'It's too complex' -- IRS head on tax code

Washington Times ^ | March 16, 2004 | UPI

[ancient_geezer]

WASHINGTON, March 15 (UPI) -- The top U.S. tax official, Mark Everson, has just finished preparing his own tax returns and -- surprise! -- he thinks the tax code is too complicated.

Everson, the Internal Revenue Service Commissioner, said he has finished his calculations and filed his return, Newsday reported Monday.

[keepitsimplestupid]

But what really matters is that the primary function of the state is to protect our property, especially our landed property. That is why we should support the government with property taxes, especially land taxes.

[ancient_geezer]

Sales and income taxes steal the things that we have created, while land tax only "steals" the natural resources that we only have because the Feds conquered them for us.

If one wants to see the end of the United States, he may hold that opinion.

Others believed otherwise in drafting the Constitution, and the Amercian people in ratifying it:

Constitution for the United States of America:

• Article VI: "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

• Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises,
  to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;
  but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "

• Article I Section 8: "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."

With full knowledge of what they were doing:

Federalist #12:

• "A nation cannot long exist without revenues. Destitute of this essential support, it must resign its independence, and sink into the degraded condition of a province."

Federalist #39:

• "The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT, is supposed to consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing the Confederacy, in their political capacities; in the latter, on the individual citizens composing the nation, in their individual capacities. On trying the Constitution by this criterion, it falls under the NATIONAL, not the FEDERAL character;"

Federalist #45:

• "The change relating to taxation may be regarded as the most important; and yet the present [Continental] sic Congress have as complete authority to REQUIRE of the States indefinite supplies of money for the common defense and general welfare, as the future [Constitutional] Congress will have to require them of individual citizens;

 

You may not like it, but Anarchy is your alternative.

[Principled]

I'm waiting for when this hits me. When does it hit? A particular income level is required to pay a particular amount of tax irrespective of deductions?

[eyespysomething]

as Herman Cain likes to say, "7 million words of nonsense" or something like that.

http://www.salestax.org/library/cain_5-9-02.html

http://www.cainforussenate.org

[ancient_geezer]

A National Sales tax will just shift the burden of government funding to the necessities of staying alive.

Like they do now where they take it coming and going both.

DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation

The impact of the federal tax system(taxes in gross wage/salaries & other compensation + business income/payroll taxes) in the price of retail consumption goods and services is 24% for federal taxes alone.

And everyone pays that tax through their consumption purchases.

Too bad they don't get a receipt for them taxes isn't it, and you are happy to keep everyone blind to the true burden they pay in taxes to the federal govenment.

Why is that?

[ancient_geezer]

That is why we should support the government with property taxes, especially land taxes.

Then we should be going by the rules discussed in the Constitutional Convention for representation.

Only land owners should be eligible for the vote and their vote weighted by the amount of tax they pay.

James Madison's Notes; Thursday July 12, 1787

Mr. Govr. MORRIS moved to add to the clause empowering the Legislature to vary the Representation according to the principles of wealth & number of inhabts. a "proviso that taxation shall be in proportion to Representation."

No taxation without representation my friend it is the violation of that premise that has created the monster government we have.

 

The Honorable James DeMint (R-SC)
United States House of Representatives
THURSDAY, APRIL 5, 2001
12:00 noon

• "There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government.

In my view, If you don't pay tax, you have no right to a say in government.

An NRST assures everyone who can vote also pays taxes.

If you want property owners to be the only ones taxed, that's fine too. But don't expect representation in government if you own no property.

[philman_36]

"It's a matter of simplifying a tax system that's far too complex," Everson said. "It's got to be addressed."
Yet another admission and in another few years from now it'll be made again by yet another Internal Revenue Service Commissioner and a few years from that it'll...but I digress.
What are we up to now...about five of 'em having now stated almost the exact same thing and none of them have done a thing about it? Talk about useless baggage!

[ancient_geezer]

Esentially people with income over $75,000 and some large deductions are subject to AMT. Most vulnerable are taxpayers with several children, interest deductions from second mortgages, capital gains, high state and local taxes, and incentive stock options.

It's the large itemized deductions that do you in.

[ancient_geezer]

none of them have done a thing about it?

Tax commissioners can't change the statutes nor court decisions. Congress writes and enacts the laws.

You want change, guess who you have to pound on.

[phil_will1]

"What are we up to now...about five of 'em having now stated almost the exact same thing and none of them have done a thing about it? Talk about useless baggage!"

I never imagined I would defend the IRS, but find myself compelled to in this instance. The IRS isn't tasked with writing tax law, they are tasked with enforcing it. While there is plenty of legitimate criticism that should be aimed at them for the way they enforce the tax laws, this missile should be fired at congress ... and the American people who tolerate this lunacy.

[phil_will1]

Here's another article about the AMT. It's a ticking time bomb.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1098675/posts

[ancient_geezer]

Ticking? It's down to the debt cord ;O)

[Leto]

But how will the social engineering programs get enforced under a national sales tax system?

The same way they do in Europe where all the countries have a NRST.

[GovernmentShrinker]

They also have huge income taxes. My point was that the income tax is carefully engineered to make people change their behavior in order to reduce their tax bill. This behavior-modification can't be achieved with a sales tax that is at the same rate for everyone and for all goods and services sold.

[phil_will1]

"My point was that the income tax is carefully engineered to make people change their behavior in order to reduce their tax bill. This behavior-modification can't be achieved with a sales tax that is at the same rate for everyone and for all goods and services sold."

According to Dr. Donald Ratajczak, Regents Professor of Economics Emeritus at Georgia State University
"Where we now use government tax treatment to alter behavior, use direct subsidies. Virtually all economic studies show that the cost of behavior alteration is lower through direct subsidies than through tax advantages."

[ancient_geezer]

in Europe where all the countries have a NRST.

Actually they don't, they have VATs, which collect taxes at all levels of production embedding the tax within prices where they cannot be seen by the citizen.

Definition [ http://www.encyclopedia.com/articles/13330.html ]:

value-added tax
levy imposed on businesses at all levels of production of a good or service, and based on the increase in price, or value, added to the good or service by each level. Because all stages of a value-added tax are ultimately passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices, it has been described as a hidden sales tax. Originally introduced in France (1954), it is now used by most W European countries

A retail sales tax is collected from the citizen at retail sale and is totally visible instead of being hidden in prices. Thus an NRST it is the direct opposite of a VAT. Actually corporate income taxes and the Flat Income Tax are closer to VATs than a retail sales tax is.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/foundationmessage03-00.html

"The economic equivalence of an European-style VAT and a subtraction-method VAT is well-established. A subtraction-method VAT is essentially identical to a business income tax except that all purchases of plant and equipment may be expensed, rather than depreciated as under current U.S. law."

 

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/fullcomm/106cong/4-11-00/4-11kotl.htm

"Robert Hall, one of the originators of the proposal, who describes his Flat Tax as, effectively, a Value Added Tax. A value added tax taxes output less investment (because firms get to deduct their investment.)"

"The Flat Tax differs from a VAT in only two respects. First, it asks workers, rather than firm managers, to mail in the check for the tax payment on that portion of output paid to them as wages. Second, it provides a subsidy to workers with low wages."

And every man woman and child in the nation, pays federal taxes through that kind of VAT.

DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation

[Paul C. Jesup]

Funny how these jerks support something until it bites THEM in the ass.

[ancient_geezer]

I suspect there is a slight difference between supporting something, and executing the requirements of one's job with the tools at hand.

Congress, on the other hand, doesn't have that excuse.

[freedumb2003]

Nahhh! Couldn't be. Only 60,000 pages of codes and regs.
Anybody can handle that in a minute or two.

That is the out you need. Just say "I couldn't figure it out" and pull out a copy of this article. Then say "your boss couldn't either."

OMG -- I forgot this is a public forum! If any IRS Agents are out there, I have to 'fess up. My name is John Fng Kerry. I live in Massachusetts. I make money by marrying rich women so I don't understand this "paying tax" thing (for myself anyway). I am sure you understand.

[ancient_geezer]

Only works once to keep your rear end out of jail if you get a jury to go with you.

Unfortunately the court then turns around and orders you to pay up the amount of tax owed regardless. Tax collection is a civil action.

It is the same as a bill owed, you might get out of criminal fraud charges which require specific intent to defraud in defaulting on a bill owed. But you still get stuck with the bill.

Remember what happened to OJ?

Just getting out of the criminal case, doesn't protect one on the civil side.