Posted on 08/01/2004 6:08:53 PM PDT by NeoCaveman
A domestic centerpiece of the Bush/GOP agenda for a second Bush term is getting rid of the Internal Revenue Service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
The Speaker of the House will push for replacing the nation's current tax system with a national sales tax or a value added tax, Hill sources tell DRUDGE.
"People ask me if I’m really calling for the elimination of the IRS, and I say I think that’s a great thing to do for future generations of Americans," Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert explains in his new book, to be released on Wednesday.
"Pushing reform legislation will be difficult. Change of any sort seldom comes easy. But these changes are critical to our economic vitality and our economic security abroad," Hastert declares in SPEAKER: LESSONS FROM FORTY YEARS IN COACHING AND POLITICS.
"“If you own property, stock, or, say, one hundred acres of farmland and tax time is approaching, you don’t want to make a mistake, so you’re almost obliged to go to a certified public accountant, tax preparer, or tax attorney to help you file a correct return. That costs a lot of money. Now multiply the amount you have to pay by the total number of people who are in the same boat. You can’t. No one can because precise numbers don’t exist. But we can stipulate that we’re talking about a huge amount. Now consider that a flat tax, national sales tax, or VAT would not only eliminate the need to do this, it could also eliminate the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) itself and make the process of paying taxes much easier."
"By adopting a VAT, sales tax, or some other alternative, we could begin to change productivity. If you can do that, you can change gross national product and start growing the economy. You could double the economy over the next fifteen years. All of a sudden, the problem of what future generations owe in Social Security and Medicare won’t be so daunting anymore. The answer is to grow the economy, and the key to doing that is making sure we have a tax system that attracts capital and builds incentives to keep it here instead of forcing it out to other nations."
You must be some kind of
Bulls-eye! So my question is, How do we get these "leaders" to relinquish this power?
It would take another persuader of Reagan's ilk combined with a Republican majority in both houses; and all of the Republicans must possess a full set of 'nads.
That's a tall order in my opinion.
That's a pretty bombastic statement. I assume that you have data to back up that assertion, right?Name me another entitlement program where every person in America is entitled to a check every month from the government. Nothing else even comes close.
41 democrat and RINO Senators make all this talk of IRS elimination, NRST, flat tax, etc. a waste of time.
I would love to see it while I am alive. Of course I would like to win the lottery too.
Everybody knows that if they eliminate the income tax and the IRS that the republicans wouldn't have anything to campaign about and the democRATS couldn't campaign that rich are not paying enough. Both parties would actually have to spend time on issues that make the country safer and stronger. We wouldn't want to do that now would we?
"So my question is, How do we get these 'leaders' to relinquish this power?"
The ultimate power in our system is through the ballot box. We have demonstrated that in Georgia. A few years ago, FairTax supporters were ignored. Now it is typical for political candidates to try to position themselves as the most effective advocate in advancing the proposal. That is, if they are running as a Republican.
The difference is that the issue is now perceived as one that moves votes. It may not be tens of thousands of votes, but enough to make a difference in a tight election. Bob Barr made the mistake of underestimating this factor in Georgia's 7th congressional district a couple of years ago.
There are signs that this is happening outside of Georgia this year. There are significantly more candidates running on the issue this year than ever before.
Our system really does work.
Under the status quo, which you support, the vast bulk of our tax load is HIDDEN.No it's not. I can tell you exactly how much I paid in income and payroll (the bulk of our tax load) taxes last year. I would have to add up every purchase I made last year to tell you what I paid in state sales taxes, which, for all but the most anal retentive spenders, would be virtually impossible.
"Name me another entitlement program where every person in America is entitled to a check every month from the government. Nothing else even comes close."
You are calling it an entitlement, rather than a rebate, which means that you anticipate that consumption would drop to zero immediately after enactment. What you did NOT say is that there is an entitlement element to the FCA.
Everyone in America would immediately stop buying groceries, gasoline, new consumer items, right? Please show me the economic study that supports that forecast. If you are counting the entire FCA as an entitlement, that has to be your underlying assumption.
BTW, what ever happened to Liberal Larry?
"I can tell you exactly how much I paid in income and payroll (the bulk of our tax load) taxes last year."
So how much were your indirect taxes and compliance costs which were imbedded in the prices of consumer items you bought?
I doubt that seriously. And even if you did go back and make the calculations, because of Withholding the money has been taken at the wellhead so that you never had the money in your hands to begin with...in other words taken in a manner designed to make you notice it the least.
And there isn't a chance in hades you can tell me how much you paid in the embedded portion of every single product and service you purchased.
Compliance costs and the tax burden passed along to the consumer is so hidden that only a tiny fraction of Americans even understand their existence.
You are calling it an entitlement, rather than a rebate, which means that you anticipate that consumption would drop to zero immediately after enactment.Because it's not a rebate. A rebate is a deduction or return from a payment. The FCA is given for sales up to the poverty level whether you spend up to the poverty level or not. Everyone who spends less than the poverty level profits. Which is virtually everyone in poverty.
So how much were your indirect taxes and compliance costs which were imbedded in the prices of consumer items you bought?Those aren't the "bulk of our tax load."
If you would like to be added to this ping list let me know.
John Linder in the House & Saxby Chambliss Senate, offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and payroll taxes outright, and provide a IRS free replacement in the form of a retail sales tax:
H.R.25, S.1493
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.Refer for additional information: http://www.fairtax.org & http://www.salestax.org
The fraction of folks who would receive more in rebates than they actually spent will be small, and is an acceptable tradeoff compared to the needless complication of having to track exactly how much each individual had paid.
You are making the perfect the enemy of the good.
If you can't have something that is in your opinion perfect, you aren't willing to let the American people reap the huge economic benefits of this change.
I repeat my earlier claim:
You have no positive solution of your own...only base criticism.
You are fighting to protect the status quo.
The Dims will see both as "unfair" because they tax everyone at the same rate.
I doubt that seriously. And even if you did go back and make the calculations, because of Withholding the money has been taken at the wellhead so that you never had the money in your hands to begin with...in other words taken in a manner designed to make you notice it the least.I have a pay stub in my hand right now that list exactly how much was taken out of my paycheck in income and payroll taxes (22.85614% of my earnings - although this is my withholdings, not final tax paid). And I get a W2 every year that list the total withholdings. And I fill out a 1040 (don't you) every year that calculates my exact total tax owed.
Actually, they are.
Compliance costs plus taxes on business definitely exceed personal income taxes.
Some of the studies that have been done even have compliance costs alone in excess of personal income taxes.
If my memory serves, it was Cato's studies that had those costs as being that high.
Thanks!
NO....NOT a VAT...its added to EVERY transaction beween producer and consumer....and it REALLY really jacks up the price and adds to inflation (like in EU).
A FLAT TAX 13% and NO deductions like in Russia is MUCH much better.....(that would tik off the lefties....ha ha)
Be careful what you ask for you might get it.
RUSSIA: PART TWO OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION TAX CODE
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/fullcomm/106cong/4-11-00/4-11kotl.htm
"Robert Hall, one of the originators of the proposal(Flat Tax), 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."
The Flat Tax; Chapter 3, by Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka
| Here is the logic of our system, stripped to basics: We want to tax consumption. The public does one of two things with its income—spends it or invests it. We can measure consumption as income minus investment. A really simple tax would just have each firm pay tax on the total amount of income generated by the firm less that firm’s investment in plant and equipment. The value-added tax works just that way. But a value-added tax is unfair because it is not progressive. That’s why we break the tax in two. The firm pays tax on all the income generated at the firm except the income paid to its workers. The workers pay tax on what they earn, and the tax they pay is progressive. To measure the total amount of income generated at a business, the best approach is to take the total receipts of the firm over the year and subtract the payments the firm has made to its workers and suppliers. This approach guarantees a comprehensive tax base. The successful value-added taxes in Europe work this way. The base for the business tax is the following: Total revenue from sales of goods and services less purchases of inputs from other firms less wages, salaries, and pensions paid to workers less purchases of plant and equipment The other piece is the wage tax. Each family pays 19 percent of its wage, salary, and pension income over a family allowance (the allowance makes the system progressive). The base for the compensation tax is total wages, salaries, and retirement benefits less the total amount of family allowances. |
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.