FairTax Summit in Florida

August 20th, 2004 | AFFT

[Remember_Salamis]

FairTax Bump!

[GSlob]

There is nothing fair in it: replacement of income tax by a consumption tax means stealthy introduction of double taxation on every after-tax saver; pretty much like death taxes, but this time on people still alive.

[ETERNAL WARMING]

The only "fair tax" is no tax at all. I have a better idea. Instead of imposing the flat tax or fair tax on taxpayers, why don't we follow the Constitutional provision and add the tax via tariff on all goods and services entering the country? I know. I don't have enough cash to buy the politicians off. Too bad. I'd love to keep the money I earned.

[ancient_geezer]

A Taxreform bump for you all.

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

[ancient_geezer]

Instead of imposing the flat tax or fair tax on taxpayers, why don't we follow the Constitutional provision and add the tax via tariff on all goods and services entering the country?

 

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

• "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.

 

So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?
---Walter Williams

 

To remove perception of the tax burdens of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Federal tax rates are high and government grows ever larger because a majority of the electorate do not perceive proportionately the burden their demand for largesse imposes on the minority of citizens.

The siren call for representation without taxation is the formula that got us where we are at today. The ability to hide or disguise taxation from the view of large sectors of the electorate allows the Congress to get away with the creation of the evergrowing monster that it fosters.

 

Federalist #35:

"Suppose, as has been contended for, the federal power of taxation were to be confined to duties on imports, it is evident that the government, for want of being able to command other resources, would frequently be tempted to extend these duties to an injurious excess. There are persons who imagine that they can never be carried to too great a length; since the higher they are, the more it is alleged they will tend to discourage an extravagant consumption, to produce a favorable balance of trade, and to promote domestic manufactures. But all extremes are pernicious in various ways. Exorbitant duties on imported articles would beget a general spirit of smuggling; which is always prejudicial to the fair trader, and eventually to the revenue itself: they tend to render other classes of the community tributary, in an improper degree, to the manufacturing classes, to whom they give a premature monopoly of the markets; they sometimes force industry out of its more natural channels into others in which it flows with less advantage; and in the last place, they oppress the merchant, who is often obliged to pay them himself without any retribution from the consumer. When the demand is equal to the quantity of goods at market, the consumer generally pays the duty; but when the markets happen to be overstocked, a great proportion falls upon the merchant, and sometimes not only exhausts his profits, but breaks in upon his capital."

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. This is an extremity to which no government will of choice accede. Revenue, therefore, must be had at all events. In this country, if the principal part be not drawn from commerce, it must fall with oppressive weight upon land."

• "The ability of a country to pay taxes must always be proportioned, in a great degree, to the quantity of money in circulation, and to the celerity with which it circulates. Commerce, contributing to both these objects, must of necessity render the payment of taxes easier, and facilitate the requisite supplies to the treasury."

Federalist #21:

"Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. "

"It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption that they contain in their own nature a security against excess.

They prescribe their own limit, which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed - that is, an extension of the revenue."

[ARCADIA]

Forget about a "fair tax" and start thinking about what we can do to reduce the size of government at all levels. It doesn't matter what scheme you come up with to fund it; the basic problem is that we can not afford to carry that much overhead.

[EternalVigilance]

I intend to come if at all possible.

The FairTax is the only viable fundamental tax reform proposal on the table.

Everything else is a bad joke.

[EternalVigilance]

It doesn't matter what scheme you come up with to fund it

Sorry, you're wrong. The method of collection is HUGE.

Read Hamilton's words in the Federalist. The Founders understood that THE WAY you collect taxes is every bit as important as HOW MUCH you collect.

[ARCADIA]

[b]The method of collection is HUGE.[/b]

...and, you will not be able to touch it without affecting hundreds of thousands of pages of special interest financing imbedded within our tax code. Not just the budgeted stuff, but, also, very significantly, all of the unbudgeted items.

[Taxman]

Drive a stake through the heart of the income tax and the IRS bump!

[ancient_geezer]

Forget about a "fair tax" and start thinking about what we can do to reduce the size of government at all levels.

 

This chart does not look very promising for the future
financial well-being of our offspring, does it?

TAXES

 

100years of history under the income tax makes it clear that we will not get there (smaller government) from here (the income tax).

The NRST will allow every voter (for the first time) an opportunity to actually see what their government costs them on every receipt. It is only out of knowledge, that one can expect an electorate to exercise it's most important function, that "Eternal Vigilence" that is so necessary to preserving liberty.

[Badray]

"There is nothing fair in it: replacement of income tax by a consumption tax means stealthy introduction of double taxation on every after-tax saver; pretty much like death taxes, but this time on people still alive."

I have to assume from your comments that you are not familiar with the FairTax plan, are you? There are safeguards built into the proposal to address each of your concerns. Please read the bill and then come on board.

[Badray]

"The only "fair tax" is no tax at all. I have a better idea. Instead of imposing the flat tax or fair tax on taxpayers, why don't we follow the Constitutional provision and add the tax via tariff on all goods and services entering the country?"

I like it.

Now how do we get there? Who will propose your plan in Congress? How many cosponsors will you have on the bill? When can you expect passage?

Yes, I'm being a bit of a smart @ss, but you're right. That is the system the Founders provided and it worked for funding the government for 150 years. Trouble is, who follows that old Constitution thingy these days in Congress? Do most Americans even know that it exists?

I believe that the only way to get back to what you are proposing will be to first change to this system so that EVERYONE can see the cost of government and that they have a responsibility to share that cost. The system is fair and easy to understand and transparent. No exemptions or deductions or exclusions. Only after we make people aware of the cost of government can we have a hope to reduce the size and cost of it.

Currently, about 40% of the people do not pay federal income taxes for one reason or another. And many more than that get a government check each month. We may soon get to a tipping point where there is no chance of fixing this. There will be too many people who will vote away more of your paycheck.

I agree with you in theory. In practice, I have to be more practical and that's why I support the FairTax.

[Badray]

"Forget about a "fair tax" and start thinking about what we can do to reduce the size of government at all levels. It doesn't matter what scheme you come up with to fund it; the basic problem is that we can not afford to carry that much overhead."

You too, are right about the size and cost of government, but you have the cart before the horse.

Until people realize the cost of government and that they have a responsibility to pay for it, we'll never get there. If you don't pay for your lunch, do you care what it costs? How willing would you be to eliminate your lunch from the list of freebies?

Let's get this plan into place and watch for wonderful changes to begin to happen -- in the economy and in government.

[Badray]

"...and, you will not be able to touch it without affecting hundreds of thousands of pages of special interest financing imbedded within our tax code. Not just the budgeted stuff, but, also, very significantly, all of the unbudgeted items."

And that is the beauty of this. The FairTax is a revenue bill, not a spending bill. The revenue will be the same and so will the spending -- until people see what they pay for government and that ANY new spending program or increase WILL affect them.

[lewislynn]

replacement of income tax by a consumption tax means stealthy introduction of double taxation on every after-tax saver;

-------

I have to assume from your comments that you are not familiar with the FairTax plan, are you?

Yes.

There are safeguards built into the proposal to address each of your concerns. Please read the bill

I've read the bill, I must have missed the safeguards part...

Post them.

[Taxman]

I should attend -- have to check my calendar and my checkbook!

[smokeyb]

replacement of income tax by a consumption tax means stealthy introduction of double taxation on every after-tax saver;

I have read HR25 too. Show ME where the double taxation is. Taxes are only on NEW goods and services-end user. It gives you the chance to actually NOT pay any taxes if you want. The essentials that you buy which will be taxed ? You get an up front rebate. Where is the double taxation ?

[Your Nightmare]

The double taxation comes from people who have already paid federal income taxes on their savings would then have to pay federal sales tax when they tried to spend their savings.