Only, I don't pay yours.
You pay more of my tax share with the federal income & payroll tax system today than you would under an National Retail Sales Tax implemented by HR25. That I can say for a certainty.
I pay no income or payroll taxes today. I would be paying net federal tax under the NRST proposed in HR25.
Why should/does anyone care what you want? After all, we all have the right to be every bit as selfish as you so obviously are.
And no, I won't pay your business taxes for you.
I don't have a business. But I do manage to do reasonably well with tax free bonds and no income taxes whatever.
Well, I prefer to shoulder a proportion of the burden of government commensurate with my income -- having already paid income taxes on my savings.
I said propotionate, not a proportion. Look it up sometime. Proportionate mean everyone pays the same rate.
And no, you don't get to con me into paying your business-income taxes out of my hard-earned savings.
I done have a business, but those who do gurarantee you pay out of their gross sales receipts.
The following article covers the mechanism on how the current Federal tax system propagates and is embedded into consumption expenditure.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
Fairer to tax people on what they're getting out of life in the form of income, than on what it takes to sustain life with bread and shelter.
Hate to be the one to inform you but you are getting it from both ends today. Take it from your income before you can spend it on bread and shelter as an income and payroll tax on the individual. Then hit you again through prices on the business side of income/payroll taxes. Business only remits taxes to government out of sales receipts. That is their source of revenue for paying any tax at all, think about that.
Under HR25, sale tax is rebated for all expenditure up to the poverylevel. The HHS poverty level is a well-accepted, long-used poverty-level calculation based on the cost of a healthy diet comprising 1/3 of total family budget value thus the povertylevel is set at 3 times that expenditure in a base year fixed in 1969 dollars updated annually for CPI.
It would also present the social policy advantage of penalizing storage of wealth, the most regressive kind of economy there is.
You want to show us how an "income tax" tax accrued wealth that is kept out of production and not subject to "income" taxes? Them taxfree muni bonds, and SS/Security means you don't get to touch my income nor my wealth such as it is. You are currently paying taxes for me to live off of. Thank you very much.
Just tax total assets (and execute anyone hiding them
Ohh, so now you are into federal property taxes. Good luck collecting on that scheme.
-- do you have an account in the Caymans, by the way?),
Nah, don't need one. Got all I need from your paying SS/Medicare and income taxes and local taxes to support me.
get that capital moving again, get that velocity of money up a bit.
I certainly do by spending 100% of what I got coming in. That income that the feds don't tax and have no income tax proposal whatever that will tax any of it. Keep smiling.
Somehow I don't think you'd like that idea. You'd rather tax poor people's pittances they pay for Moon Pies and RC Colas, and jack up the cost of a glass of lemonade, than take an audit from the IRS yourself on your hidden income sources and off-balance-sheet transactions.
Hey I love the idea, you're the one paying for all my goodies now, through state, local taxes and federal income/payroll taxes.
Since you've started in on invidious imputations and assumptions and all.
The only one makeing invidious imputations and assumptions has been you. Quite off the mark as well.
Oh, and by the way -- has anyone mentioned to you that you spam?
Lets see, spam is unsolicited email for commercial purpose. Sorry I don't spam. I do however respond to commentary on FR, and replies or questions directed at me.
Hmmm, you don't know my tax status, and you are making a very rash statement unless your real taxable income is zero.
If you're 100% invested in tax-free municipals (assuming you are arguendo), you're missing some good income/capital appreciation opportunities and exposing yourself to the other tax neither of us has discussed -- inflation -- but then, that's your business.
Unless you are paying zero federal taxes, I assure you, you are standing on a banana peel.
I pay no income or payroll taxes today. I would be paying net federal tax under the NRST proposed in HR25.
If your financial structure is that simple, then your enthusiasm for NRST is self-wounding, raising questions about your common sense, or about your having told the whole story.
[You quoting me] And no, I won't pay your business taxes for you.
[Your reply] I don't have a business. But I do manage to do reasonably well with tax free bonds and no income taxes whatever.
If you say so, one for you, I assumed you had to be a business proprietor or manager on the make. That's who this bill is written for.
[Quoting me] Well, I prefer to shoulder a proportion of the burden of government commensurate with my income -- having already paid income taxes on my savings.
[You, replying] I said propo[r]tionate, not a proportion. Look it up sometime. Proportionate mean everyone pays the same rate.
One, I don't think your usage niggle makes a point. What I meant was perfectly clear, and perfectly fair, and it doesn't have to mirror your proposition. Now that my income has declined, I want the same deal I got when the government taxed my income as a good way to skin me harder as an object of tax policy. I was taxed on income then, and I want to be taxed on income now, same-same. I don't want the Congress going back and rewriting the tax code just to keep me in the barrel, in order to favor someone else.
That's why I favor a flat tax. Flat, in the name of fairness, but a tax on income nevertheless, in fairness to myself. Except for my cap gains and other investment income, those savings not in my IRA are after tax, and I'm damn well determined to keep them that way. I am absolutely not in favor of rewriting the tax code in order to target the Boomers' savings for the financial benefit of the business wing of the GOP, which is exactly what I think this proposed legislation is all about.