Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

S 122 - A bill to abolish the IRS and establish a sales tax
Vanity ^ | May 21, 2013 | Westbrook

Posted on 05/21/2013 8:10:25 AM PDT by Westbrook

S. 122: Fair Tax Act of 2013

Summary: A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.

More info ... http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s113-122

93% support out of 836 votes as of this post.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: fairtax; fairtaxact; irs; salestax; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last
To: Westbrook

I am strongly in favor of a national sales tax but only if the IRS and all personal and business income taxes are abolished simultaneously with the establishment of that national sales tax. I do not trust the corrupt thugs in DC to eventually get around to abolishing the IRS.


21 posted on 05/21/2013 8:39:56 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack
Also, the “prebate” the Fair Tax uses is something that the politicians can play around with.

The 'prebate' will be a larger problem than the IRS. We don't need the prebate. Just lower the rate. Keep it simple. Stop the progressive, entitlement thinking.

22 posted on 05/21/2013 8:44:35 AM PDT by FatherofFive (Islam is evil and must be eradicated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: george123

Abolish the for profit, foreign owned private corporation known as the Federal Reserve Bank while you are at it. It is as Federal as Federal Express, has no reserves, and is not a bank. It creates money out of thin air and charges the American people interest to use our own currency. It conveniently doesn’t create the money to pay back the interest so eventually all the real wealth of the country ends up in their private, foreign hands.


23 posted on 05/21/2013 8:48:35 AM PDT by Count of Monte Fisto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

> I am strongly in favor of a national sales tax but only if
> the IRS and all personal and business income taxes are
> abolished simultaneously with the establishment of that
> national sales tax. I do not trust the corrupt thugs in DC > to eventually get around to abolishing the IRS.

Then be sure to let your senator know that you support S 122 and be sure to convey your concerns, much as you have here.

I have actually used language as strong as yours when communicating with my congressional delegation.


24 posted on 05/21/2013 8:58:13 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook
Yes, but you would still be subject to the abuses and vicissitudes of the IRS.

Why? Who's going to collect the national sales tax? It could be Treasury. If that's the case, they could also collect the Flat Tax. Indeed, since all income sources are subject to the tax, the payers of income would deduct the 17% on all income sources and send it to Treasury. At the end of the year, Treasury deducts the deduction and mails you a check for the difference. You wouldn't even have to file a return.

A VAT tax is probably the worst tax imaginable. Think about it: a tax on the "value added" (how do you really measure that?) at every step of the production/distribution process. Given that something a simple as bread has up to 67 steps, just think of the bureaucracy that would create.

25 posted on 05/21/2013 8:59:29 AM PDT by econjack (Some people are as dumb as soup.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive; econjack

> The ‘prebate’ will be a larger problem than the IRS. We
> don’t need the prebate. Just lower the rate. Keep it
> simple. Stop the progressive, entitlement thinking.

Agreed.

Sales tax is intrinsically “progressive”, because people spend according to their income level.


26 posted on 05/21/2013 9:00:06 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: FatherofFive
I'm not in favor of the prebate, but that's part-and-parcel of the current Flat Tax idea. I agree...there should be no prebate. However, politically, there would have to be a "living expense" deduction, which is the $20K I made up. You can argue the $20K amount, but that seems reasonable to me.

Also, when I hear the IdiotInChief say: "The rich are taking advantage of tax loopholes and aren't paying their fair share", I can't decide whether to laugh or throw up. First, who does he think put the loopholes there in the first place? They put them in to hand out political favors in hopes of contributions to keep their a$$ in office. Second, the top 10% of income earners pay almost 70% of the tax bill. If anything, the rich should be paying less.

Finally, if Warren Buffet and his ilk really feel they don't pay enough taxes, why am I hearing about it? Why don't they just open their checkbooks, write a check for an amount that makes them feel warm and fuzzy, and then STFU. The rest of us are having a hard enough time with this Bozo running things without them adding to the problem.

27 posted on 05/21/2013 9:08:10 AM PDT by econjack (Some people are as dumb as soup.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O

Couldn’t it be said this new tax would be in “direct proportion” to the census? Since it would apply to everyone, the “proportion” would be 1:1.

Just an idea. Since it’s vital the 16th amendment be repealed, especially if this new tax is created.

Otherwise we could simply write our senators and tell them to include similar language as the 16th.


28 posted on 05/21/2013 9:11:28 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

OK, then repeal the 16th.
This requires another amendment, of course.
And while they’re writing the repeal, include language prohibiting a tax on income.

Prohibition of government employee unions would be a bonus as well.


29 posted on 05/21/2013 9:13:23 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

By my quick math if you take the current taxes revenue needed to run the government ($3.5T) and divided by the current GDP $15T it would give us a sales tax of 23% +/-.

Currently here in Washington State they do not tax sales on food products purchased for future preparation. Fast food, chips, and anything that is considered for immediate consumption is subject tot sales tax which varies across the state from about 7% to 10.5%.


30 posted on 05/21/2013 9:19:26 AM PDT by shotgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: shotgun

> By my quick math if you take the current taxes revenue
> needed to run the government ($3.5T) and divided by the
> current GDP $15T it would give us a sales tax of 23% +/-.

I don’t think GDP is the right number, because it excludes sales from imported products.


31 posted on 05/21/2013 9:27:01 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: george123

Repeal of the 16th Amendment would only prevent taxes on rents, dividends and interests. These are taxes on capital and thus direct taxes. Taxes on wages and salaries are considered excise taxes and would be allowed even if the 16th Amendment were repealed.


32 posted on 05/21/2013 9:55:09 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

this is good - the Fair Tax promoted by Neal Bortz is better, IMO.


33 posted on 05/21/2013 9:59:46 AM PDT by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

No way!!! with the current tax law i can hold my taxes to 15%!!

If you’re too damn stupid to read and use the tax code to AVOID TAXES you’re too damn stupid to be voting!


34 posted on 05/21/2013 10:00:05 AM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

> If you’re too damn stupid to read and use the tax code to
> AVOID TAXES you’re too damn stupid to be voting!

Ad hominem is typically the refuge of the left. Are you recovering, or are you still suffering from the affliction?

And if all of us who would like to see the abolition of your precious “tax code”, and its attendant leviathan the IRS, stopped voting, this country would be much worse off than it is right now.


35 posted on 05/21/2013 10:05:50 AM PDT by Westbrook (Children do not divide your love, they multiply it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

Keep an eye on this. This must do a couple of things FIRST:

Include a provision that the income tax Amendment is repealed BEFORE the new taxes go in place.

That this does not turn into a VAT.

No exemptions.

Other than that, I approve of a consumption tax over a production tax.


36 posted on 05/21/2013 10:08:54 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

You’re too stupid to be voting!


37 posted on 05/21/2013 10:09:51 AM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Marathoner

The legislation we’ve backed before has universally included a repeal of the 16th before the new taxes go into effect.


38 posted on 05/21/2013 10:10:07 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

Which is bigger? 15% of your beloved income tax? Or 10% on a sales tax?

If you can’t figure that one out, you are “too damn stupid to be voting.”


39 posted on 05/21/2013 10:11:48 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (I will not comply.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Westbrook

How about, abolish the IRS, don’t replace the income tax with anything, and just shut down the whole damned federal government?


40 posted on 05/21/2013 10:13:05 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson