Replies

Well you seems to be saying that the NRST would be a fairer system and becuase it is a fairer system it will not be adopted. You might be right but that is not the fault of the system. Re earned income credit. As I understand it everyone gets a rebate of several thousnad dollars to compendsate for taxes paid on thier first 20,000 or so of income. The idea being to lesson the tax burden the first 20,000 or so of income which in the case of poor people is thier only income. So the system bends over backward to protect the income of poor people from taxes. Also I would tink that it would be possible to apply for earned income assistance, maybe not in the same way, but still possible.

I guess all I'm saying is that, in theory, the NRST is more fair than a progressive income tax system. As soon as everyone starts getting refunds to eliminate a dollar level for taxation you've reduced some of that fairness. If an income tax system is retained for the "rich", the fairness is even more tainted along with the promise to eliminate tax preparers. If business transactions are exempt from the tax, thus eliminating corporate taxation, additional tax burden will shift to individuals with no guarantee of offsetting consumer savings. Individuals intent on avoiding the tax will establish business activities to "shelter" income thus bringing back the accountants and compliance monitors.

Although it might be a great campaign issue, I don't think it would ever provide the benefits its dreamers foresee. I guess I see that as the difference between "theory" and "reality".

Also I would tink that it would be possible to apply for earned income assistance, maybe not in the same way, but still possible.

Not if there is no income tax.
Maybe there would still be welfare and AFDC.