Oh, but it has everything to do with marginal income tax rates. At present these are so high that many people are tempted to evade (but most, being basically honest, do not ... don't know about you, though).
The "sales tax rate" of 7% you proffer probably isn't accurate but forget that for now. You're adding percentages that are derived from different bases perhaps because you know no better (or, more likely, because you're just being dishonest and trying to fool people).
Present sales taxes in states are all over the map in what they do/don't tax and most are replete with many exclusions/exemptions and things not taxed. Almost none of them tax services as does the FairTax.
In fact, many (if not most) states will probably elect to conform their sales taxes with the FairTax once it becomes law. They would be both reasonable and wise to do so. Doing so will about triple the tax base when one considers that services are typically half or more of the revenue and having no exemptions/deductions will easily boost it to a factor of three times the present base. This would mean that a state with a 7% rate presently would have it drop to 2% or 3% or possibly even less while raising the same tax revenue.
This drops your "37%" t-e (which was bogus to begin with)
by easily 3 or 4 percentage points. Even so, at, say 33% that rate is still much lower than the present marginalincome tax rate so what I said still applies even more:
The lower rate of the FairTax (and of course, you unfairly include state sales taxes with a different base to artificially and dishonestly boost the rate). If you include your "7%"and add it on to the existing marginal income tax rate, the IT rate is much, much higher thereby offering much more of an incentive to evade than there will be under the FairTax.
You might go back and check that with your dad (if not Gale and your Brookings Buds) since it seems he needs to give you another dose of common sense. You have lost a good bit of yours. Been around the libs too long, I'd say.
Oh, but it has everything to do with marginal income tax rates. At present these are so high that many people are tempted to evade (but most, being basically honest, do not ... don't know about you, though).
The FairTax rate has absolutely nothing to do with marginal income tax rates or income tax evasion/avoidance. It is simply a factor of the expenditures base and the revenue required. It's the evasion/avoidance in the expenditures base that will increase dramatically with the increase of the overall sales tax rate.
Present sales taxes in states are all over the map in what they do/don't tax and most are replete with many exclusions/exemptions and things not taxed. Almost none of them tax services as does the FairTax.
And one of the reasons the states don't tax services is that they are very easy to evade. Not taxing these services tends to reduce the amount of evasion/avoidance in the NIPA expenditure numbers as compared to the FairTax base.
In fact, many (if not most) states will probably elect to conform their sales taxes with the FairTax once it becomes law. They would be both reasonable and wise to do so. Doing so will about triple the tax base when one considers that services are typically half or more of the revenue and having no exemptions/deductions will easily boost it to a factor of three times the present base. This would mean that a state with a 7% rate presently would have it drop to 2% or 3% or possibly even less while raising the same tax revenue.
That might be true except for the fact that the states will be paying the FairTax on their purchases and their employee's wages thus increasing their expenditures. They would have generate more revenue than they do currently to pay for this increase in expenditures.
This drops your "37%" t-e (which was bogus to begin with)
by easily 3 or 4 percentage points. Even so, at, say 33% that rate is still much lower than the present marginalincome tax rate so what I said still applies even more:
The 37% is bogus. And, again, the marginal income tax rate is not a factor in calculating the FairTax rate.
The lower rate of the FairTax (and of course, you unfairly include state sales taxes with a different base to artificially and dishonestly boost the rate).
And you unfairly don't include the increase in state expenditures due to the FairTax to artificially and dishonestly decrease the rate.
If you include your "7%"and add it on to the existing marginal income tax rate, the IT rate is much, much higher thereby offering much more of an incentive to evade than there will be under the FairTax.
Why would you do that? Talk about dishonest (actually, it's just stupid).
You might go back and check that with your dad (if not Gale and your Brookings Buds) since it seems he needs to give you another dose of common sense. You have lost a good bit of yours. Been around the libs too long, I'd say.
You might try making at least one post that makes sense before you accuse people of losing their's.
But you fail to include state income taxes. If states drop the income tax and piggyback off the NRST, then the state exclusive sales tax rates would have to be closer to the 5-7% level. Otherwise we are still stuck reporting income to the state.