There he goes again ...LOL! You don't even know WTF we are talking about!
BTW, is it hard to walk in those big shoes?
Posted on 05/12/2005 7:46:54 PM PDT by Your Nightmare
Members of the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform on May 11 expressed concerns over the FairTax national retail sales tax, a plan that has emerged as an alternative with a major grass-roots push.
Panel chair Connie Mack, vice chair John B. Breaux, and other members worried the plan would be difficult to enforce, would be regressive, and would require a high rate in order to take in enough money to fund the government.
Breaux raised concerns that the proposed 23 percent (tax-inclusive) rate would not be sufficient to raise the revenue necessary to fund the government. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that it would take as much as a 57 percent (tax-exclusive) rate to be revenue-neutral. Further, Breaux said he thought exemptions that would be carved out to make the sales tax progressive would also complicate it.
Mack, who raised concerns similar to his fellow panelists', said he was "intrigued" by the plan. "But if it's such a great idea, why haven't other political entities around the world pursued it?" he asked.
Americans for Fair Taxation Executive Director Tom Wright emphasized that the plan emerged after "thorough academic research" and "thorough polling" The strong grass-roots push has resulted in some of the group's 600,000 members appearing at each of the panel's hearings and has inspired a large comment-writing campaign to the panel in support of the plan.
Sales tax advocates were among the 20 witnesses who gathered before the panel for a full day of testimony on tax reform proposals. Although the group has held several other hearings in Washington and around the country, the May 11 meeting was its first hearing on specific reform plans since Bush appointed the panel in January. The panel has been charged with identifying tax reform proposals that are progressive, encourage charitable giving and home purchases, and are revenue-neutral. The proposals are due by July 31.
Among the tax replacement and reform plans presented to the panel were the value added tax, consumption-based tax, and the flat tax, as well as proposals that would use the current income tax as the foundation.
Witnesses generally claimed that theirs was the fairest, simplest, most flexible, most transparent revenue-neutral proposal that would improve economic growth and savings while meeting the president's criteria of encouraging charitable giving and home buying. Witnesses presenting consumption-based plans praised their overhaul as taking millions of low-income taxpayers off the rolls, being easy to transition to on a worldwide basis, and including safeguards to prevent new loopholes that would result in increased complexity down the road.
Tax reform panel members, who agree the current tax system needs to be fixed, grilled witnesses without revealing whether they will ultimately endorse a consumption- or income-based tax or a different mixture of the two.
There he goes again ...
He larned that from looey - and , see, there he goes again ...
Seems to be the way he earns his livelihood.
More "looey-arithmetic" ...
It's no trick - and no illusion. The FairTax bill is designed to be revenue neutral in its present form and ALSO abolished the Income tax (and many others) along with the IRS.
In addition it calls for repealing the 16th amendment (but cannot do so directly within the bill since a constitutional amendment is legislatively a different breed of cat than a tax bill).
The tax bill is not a spending bill and identifies no such requirements within the bill. It does, however, offer a mechanism for us to make people aware of how much government costs on each and every receipt. That should help irate taxpayers hammer on their Congresscats to spend less.
As it is those persons can bob and weave hiding taxes (and therefore how much they really blow) from the present taxpayers. It should be obvious on these threads that most of the status quo defenders (who claim to not be) don't understand how much they now pay in federal taxes.
Oh they understand, but they would personally lose money if the IRS was abolished.
You don't seem to have read the FairTax bill. Please look at it on the THOMAS website and see that it is NOT an additional tax but abolishes the income tax and the IRS and calls for repeal of the 15th amendment.
Hybrid taxes (VAT and income, sales and income, etc.) are monstrous and you'll find that most FairTax supporters both realize this and are adamently opposed to any hybrid tax system. That's why it is necessary for all of us to hammer on our Congressmen to pass the FairTax bill pretty much its present form.
You are no doubt correct, and I think several of us could name them - but I think most Freepers can quickly identify them.
Good ... since you know how much you pay; based on your gross income what % do you now pay in federal taxes?
You needn't give dollar figures, just % of the gross income rounded, say, to the nearest integer percentage point.
I'm sure you'll have other questions after your reading so just post them on the thread and someone will answer them. Keep in mind, please, that there are a number of vehement FairTax opponents (or status quo defenders) such as Willie Green, Your Nightmare, lewislynn, and even others so please keep that in mind when judging their posts.
Heaven forbid you should read any opposing view points with facts to back them up. That's what really worries the pigs of the threads. That's why they go out of their way to try and discredit us while avoiding the actuall subject of the thread...Don't take my word for it. just look at all of the pigs posts that lack substance.
BTW, have any of the fairtaxers told you the actual rate in sales tax terms is not 23% but 30%? And that the tax is "of the gross payment", which means there would be a federal sales tax on other taxes, fee's, excises and everything else included in a "gross payment"?
Did they tell you for example that "any government" is a "taxable employer" and ALL government employee's (from Presidents to peons, including the military) wages, salaries and benefits would be taxed an additonal 30%, increasing the cost of ALL governments (federal,state, local) by a HUGE amount?...Did they tell you where that money would come from?
Did they tell you that your income/wage would still be required to be reported?
Did they tell you that in order to pay for the phony rebate and tax avoidance the actual rate needed to fund the government is increased by over 27%?
Did they tell you their economist likes the fairtax because it taxes current (already taxed) wealth?...Did they tell you the same economist thinks that homeowners should pay a sales tax on the "imputed rent" (rental value) of their own homes? and that the tax rate should be increased 25%?
Did they tell you the law allows unelected bureaucrats at Social Security to "determine the rate" every year without a vote from Congress or a signature from the President?
Did they tell you prices would drop the amount of the tax (23% or more)?...Did they say where in the law it says businesses would be required to do that?...It doesn't say it and they not only won't but can't, most products aren't even manufactured here to be subject to the income/payroll tax.
This will be the part where they simply call me a liar...
I pay a gross of 16% and a net of about 20%. Gross meaning before all sorts of business deductions and net including employers share of payroll tax and my self employment tax. We have a lot of personal and business deductions to account for the disparity. My wife and I are both at least partially self employed so the income tax becomes the best way to account for business costs. In NH, we have no business tax for our kind of business and we have no income tax. That is why, other than the weather, NH is the finest place on earth to live.
There he goes again ...LOL! You don't even know WTF we are talking about!
You didn't think i'd take the time, did you?
CC said something different than you said. Go ahead, admit the difference, then minimize it. It's the way you always do.
When finally caught, you say, " yeah well, it doesn't matter much anyway"... Oh the ways of a liar.
You're so busted as a liar. BTW, what rate would be, say, 25% greater than zero?
You didn't think i'd take the time, did you?Correct. TaxAnalysts provides resources to the 'industry.' Their bias should be obvious to all but those who are so blind that they refuse to see.OK, in those posts CG said "Correct. TaxAnalysts provides resources to the 'industry.' Their bias should be obvious to all but those who are so blind that they refuse to see." and I asked "Any specifics of this report you want to point out as being biased?"
When finally caught, you say, " yeah well, it doesn't matter much anyway"... Oh the ways of a liar.Yes...the ways of a liar.
You're so busted as a liar.LOL! I just asked CG if she saw any bias in this report! ROTFLMAO! And you lied about what I said and now you struggling! Busted, indeed!
BTW, what rate would be, say, 25% greater than zero?Uh, there is no rate 25% greater than zero. You can have a 25% rate and you can have a 0% rate, but you can't have a rate 25% greater than 0%. This is grade school math. Anything multiplied by zero is zero.
It's just fine for anyone to read opposing viewpoints, especially with facts to back them up as you say.
Unfortunately for you that leaves yours off the list as most would soon determine when they read the bill and find out that most of your contentions are like passing gas in church. If he also happens to have a calculator handy, you're dead meat.
I won't comment on your "liar" claim (since that would be kicking a guy when he's down) but your "simple" reference certainly fits you to a T since almost everything you offer in your post has been repeatedly shown to be nonsense - normally, several times over.
Someone once said that mental illness could be defined as someone saying and doing he same incorrect/illogical thing over and over hoping that the next time he says it it will come true. Keep it up, looey!
No, that's not what you asked her.
25 more than zero is..... drum roll please....
Does that include SE taxes and any gift and/or estate taxes you might be having to pay? Be sure you have figured in the amount you spend for tax compliance and preparation since that, in effect is a government tax even if you deducct the expense (that only lowers the actual tax paid a bit). If you truly get by with 16% of you gross income, you are certainly well below the norm. A figure of 23% would be revenue neutral.
Next you might use one of the samples in this link to see how you would do under the FairTax (and keep in mind the 20% or more price decrease):
http://www.fairtax.org/tax_returns.html
... when doing this you should be getting pretty close to what your tax situation is under the FairTax, but you might also factor in some savings amount (not taxed) and some savings (or other capital) income (interest, dividends, etc.). That reduces what you would spend for consumption ... which is under your control as to amount and timing (as opposed to the situation with the present tax system).
Notice that there is an option to submit your currect circumstances to the AFFT for calculation - and there is NO tax compliance/preparation expense involved.
You can also note using other links on the AFFT site that both the income tax (plus other taxes as well) AND the IRS
are both done away with and the 16th amendment is called upon to be repealed (which can't be done without a replacement tax plan in place).
Better yet, read at least the first part or hr25, the FairTax bill, itself to see these things are indeed there. It is easily obtained from the THOMAS website and easily read in understandable English.
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.