[Marine_Uncle]

1. 23% tax on high cost items, lets say an automobile, could have a gross effect on lower wage earners. Imagine a person that must replace an old auto, makes just above the "poverty point", having to pay an extra 23%.
2. Bottom line is for those in higher middle and high tax brackets, who can could afford the extra %23 percent on every item they purchase, this scheme might not sounds so harsh, but for the rest, it could be a real nightmare. To just say, well do without, seems a little cruel. How about the millions of elderly that really only get a fixed retirement, and are already stretched to the limits with paying mortgages, health costs, etc.. How will they fair in such a scheme. How about the many people who have lost professional jobs, and now slave at super low salaries, just to make ends meet, how will they fair in such a scheme.
What on the surface might appear attractive could become a super burden on more people then we realize. And the idea that "well those at or below the poverty line" will get some type of "voucher", means all in that catagory must somehow come under a federally controlled system....THINK.
It will the final legitimalization of what has been in manys eyes an attempt to control vast numbers of people in this country. Food stamps, special programs in some states where low income individuals have state controlled accounts that govern how much money they may spend a month etc.

On the surface, this scheme may sound fine to those who earn a decent salary, or perhaps are simply blessed through family with a lot of money, but for many, and I am talking about vast amounts of very low income honest hard working Americans this could the a super nightmare.
I don't think the proponents of such a scheme are representing our citizen's best interests in this case.
Why can't we just push for a much more streamlined fair tax code for all? Must we disfranchise a part of our citizentry for the sake of only a part that would perhaps benifit in the long run from such a scheme.
Hey $50K earner, what are you going to do when your job goes bye bye, and you simply cannot find a job that will provide lets say $25K of income. You will be shit out of luck!

[kevkrom]

having to pay an extra 23%

This is a common fallacy -- the "extra 23%" concept. This misses the fact that current prices are artifically inflated by 20-25% on average due to the effects of an income tax. Remember, the NRST is a replacement for existing taxes, not an additional tax.

[jimthewiz]

1. 23% tax on high cost items, lets say an automobile, could have a gross effect on lower wage earners. Imagine a person that must replace an old auto, makes just above the "poverty point", having to pay an extra 23%

You are ignoring the fact that your paycheck will not be reduced 25%-40% by state and federal income tax withheld. So you will have more money to spend and some of it will go to pay the sales tax.

[numberonepal]

... "poverty point", having to pay an extra 23%

Only if he buys a NEW car.

[Big Red Clay]

Your concerns are valid M.U. Let me make a couple of comments that may clear things up for you. First, the low income guy who goes to buy that car would, most likely, buy a used car, correct? In that case he would not pay the sales tax. The sales tax is on NEW goods only. Taxes are only paid on an item once. Therefore, no taxes on this purchase.

As far as the vouchers go, let me clarify that as well. EVERYBODY gets one. It is not based on income. It is based on the idea that no one (from Bill Gates on down, as long as they have a Social Security number) should have to pay the NRST on basic goods and services and is based on a percentage of the estimated policy level. Therefore, no govt control.

The biggest part of the sales tax concept that folks I speak with cannot wrap their minds around (due to the fact that we are conditioned by the current situation to think that way) is that folks WILL TAKE HOME ALL OF THE MONEY THAT THEY MAKE!! No more losing half their check to income tax and FICA deductions. This would mean an immediate pay increase of about 15% across the board for the low income folks who dont pay any income tax but still pay FICA taxes. Not to mention the eventual effect that the NRST will have on retail prices. This change would be a big benefit to low/fixed income citizens. This is outside of the moral benefit to all of us of having the government OUT of our financial business.

[WhiteGuy]

"On the surface, this scheme may sound fine to those who earn a decent salary, or perhaps are simply blessed through family with a lot of money, but for many, and I am talking about vast amounts of very low income honest hard working Americans this could the a super nightmare."

Those who "earn a decent salary" are the ones paying the lion's share of ALL taxes now.

If this proposed reform eliminated capital gains taxes and corporate income taxes, it could be argued that the inflow of new investment dollars would generate millions of new jobs.

Food for thought

[Sprite518]

You need to read the fair tax because it covers that part too. Let me give you an example how the poor, and retired benefit. Aside from not paying any taxes(working poor)(401Ks for the retired) here is how they would benefit too. This is just an example. Let's say you have a family of 4 making $20,000 a year. Which is considered the poor. Anyone who is considered poor would be compensated for the 23% Sales tax. Therefore, if you have a family that makes $20,000 a year. Then the government would send a check for 23% of 20,000. I believe that is $4600 to cover that 23% Sales tax. Now instead of getting it once a year the family would receive a check for $383.33 each month to cover the tax. What do you think of that?