Posted on 04/16/2006 7:49:45 AM PDT by Eaglewatcher
The FairTax replaces the income tax and all other federal taxes with a national consumption tax. The FairTax is levied only once, at the point of purchase on new goods and services.
The group admits it will be difficult for legislators to face down entrenched special interest groups, but they initially proposed replacing the current system with U.S. Senate bill S. 25 and U.S. House of Representatives bill H.R. 25. The next step would be to repeal the 16th Amendment to the constitution allowing the Federal government to levy an income tax.
Signatories to the original petition include noted academic economists and practitioners who feel the current tax code cannot simply be fixed. The current regs include 54,000 pages, approximately 2.8 million words of mind-numbing rules, exceptions and special interest loopholes. This tangled web would be replaced by a simple national sales tax similar to that paid to the county, city or, in the case of our own Hawthorne TDD, the subdivision.
But what about poor people? The FairTax provides every family with a rebate of the sales tax on spending up to the federal poverty level (plus an extra amount to prevent any marriage penalty). The rebate is paid monthly in advance. It allows a family of four to spend $25,660 tax free each year. The rebate for a married couple with two children is $492 per month ($5,902 annually). Therefore, no family pays federal sales tax on essential goods and services and middle-class families are effectively exempted on a big part of their annual spending.
(Excerpt) Read more at digitalburg.com ...
The FairTax is the opposite, Roscoe, of Marx and socialism and you know it.
Zero is smaller than what we have today!
The rebate will be sent to EVERY US family, not just those who want it. And who in their right mind would not want it.
You're wrong. Only people that sign up for the prebate will receive it and no one is forced to sign up. Also, I can think of many people that wouldn't sign up for it that are very much in their right mind. For many people their privacy is worth the price. The more anonymous they can be to the government the better. So short sighted of you.
When the FairTax bill passes, it would become effective 6 months later.
Nonetheless, If we let those bastard politicians have both a sales tax and an income tax we will end up with both. No NST until the Income Tax and the IRS is abolished.
Any other result is stupid.
Repealing the 16th amendment will never happen without a replacement tax in place. There is no way to operate government without funding it. Any other result is not just stupid, it's delusional.
That's disappointing.
"Moreover, it is our intention to replace, with a tariff based revenue system supplemented by excise taxes,"
and
"To the extent permitted by the Constitution, we believe that the taxation of corporations is an appropriate source of government revenue."
So the Constitution party favors hiding all taxes in the price of goods and services so the people are unaware of their tax burden ?
That's the effect of tarrifs corporation taxes. Just hide the taxes in prices so people never know exactly what portion of their spending is feeding the government monster.
And then passing the buck so it looks like the States are the bad guys when they must extort money from their people to pay the Fed ?
No thanks. Only VISIBILITY of taxes can encourage people to vote for smaller government.
I looked it up for you, on www.fairtax.org, in the FAQ section, & I quote:
How does the rebate work? All valid Social Security cardholders who are U.S. residents receive a monthly rebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures. The rebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month.
Nuf said!
Exempting food/shelter/utilities/medical for all users would be far more expensive than the prebate, obviously because many households spend far more than poverty level for these items. Worse than that, as soon as you open one exemption window, every other interest group wants its own window opened. Exemptions open too many windows, losing revenues and requiring a higher tax rate.
Bureaucracy will be minimal for the prebate, particularly with the assistance of cutting edge database management systems. Everyone in the household can be identified with a SS# and attempts at fraud can be rooted out at minimal costs. IMO the prebate is an ingeneous design feature of the Fair Tax that achieves important political and civil liberties objectives.
Repealing the 16th amendment will never happen without a replacement tax in place. There is no way to operate government without funding it. Any other result is not just stupid, it's delusional.
Well setting aside the fact that we don't NEED the federal government . . .
No one but a fool would support adding an NST on top of the existing system. Reason stated above. We cannot trust the politicians, from either party, to do the right thing. Re-stated: We can trust that politicians, from both parties, will do everything within their power to maintain their control.
From early conversations with Boortz (circa 1994) I know for a fact that in the early stages of planning it was believed that an amendment would be needed to allow the NST and that the 16th could be appealed at the same time as the NST was approved.
I would not be surprised if that plan was abolished in favor of just trying to pass legislation to allow the NST. Neither party respects the Constitution enough to worry if THEIR bit of legislation is actually Constitutional.
A Pox on both their houses.
And no, FairTax can not and should not be supported unless a mechanism is in place to abolish the 16th amendment; to do otherwise is sheer folly. "Taking years" is not an argument against repeal, it is an excuse.
Zon's reply in #106 is right on target. The only thing that I will add is that we already have both. We pay an income tax that is ripped from us before we get our money and we have the imbedded tax costs of every business and service.
The FT removes that component of prices and pre tax prices will fall.
The object is transparency. The cost of government will be visible.
Besides, the only thing preventing them for ADDING a sales tax on top of the income tax and the imbedded taxes is the risk of the anger of the voters.
After the FT is in place, the IRS infrastructure will be gone making the re-imposition of an income very difficult from both and operational standpoint as well as making the voters angry. Once you start getting your entire paycheck, will you let it be stolen from you again?
Your question is a legitmate one, but the answer to it, and every other question, is the same as we were told 200 plus years ago -- eternal vigilance. Over the last 90 years, we weren't as vigilant as we should have been or we wouldn't have gotten into this mess.
The article is not an authoritative source of info. The author may be a fan, but that doesen't make him an expert.
How do you think the government will know who to send a check to and how much? Will they just know? BS
Someone in that household will have to complete a form with the names and SS # of each person in the house.
Now suppose I don't send one in. Do you really think that the government is going to care? They can't make you take money from them. Most people will register, but for $187 a month, I doubt that I will register. I'd just as soon remain anonymous.
Better yet, go to the actual Bill before Congress, HR 25. You will see that Zon was correct and you are very wrong. Looks like you'll be buying Zon a lunch.
Note that there are certain conditions to eligibility. For example, you must be a legal resident, so no illegal aliens qualify. For another, you cannot be incarcerated. For another, you must REGISTER "`(d) Annual Registration" and provide bona fide Social Security numbers for all members of the family.
If you wanted to opt out and not receive the FCA, nobody is going to force it on you. You simply don't register. "`(e) Registration Not Mandatory" and "`(f) Effect of Failure To Provide Annual Registration ... shall cease receiving the monthly family consumption allowance"
So the article and the fairtax.org FAQ have oversimplified the case, assuming that their audience is composed of law abiding citizens with SS#s that will WANT to receive the FCA.
So, are you for the status quo or do you have a super secret plan that is working its way through Congress gathering support?
I don't think that you'll find any supporters who believe is perfect -- no plan is. But its the best one out there and it cures a lot of the ills and sins of the current system.
If it becomes corrupted like the present system over the course of the next ten or fifty or 100 years, then we will have had it better than we have it now for that pereiod of time.
It is up to us to repair the problems that we face with the Code and the IRS. It will be up to our children and grandchildren to do the same for themselves. If we have any success in also reining in government power and spending, that's an added blessing. To whatever degree we are successful, we will have gained some liberty for ourselves and our children and we will have provided an example to them that we can fight back and make changes.
This is NOT a government idea. This is from the grassroots. Supporters in Congress are those who have taken the time to look into it and see its benefits. They are the fiscal hawks and the liberty minded folks in Congress.
The ones opposed to it are the ones who spend the most and rely on that spending for buying votes to win reelection. The Dems have threatened their members that they will suffer the consequences if they support the FT.
Doesn't the FT's supporters and enemies tell you anything at all?
Do you see anything at all good about the FairTax?
From the web sight www.fairtax.org, in the FAQ section:
"How does the rebate work? All valid Social Security cardholders who are U.S. residents receive a monthly rebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures. The rebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month."
So, 300 million checks a month - nah, no bureaucracy or fraud & abuse possible there.
I suggest you spend some time at this web site - I have.
Then we'll have to work on the rate and get rid of the rest of the code.
TS
See #114.
An excerpt from the actual bill.
Apparently the FAQ section assumes that you have the brains to know that the govenment has to get the info from you in order to send you a check.
Also note the safeguards to prevent illegals and criminals from getting the money. What other government program do you know does that?
And it won't be 300 million checks. It would probably be more like 75 to 100 million. Children won't get their own checks. Couples won't get separate checks. One check per household.
Did you know that there are computers with high speed printers nowadays? Do you know how many checks the government already sends out every month?
I think that you are nitpicking and you have some other underlying and unstated opposition to the replacement of the status quo.
Do you like the status quo? Do you like ANYTHING about the FairTax? Do you have an alternate plan?
Actually, most people with a bank account will opt to have the FCA electronically deposited rather than having to deal with a paper check, mail, etc.
How much fraud is there in the disbursement of SS benefits ? Not much. The FCA will be a smaller amount, therefor logic would indicate that there will be even less fraud with it.
Paragraph 4, line 2: "The Fair Tax provides every family with a rebate of the sales tax....". What part of "every family" is confusing to you.
I understand what the bill (H.R.25) says and it says you're wrong. The writer should have said every person with a social security number is eligible for the prebate.
Look it up, & if I'm wrong, I owe you a lunch.
Four Seasons will do for lunch.
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.