put a salestax on food, as it is today with state sales taxes. But otherwise it would be great, as far as I am concerned.

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

This is well-explained. The socialists will therefore hate it. The tax is all too visible. They like that withholding thing.

[DittoJed2]

Was the 16th ammendment ever ratified by the states? I heard something this week that it wasn't. The states never voted on it.

[rivercat]

I wonder if one would have to pay sales tax on their house? What about rent? Is that a retail product? Hmmm...

[auntdot]

There could be an exemption for basic food items and clothing purchases under a certain amount per item.

You want to buy meat, vegetables, flour, milk, and the usual necessities, no sales tax.

If you want to purchase a fancy, prepared frozen food, imported cheese, etc., you pay the freight.

That method would carry far fewer administrative costs than the method proposed.

I love the idea, but believe it has about as much chance of coming to fruition as I do of being able to flap my arms and fly to the moon.

The biggest problem is that as soon as the Demmycrats get back into office, and they will, they will, a small income tax will be initiated. And then, slowly, taxes will rise again.

The only way to settle the matter, once and for all, is a Constitutional amendment, but in the current political climate I think passage would be impossible.

[Capitalism2003]

Anyone have that toll free capitol hill number handy? I bet if just 10% of freepers (15,000) took five minutes out of their day to call their representatives, we could put some MAJOR pressure on them.

[alaskanfan]

It would also end social engineering through the tax codes.

[Taxman]

Thanks for posting Boortz' essay.

NRST bump for later review and comment.

In the meantime, if you are interested in the NRST, check out: http://www.salestax.org , http://www.votr.org , http://www.fairtax.org and http://www.cats.org.

[Quicksilver]

Link: http://fairtax.org/

[agincourt1415]

23% NRST is too high. Humor me for a moment

We do away with the income tax, and the economic boom, caused by billions in freed up capital with cause enough of a serge in consumer spending that a 5% NRST tax will be enough to cover the lost revenue on the income tax side.

Just consider that most all large capital purchases are financed, therefore we realize a little leverage on the NRST. If the tax starts at 10% we can have a declining percentage over five years to 5%.

With the 23% they are comparing apples to oranges, you don't that high of a rate on the Retail side.

[lewislynn]

A constitutional amendment repealing the 16th Amendment would be sent to the states for ratification.

It's a lie, there isn't any legislative language in HR25 about repealing the 16th amendment......

[lewislynn]

Income taxes are on profits and gains.

For example:
In order to reduce the price 20% by eliminating (33.3%) income tax on business' profit, the profit would have to be 60%...

$100 dollars including 60% profit.
33.33 (% tax) X $60.00 (profit) = $20.00, or 20%.

If only labor is involved the employer portion of FICA is 7.65% of the payroll...not the price...in other words if your auto repair shop charges $80.00 an hour shop rate but pays the tech $25.00 the employer portion of FICA is (.0765 X 25) $1.91 or less than 2.5% of the shop rate...But I thought employee's would get "100% of their pay".

Assuming $25.00 of the $80.00 is labor and $25.00 is overhead that leaves $30.00 (37.5%) profit...if $20.00 of the $30.00 is tax (66%) then we need to get rid of Democrats AND Republicans.

[EternalVigilance]

Okay, I repent in dust and ashes. I called you a troll on an Arnie thread, but your posting of this marvelous piece about the Fair Tax proves that I was hasty in my assessment. ;-)

Just keep on plugging this issue (which has the potential to do great good on behalf of our freedom and prosperity) and don't be so trollish over the Schwarzenegger/McClintock division in our ranks! LOL...

Thanks for the post, and have a fine day.

[boris]

Jews (like me) will be exempt. We never pay retail.

In fact, there's an old joke among Jews: Q:"Why did God create Gentiles [non-Jews]?" A: "Somebody has to pay retail."

I Can Get It For You Wholesale.

--Boris

[jla]

^

[sleeper-has-awakened]

How do you think this would affect real estate prices? Would they also place a tax on home purchases?

[agrace]

Sounds great to me. I have one question though.

As soon as these taxes vanish, economists agree that competitive market pressures will immediately cause prices at the retail level to fall. So, we almost have a wash here. The prices decrease by over 20 percent, and you start paying a 23 percent sales tax.

Will retailers really drop their prices or see this as a windfall?

[Tauzero]

"I think this credit to everyone is overdoing it"

Yeah. Just a dandy idea. Let's get everyone accustomed to receiving a monthly check from the government.

Reminds me of the People's Republic of Haven, of David Weber's novels.

[sandydipper]

Too good to be true. Sounds like a "free" lunch.

Oh how I'd love to see the IRS dick heads roll. I just hope I live long enough.

[gridlock]

If America is now ready to accept the possibility of the Red Sox winning the World Series, we can certainly support an idea as daring as the Fair Tax Act.

America may be ready to support the Fair Tax Act, but I, personally, will never be able to accept the possibility of the Red Sox winning the World Series. It just isn't going to happen...

[Bryan24]

I have a much better solution.

First off, if revenues are tied to consumer spending, an economic slowdown will BUST the budget process. And since it already does this, placing ALL revenues directly on consumer spending will only magnify the problem.

How about we make it really simple?

#1. Pass a national flat tax on all income. 17%. No deductions. The lower limits are:

a. $15,000 for a single person
b. $20,000 for married couples
c. $ $2,000 for each child up to 3 children ($26,000)

For each of those categories, each additional $1,000 earned carries a 1% tax. So, as income goes up, taxes go up.

$15,000 = No Federal Income Tax = $15,000 take home
$16,000 = 1% Federal Income Tax = $15,840 take home
$17,000 = 2% Federal Income Tax = $16,660 take home
$18,000 = 3% Federal Income Tax = $17,460 take home
$19,000 = 4% Federal Income Tax = $18,240 take home
$20,000 = 5% Federal Income Tax = $19,00 take home
$21,000 = 6% Federal Income Tax = $19,740 take home
$22,000 = 7% Federal Income Tax = $20,460 take home
$23,000 = 8% Federal Income Tax = $21,160 take home
$24,000 = 9% Federal Income Tax = $21,840 take home
$25,000 = 10% Federal Income Tax = $22,500 take home
$26,000 = 11% Federal Income Tax = $23,140 take home
$27,000 = 12% Federal Income Tax = $23,760 take home
$28,000 = 13% Federal Income Tax = $24,360 take home
$29,000 = 14% Federal Income Tax = $24,940 take home
$30,000 = 15% Federal Income Tax = $25,500 take home
$31,000 = 16% Federal Income Tax = $26,040 take home
$32,000 = 17% Federal Income Tax = $26,560 take home

The tables for the married and married w/children will look similar to this.

#2 All monies earned from interest entered into savings from this point forward, will NOT be subject to taxation. You brought home $38,000 after taxes and put $10,000 into some type of savings (bank, stocks, mutual fund, CD, etc...) and earned $1,000 from that savings investment. NO TAX on the earnings.


#3 Over a period of years, phase out Social Security. All retirement will be privately financed.