Posted on 10/09/2007 5:27:15 AM PDT by Man50D
Ron Petrucci's Sept. 24 letter addressing Charles Firth is right on a number of points. We have been running more than an $800 billion trade deficit. That can't go on for very long. Ron says we're a debtor nation and we are.
Our manufacturing continues to move overseas to "more tax friendly" locations. We can't exist by providing each other services. Picture everyone doing their neighbor's laundry. We need to produce products to exist.
What Ron neglected to say is that the reason for that migration is our tax system. Federal taxes and associated compliance costs comprise an average of 25.9 percent of prices of our goods and services. Imported goods and services arrive at our shores essentially tax-free, because most foreign governments encourage exports by rebating their taxes at their borders. We don't do that.
When we try to sell there, they add their taxes to our prices, so our goods and services end up bearing double taxes. American companies have a raw deal both ways. That's why they have trouble competing.
There is an answer, though in the form of HR 25, The Fair Tax Act. That bill is in the House ways and means committee. It is the most thoroughly researched tax bill ever.
For the second time, a group of noted economists recently wrote a letter to Congress and the president, urging them to pass it and sign it into law.
The bill already has more cosponsors than any other tax bill in 80 years. It is a grass-roots proposal. It will pass only if enough citizens support it and tell their representatives. If passed, the current federal tax system would be replaced by a national retail sales tax applied at the final retail sale and collected by the states.
Net retail prices paid would be about the same. Revenue raised would be about the same. Collecting a sales tax is much more efficient than collecting an income tax, it provides a steady revenue flow and everyone would pay.
It needs to pass now, though, before this president leaves office, because no first-term president will entertain changing the tax system, and Social Security will run out of liquid assets at about the end of the next president's first term.
Check the proposal out at www.fairtax.org
The biggest problem I see is that all individuals/families should pay some tax. We currently have almost 50% of filers who don’t owe/pay tax - so anything they get from the government is essentially “free”. That MUST change. Those people vote Democrat because the Dems promise more giveaways.
-
well you can either tax the poor (which doesn’t make sense if you’re going to give them $ back in the end) or create more rich people
Uh huh. You are the one who took a tag that has nothing to do with you personally. I assume you have been banned before. Considering your tone and demeanor, I would not be surprised.
You are a trip though...
1) a lot more people than corps
2) corps already have accountants and can benefit from economies of scale
3) a registered corp is less likely to engage in illegal activity than people
Good arguments for lower compliance costs, I guess.
However, if you only tax business income, small businesses will just shift the income to personal income by the owners.
Large businesses will reinvest revenues and grant dividends to shareholders. The company will grow in value, but due to reinvesting revenues, but those aren't taxable profits.
I guess you could just tax all revenue, but that screws over efficient companies that work on low margins.
However the biggest problem with having American companies bear all the tax burden, is that it will drive American companies into bankruptcy in droves as outsourcing labor to foreign countries and buying imported goods would be far cheaper than hiring an American company to provide services, or to buy American goods.
Shifting more tax burden to businesses means making American businesses less competitive in the world market. It won't help the American people, because the American people need jobs.
Hey, you guys run to the mods when you don’t like a tag line don’t you?
Of whom do you speak, my good man? And to which tagline did someone take such offense that they perpetrated such a dastardly crime??
I’d go 10 percent for that but would want front row tickets...
No, it doesn’t guarantee $30k to every citizen. Reading comprehension is a good thing. It “guarantees” a deduction of the federal poverty limit from the total of purchases.
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/07poverty.shtml
In case you’re mathematically challenged, the fair tax percentage on 10,210 is not $30K. It’s zero. Let’s say you spend $30k as an individual. Deduct 10,210 from 30k and you would pay 30% of 19.8k.
Additionally, once people understand that they’re paying 30% every time they open their wallet, maybe they’ll be less inclined to vote themselves goodies from the public treasury because they won’t think they’re free, as 44% of Americans currently do.
Understand now ?
/anklebiter ignore switch on.
I’d prefer all to be rich, but many who don’t pay taxes are not poor, either.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1111.html
FTL's just can't get their head around the fact that "all the slow rabbits have already been caught"
Why don't you ask x? Judging by one of your recent posts you are truly beginning to understand the boy.
X, you can come out from under your desk now.
Yep - you “don’t care”. This is you:
{sticking fingers in ears} I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you ...
Pull your head out of your butt and wipe the poo from your eyes.
Corporations have many opportunities to take deductions, of which business expenses such as unemployment comp and state and local taxes are just a few examples. Let’s see - pay higher salaries or bonuses as an expense, or pay federal taxes... Hmmm, what would a corporation do ? Most corporations pay few federal taxes because they pump up their expenses with all kinds of legal deductions that they have spent a ton of money lobbying for - which is also a business deduction, by the way.
Why do you think the AMT is becoming a problem for individuals - because it’s exposing the high tax rates of states and local jurisdictions. Same for corporations in terms of paying state and local taxes. It’s relevant.
So, to continue, if the drug dealer buys an item from a corporation that pays no federal taxes, he is still paying nothing.
Dude, look under the surface if you have an IQ above room temperature.
http://www.cbpp.org/10-16-03tax.htm
I agree, but if almost 50% of filers pay no federal taxes, and many of the rest don’t “see” the taxes they pay because of witholding, then they need an education that only a shock every time they open their wallet will provide.
Add to that a supermajority in Congress (wishful thinking here) to change/increase taxes, and I’d be happier.
My corporation pays tons of taxes -- just not federal corporate income tax. I pay that personally under the subshapter-S rules. I get no deductions of any kind (corporate income makes my "personal" income far too high)
However, I make a damned good living doing what I do, and employ around 700 other people who also make a damned good living. About the last thing I worry about is the IRS. The vast majority of the "corporate income" beyond profit sharing (which is generous) gets pumped back into the business to continue growing it.
It follows that the only meaningful move is enforceable spending control.
So how does customs know what the value of the items is and how much tax to collect?
Customs isn't going to inspect a significant portion of packages going to individuals.
They may try and detect drugs or explosives externally. They may check manifests of large shipments going to businesses, but they won't be collecting taxes on imported goods going to businesses because they won't be taxed until they are sold to consumers. They will have to track imported goods sent to businesses to make sure they are sold as new, not as used items to avoid the tax. Customs doesn't shed any responsibility, they just have a lot more to worry about since there will be a huge incentive to avoid the tax by having individuals purchase things.
I suspect the solution would be to make the shipping company responsible for collecting taxes on imported items being sent to consumers (but not to businesses that will resell them).
Of course if they claim to be running a business out of their home, then how will the shipper know?
All businesses but cash businesses already use POS systems(and we know why they don’t). A few clicks of the mouse and you have sales tax reports. I don’t see any problem with doing the same thing for the Fair Tax.
Sure, it's simple to collect sales taxes and keep track of them. Of course it's simple to have your payroll system deduct income taxes as well. It's relatively simple to figure out business income taxes after the business has done all the accounting they need to file with the SEC as well. The hard part is doing all the accounting work, and while there are strange tax laws they need to know to benefit from, they are a small incremental cost to their accounting costs that they will bear regardless of the tax system.
Every other country imposes import duties on a wide variety of products. We used to, years ago, get most of our federal revenue from the same. Norway, for example, imposes a 400% VAT on imported alcohol.
Sure they do. But those items they tax are a small percentage of the goods that are imported, so the effort to enforce those duties is manageable.
The US taxes alcohol imports as well. Tobacco too.
The biggest problem I see is that all individuals/families should pay some tax. We currently have almost 50% of filers who don’t owe/pay tax - so anything they get from the government is essentially “free”. That MUST change. Those people vote Democrat because the Dems promise more giveaways.
No disagreement from me. Everyone in this country needs to have a stake in the cost of raising taxes. People shouldn't be able to vote in tax increases on other people to benefit themselves.
We will NEVER even get close to constitutional principles if we don’t make people understand that the government cannot provide “free” anything.
Very true.
And the best way to do that is to remind them every time they open their wallets. What we have now, the witholding process, does more to encourage this dissonance.
I'm dating a woman who lives in Canada so I visit there a lot lately, and I've also visited for work some in the past as well.
They pay 14% in sales taxes. They all complain about it, but they also are far more socially liberal on average and think that the government needs to get involved in everything or at least far more things than most Americans I know do.
I don't think the evidence supports the idea that shifting taxes to a sales tax rather than an income tax will make people get more involved with stopping the growth of government.
People see how much the government takes out of their paychecks, and it doesn't keep them for voting in big government politicians.
If you switch to the Fair Tax, you will just have the people that don't pay taxes now voting in politicians that will increase the size of the prebate, and provide more services to them since they receive far more than they pay in.
Politicians will raise the tax rate under the pretense of saving Social Security, and then vote for other programs, that they or another politician will have to "save" at some time in the future.
The poor aren't going to vote against supporters of tax increases in the Fair Tax, because any tax increase automatically results in an increase in the prebate they receive. They will however vote for those who push to raise the poverty level used to calculate the prebate.
Why don't you ask x? The little troll wouldn't tell me if he knew or admit it if he did it.
You are the one who took a tag that has nothing to do with you personally.
So now, in your warped opinion asking a question is taking something personally, is it? Or are you just lying about that to feel good?
I assume you have been banned before. Considering your tone and demeanor, I would not be surprised.
For your information, I have indeed been banned from several fora -- for telling the truth to liars. But, then you might not understand why one might take exception to someone lying about them.
the govt spends a lot of money on a lot of junk. but here’s a list of things that many conservatives may want to fund:
1) lots of defense spending. We may have to deal with iran as well as iraq. We want to see future episodes of futureweapons.
2) homeland security so that nobody sneaks in anthrax or a suitcase nuke
3) a nice border fence to keep out all the illegals
4) private accounts for social security while still paying for senior’s retirement will cost money
5) big science projects like going to mars or building supercolliders
6) help pay for nuclear power plants so that we are less dependent on foreign oil
Oh, he knows. He truly knows. LOL.
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.