Sales of Boortz book spike as interest in fair tax increases

Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 8-20-2005 | Matt Kempner

[pigdog]

Nope - both won't co-exist. Read the bill.

[pigdog]

Here's a link to the bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.25:

And a link to the FairTax website which has lots of goog economic analyses:

http://www.fairtax.org/research.html

[GSlob]

Well, if anyone seriously believes that the disappearance of "embedded tax costs" would magically lower the prices under the new system - I could offer to such people my shares of interest in one used but perfectly serviceable bridge in NYC. I could even add a timeshare in Grand Canyon, as a bonus. As seen in, among other things, gasoline prices - the prices go up with alacrity, but come down much less eagerly.

[jslade]

bite me bumpero.

[phil_will1]

"Wonder what's considered 'fair'? 25%? 35%? 55%? Once they open this door, every year congress will hike it a 1/4 to 1/2 percent! Until pork is controlled, this is a waste of time!"

"It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, 'in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four.' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them."
Alexander Hamilton in Federalist #21

[phil_will1]

"Well, if anyone seriously believes that the disappearance of 'embedded tax costs' would magically lower the prices under the new system"

It isn't magical at all - it is called price competition. Believe it or not, it is at work right now in any free enterprise system, including our own.

[pepsi_junkie]

Can anyone give a brief overview of the benefit of the fair tax verus the flat tax? I think one downside of the fair tax is it does open the door for both income and sales tax at the national level (cynical though that view may be), while the flat tax retains only income tax, albeit at a better rate across the board. But I'm no expert.

[GSlob]

Well, I happen to believe that flat rate income tax would be fair enough tax, and sufficiently simple, too. And the transition would be easier, for the less transitional complexity is there, the better. [One should not change the rules too much in the middle of the game]. The basic outlines of what is liable to taxation and what is not could be preserved under flat rate income tax without too many changes. Alternatively one would have to up-index by decree every savings and Roth account by some 20% (sales tax rate) to compensate for the future double taxation of them - and that would be inflationary.

[photodawg]

If you have a point related to the bill being discussed, please make it.
_____________________________________________________

I made the point. I guess you didn't understand it. THE BOAT WON'T FLOAT, THE DOG WONT HUNT, IT WILL NEVER FLY,.....the point is the votes aren't there to repeal the income tax. You'll only get a national sales tax on top of the income tax. Talk all you want about the "fair" tax. Fair don't fly when revenue service is involved. Look what it took to get a minor tax cut. Look what it took to get Bolton to the UN. Look what it took to get three f-ing judges appointed.

My point is that what goes in one end of the pipe as fresh water comes out the other end as sewage. Can you deal with that while you're debating your philosophical BS about the "perfect" tax. Even the term "fair tax" is an oxymoron.

[Turbopilot]

Sure. Under a flat tax:

-We keep SS/FICA/payroll taxes
-We keep automatic payroll deductions
-We continue to "hide" the 7.65% "employer contribution" (which just comes out of your wages)
-We keep the death tax
-We keep corporate income taxes (among the highest in the industrialized world)
-We keep the IRS in its present form
-We keep compliance costs from businesses and individuals having to spend billions of hours a year on tax preparation
-We keep the economic distortions of businesses and individuals trying to avoid income for tax purposes
-We continue to have to report personal income information to an unaccountable government bureaucracy
-We have no way to influence the amount of taxes we pay, short of becoming intentionally underemployed
-We likely buy ourselves very little time - remember, Reagan introduced a two-tier flat tax that quickly became another uncontrolled nightmare

Under the FairTax plan:

-We eliminate the IRS
-We eliminate Social Security/FICA taxes, including the half supposedly paid by your employer but really just taken out of what you could be earning
-We eliminate all automatic deductions - what you earn is what you take home, 100%
-We eliminate the death tax
-We eliminate corporate income taxes (imagine the economic boom from being the world's #1 investment center/tax haven)
-We eliminate all personal and almost all business compliance costs
-We eliminate the reporting of personal information to the government (except the size of your household and an address or bank account to which to send the monthly prebate)
-Everyone, rich or poor, gets their poverty-level tax spending prebated every month, ensuring no one pays any tax on necessities
-We eliminate the economic distortions of tax compliance and tax avoidance, letting the free market rather than tax policy determine individual behavior
-We take control over what we spend on taxes, since we can choose to buy used goods and avoid tax entirely
-We permanently end the possibility of multiple national taxes (which we have now with income, FICA, SS, corporate income, etc.) - first by statute, as part of the FairTax Act, and immediately after by repealing Amendment XVI, which permits income taxes

Some posters to this thread have been confused (or intentionally obtuse) in thinking that FairTax advocates support a national retail sales tax. While that is the tax facet of the FairTax Act we support, the name FairTax itself may be a misnomer as the tax itself is only one half of the proposal we support. The other, equally important half is the elimination of all other federal taxes. We don't support a NRST by itself, even with promises of later changes. We specifically support the FairTax bill, which accomplishes both necessary parts of the proposal at once. Anyone who is wary that a tax bill could result in an income tax and a NRST is not discussing the FairTax bill, but some other NRST of which I am unaware and do not support.

[Wolfie]

Politicians wouldn't chance what you describe with talk radio and the internet now as the gate keepers.

Now that's just plain funny. Congress screws us seven ways to Sunday in a myriad of different ways, and the American People just don't give a damn. Gatekeepers? There isn't even a gate.

[Turbopilot]

Got it. You actually have no argument with the bill itself; you've just already given up on the whole "of, by, for the people" thing. Government's won.

We'll never be able to outspend the Soviet Union.

The Berlin Wall will never come down.

We'll never land a man on the moon.

States will never pass concealed carry laws.

The assault weapons ban will never sunset.

We'll never pass a tax cut, let alone two.

Yeah, I guess you're right. We should ignore good ideas when they seem too hard. I hope I don't need the /s tag here.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Now that's just plain funny.

Glad I could amuse you. I have more. Did you hear the one about.....?

[Conservative Goddess]

Moreover.....

Any system of taxation which is based on income is not eligible for border adjustment....per the WTO. That means that our goods enter the world market with an embedded tax cost. European goods, or goods emanating from any economy that uses a consumption based tax system, are not similarly burdened. Consumpion based systems of taxation are border adjusted. This gives those economies a huge advantage. We must switch to a system of taxation which is border adjustable if we are to maintain our current lifestyle and position in the world economy.

[GSlob]

I do not see any extra advantages, to tell the truth, that European goods would bring their countries. The stuff is very expensive, and IMHO, the quality is frequently lagging behind the price. There are exceptions, of course, for SOME of it is very good and not that expensive. By simply moving to flat rate income tax the country could save on costs of tax compliance, and hopefully enjoy other benefits of the economic growth from encouraging capital formation and deployment.

[GPBurdell]

Fair Tax Fans is a group of blogs and websites that support the Fair Tax proposal advanced by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder in their best-selling book "The FairTax Book."

I am, of course, a supporter of this proposal and in an effort to help spread the word about the Fair Tax, I have started Fair Tax Fans. It is my hope that blogs and websites supportive of the Fair Tax will join Fair Tax Fans and help create support for this reform proposal. Please click right here for more information.

[Man50D]

Wonder what's considered "fair"? 25%? 35%? 55%? Once they open this door, every year congress will hike it a 1/4 to 1/2 percent! Until pork is controlled, this is a waste of time!

The concept of "Fair in the Fair Tax Act does not have to do with the rate. It has to do with people determining how much they are taxed based on how much they spend. People tend to increase spending as their income increases. Also the rebate amount on necessities will be larger for those who have lower incomes. Consequently higher income people will pay a greater percentage of taxes relative to their incomes.

Congress can raise the tax rates under any tax system if the people allow it to happen. I suggest you go to Fair Tax FAQ's for more information.

[Man50D]

Well, if anyone seriously believes that the disappearance of "embedded tax costs" would magically lower the prices under the new system - I could offer to such people my shares of interest in one used but perfectly serviceable bridge in NYC. I could even add a timeshare in Grand Canyon, as a bonus. As seen in, among other things, gasoline prices - the prices go up with alacrity, but come down much less eagerly.

One factor you forget is competition. Competitors are always searching for a competitive edge to increase sales. One method is to lower prices. It will only take a small number of businesses to lower their prices that will cause their competitors to do the same.

[ancient_geezer]

I think one downside of the fair tax is it does open the door for both income and sales tax at the national level (cynical though that view may be)

Door is just as open with the Flat Tax or even the current income tax system. There is absolutely nothing but the American voter standing in the way of Congress enacting sales taxes on top of income taxes now.

With the FairTax the all federal income and payroll (SS/Medicare) taxes are repealed with the FairTax put in its place. No overlap, a straight replacement of one for the other.

If their is enough voter interest in getting rid of the income tax and replacing it with a National Retail Sales Tax. There will certainly be enough voter concern to keep the income and payroll taxes of the books while the repeal of the 16th amendment goes through the ratification process.

while the flat tax retains only income tax,

There is no impediment to enacting a additional sales tax in any flat tax proposal, in fact the

albeit at a better rate across the board. But I'm no expert.

How do you figure a flat tax has a better rate? The flat tax does not repeal payroll taxes, thus the flat tax marginal rate is at least 17%+7.65%= 24.65% on wages for the House version, and as much as 20%+7.65%=27.65% in the Senate version of that tax system.

That by the way does not include the fact that the flat tax is also levied on all business income as well as business half of payroll taxes meaning those taxes get passed onto the customer in higher prices or lowered wages as well.

Furthermore, the flat tax is just the same ole garbage the current system started out at with a much lower rate besides. Didn't flat didn't survive a single term of Congress, and grew into the 60,000 page monstrosity of tax code we have today.

As far as complexity of taxes going away with the flat tax, IRS is still around to make sure those postcard returns are acurrate and truthful. In fact in a more virulent from with extended powers as it no longer has the detail to work with in tax returns to validate information with that it has in the current income tax.

All in all I would say the Flat Tax, is same ole' scam the income tax has always been, a way to buy votes and devide the electorate, rich vs poor.

 

"As a matter of fact, what the income tax does — and this is the debate that I think we always try to get into in order to let you and him fight, see — and the people of this country are led down a path where the actual control of their resources, which in the end is the control over their will, is handed off to the government."

. . .

"The government then manipulates that will in order to destroy the freedom of our electoral system through the income tax structure, and we call the resulting slavery a free system."

"In point of fact, it is not as the founders understood, and the only way to restore real freedom is to give people back control over the income that they earn so that they won‘t, at the voting booth and in other phony issues, be subject to that manipulation."

- KEYES TRANSCRIPT (01/28/02)

[phil_will1]

"Can anyone give a brief overview of the benefit of the fair tax verus the flat tax? I think one downside of the fair tax is it does open the door for both income and sales tax at the national level (cynical though that view may be), while the flat tax retains only income tax, albeit at a better rate across the board. But I'm no expert."

The current system is a flat tax many years removed. It is inconsistent with our constitution, which is why the 16th amendment had to be adopted after the Supreme Court struck down an income tax in the late 1800's.

There are a number of serious economic problems which are contributed to, in varying degrees, by our horribly inefficient and antiquated tax system. Among those problems are
1. our enormous and growing trade deficit,
2. our federal budget deficit
3. the looming insolvency of Social Security and Medicare
4. the huge and growing compliance costs and the economic drag that places on all of us

In some cases, the flat tax addresses the problem, but does so less effectively than the FairTax does. (Ex: # 2 & 4 above)

In other cases, the flat tax represents little, if any, improvement over the current system. (Ex: # 1 & 3 above)

That is the "Cliff's Notes" answer to your question.

One other point - if there is one thing which should be obvious by now, it is that globalization is a huge economic force that is changing our planet economically and that those changes have just begun. Sticking with a tax system which puts our producers at a disadvantage in the global economy is a luxury that we can no longer afford. That is what both the flat and progressive income and payroll taxes do. Their day is past and the sooner we recognize that, the better off we will be.