Posted on 03/08/2005 9:20:44 AM PST by n-tres-ted
Our tax code is a mess for a reason. Special interests pay for special favors. And with 17,000 pages and counting, there's plenty of places for our politicians to hide the kickbacks. Meanwhile, all the exemptions, deductions, exceptions and special provisions reduce the tax base, which means higher tax rates and smaller incentives for individuals and companies to produce income. And whether the tax breaks are set in fine print or spelled out in bold type, they generally favor the rich, making our tax system less progressive than is generally believed.
No tax system is perfect, but ours is so awful that fundamental reform is the only option. Fundamental reform is not just a necessity; it's also an opportunity to stop taxing income and start taxing consumption. My colleagues and I have been studying income and consumption taxation via computer simulations for some time now. We've found that switching from taxing wage and capital income to taxing consumption can significantly improve economic efficiency and growth. What's more, it can make our tax system much more progressive and generationally equitable.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
You can't see the forest for the trees Willie. There or many other forms of consumption than retail sales which seems to be your only measure. Every dollar is "spent" unless it is literally hidden in a coffee can or under the mattress.
And the burden of taxation will fall most heavily on those on the lower rungs of the economic ladder because they must devote a larger proportion of their earnings to purchasing "necessities" (food, clothing, shelter, medicines).
As the article points out, the current system taxes income, not wealth. Taxing income is by definition, regressive, since the lower the income level, the higher percentage of total wealth is taxable. People in the lower-middle who are without shelters and sophisticated deductions, (people who can file via telephone) are currently paying at a higher rate than most of those in the upper end of the spectrum, albeit, most of it in the form of wage and hidden taxes on the goods they buy.
Under the Fair Tax, those at or below the poverty line would pay zero federal tax. As you go up the scale, the percentage paid would increase with the amount spent.
Instead of playing class-warfare tricks, how about you defend the current tax system that gives foreign manufacturers an automatic 20% price advantage over American manufactures at the wholesale level.
and you see a tax system that punishes the poor (not to mention the middle class) as fair?
wouldn't it be more fair to have everybody fill out their income, then calculate a percentage, and send that in? isn't that simpler than setting up a tax mechanism for point of sale collection, based upon purchases?
No I am not.
You're referring to a VAT and I'm talking about a NST.
No I wasn't. That tax on luxury goods was not on "value of labor added during production", a "VAT", but a tax at the "point-of-sale", like the NRST that you favor.
If you eliminate a companies' income tax, you lower their cost of operation..
Not if you put an NRST on every item the company buys, from raw to finised, in order to produce their product. American companies will be even worse off than they are now in foreign trade with an NRST. Many will just leave the US and go to countries that want the revenue. And there are plenty willing to welcome them. How's your Spanish or Hindu. Or maybe your kid's or your grandkids. Think about it.
So what. It's immoral and should be stopped this instant. I'm not kidding myself about that I assure you.
and that ewould be preferrable th thier knowing what you buy and when you buy it.
How the hell are they gonna know that? I don't recall anything in the Fair Tax bill that says everyone's purchases will be tracked.
Commie alert!
Don't bet on it.
"you really think that there won't be any tax on used cars?????"
Yes. Read the proposed legislation and you will see that the new car has already been taxed, therefore no new tax will be implemented.
"besides, aren't you really saying that only the rich should be able to buy new cars, anfd that the rest of us are opnly good enough for their cast-offs?"
Is that not the way it is today? If you can't afford a new Navigator, but you want that specific car, you buy a used one? Or you settle for a cheaper car? Besides, if you remove the embedded cost to manufacture a car and give the potential car buyer their whole paycheck then add the tax, their economic power remains about even. Therefore, if you can afford a new car today, you should be able to afford a new car under the NRST.
I'm talking about end user retail sales tax...
mfg's don't purchase retail! gezzzzzzz
The idea is to eliminate the possibility of using a tax code to favor anyone or anything. Hence no exceptions to consumption is taxed, investment is not.
Further, exempting items leads to higher rates on the remaining items. The broader the tax base, the lower the rate can be.
Today's prices of food, medicines and clothing are taxed today. That most people don't realize that today's purchases have prices that are inflated by 25% or so due to tax costs tell us just how good this present tax system is at hiding the true cost of government.
Separately, the nrst that's in Congress now has a provision that allows spending up to the poverty level to be tax free for everyone who is a legal resident with a valid SSN... analgous to today's standard deduction... simply a refund of taxes... but the nrst doesn't make you wait for the refund, they give it to you in advance monthly - no more interest free loans to Uncle Sam.
"why not tax everybody at the same rate - AND count all income the same (cap gains, dividends, etc.)"
For one thing, if we continue to tax corporate income and payroll at each stage of the production chain and imbed those costs into our prices to the end user, we will continue to struggle to compete in the global economy. Our balance of trade is now up to $600 billion/year (it has been growing dramatically for the past few years) and is a major reason that our economy can't produce enough good jobs, even though we are in the midst of an economic recovery.
Globalization is a huge economic force that is changing the economic dynamics of this planet in a big, big way. As Newt Gingrich recently said, we need reform in 3 areas to thrive in the new environment of the 21st century:
1. litigation
2. education
3. tax
Handicapping our producers in the world market is a luxury that we can no longer afford.
So you STILL have to report your family income and number of dependents in order to receive your monthly welfare "rebate" check.
But "rich" people get "rebates" too, don't they.
So I guess they're going to have to sign-up at the welfare office to get their checks, right?
You describe a flat tax on income. Works for me. The FairTax is flat tax on sales. That is regressive.
I agree that the government spends too much, but is taxing most people out of the market for most new items (cars, etc.) going to help the economy or ruin it? If the avergae Joe can no longer afford to buy a new car, what will happen to the automotive industry? the economy in general?
"Secondly, the 'FairTax' is fair because it treats every American exactly the same. "
it does nothing of the sort. if I don't buy things, then I don't pay the tax. if I have a mega income, than I pay less of a percentage of my income as tax, whilst the middle class pays more because they aren't making mega-bucks. That's hardly the same. If you want to stifle consumption, tax it. of course that also stifles production and markets, and the whole economy.
"It is also simple, visible, efficient and noninvasive. "
not from what I've heard from it;'s proponents. there are rebates (re-imbursements), certain items are taxed but others aren't. Hardly simple, maybe visible, but with thousands of retailers having the added burden of collecting this tax, it is hardly efficient nor non-invasive. The diff between collecting state sales taxes and collecting both state AND federal sales taxes (which will be different) is by definition complicated and costly. Those retailers able to survive the initial startup costs will pass those costs, as hidden costs upon the consumer.
And don't forget that it is very easy to add to the taxes by simply adding exempt items to the elligible list. and if you don't think the government knows and is preparing for this then you don't understand governments.
most arguments that I have heard in favor of the nrst don't fit the solution. if you don't like the manner in which the tax is collected, I agree with you, but this wholesale change cannot but devastate the economy. that means less consumption, less production, more unemployment, more "poor" less middle class.
is that the unsatted objective for this tax?
Yeah, yeah, yeah... I know...
The "Fair Tax' is merely a prelude to "harmonization" with the global internet tax.
"Why wouldn't the 'fair tax' will suppress new home construction (since it creates an incentive to purchase existing homes)?"
Why would it? The home will cost about the same (after-tax) that new homes do now, and you would have your entire paycheck to save up for the down payment.
No.
The number of dependents with valid SSNs is needed to refund the right amount. If they don't know how many people live there, how can they prefund the right amount of tax? Of course, there is no obligation to receive the prefund. You may forfeit it. I'm sure they wouldn't mind.
I wonder how many people who can claim the standard deduction don't claim it today....
"Not if you put an NRST on every item the company buys, from raw to finised, in order to produce their product."
Business inputs are not taxed; only final sales to consumers.
I see a system of voluntary taxation as the ONLY moral system. What's fair is that under the NRST you decide how much money you wish to pay in taxes. What I think is that bringing in the concept of class at all into the argument about taxation is immoral and patently unfair. Choice is the key concept here.
wouldn't it be more fair to have everybody fill out their income
Nope. MY income is MY business (and my wifes in case she's reading). The police powers of the IRS must die a quick and painful death.
isn't that simpler than setting up a tax mechanism for point of sale collection
It already exists.
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.