The FairTax movement is the largest tax reform movement in Congress and in the nation today. There are no lies about the rate. In fact it is a lie to call those that support the FairTax liars. They are truth tellers and the kind of people that I like to have around.
The NRST rate is stated two ways on a receipt, inclusive and exclusive. Income tax rates are stated inclusively, hence the FairTax rate is often quoted inclusively for comparison purposes.
The difference between inclusive and exclusive is one of arithmetic in the denominator. Simply put, given 4 items, if I take away 1 from the four, then I have reduced the total by 25%. Then if given 3 items and I add 1 to this total of 3, I have increased the total by 33%. In the first calculation I use a denominator of 4 and this is the inclusive form. In the second example I use a denominator of 3, and this is the exclusive form.
Complaints about too many taxes are legitimate but the FairTax is not an additional tax, it is a 'replacement' tax to replace the federal income tax and it is applied only to retail products and services, never to business to business transactions nor to used item transactions.
There is already a black market in cigarettes and alcohol because of a lower rate than the Fare Tax would assess, but instead of answering the argument with content you chose to portray my position falsely.
What position? What argument? The IRS will be abolished and state tax collection agencies will collect the NRST, just as they did before the 16th Amendment. You seem to have a real misapplied animus towards the FairTax.
As for enforcement, the FairTax is orders of magnitude more efficient than the Income tax. First, it ***takes two*** people to cheat under the FairTax, a buyer and a seller. Whereas under the Income tax it ***takes only one*** person in secret to cheat. One can say absurdly that cheating under the FairTax will be less efficient.
Second, more than 70% of all retail transactions are carried out by about 3000 corporate chains. And these corporate chains are electronic. It is then so much easier for state tax enforcers to audit an enormous block of retail transactions than it is to audit the books under the income tax code.
"If the income tax went back to 1% (which was the original rate) would you really be bitching about it now?"
I don't need to be the target of your foul mouth.
There have been several flat income taxes in US history beginning with the 1% in 1861 under Lincoln. Income tax proponents always start with the innocent 1% and claim that it will barely be noted in the general population. But history shows that a flat tax never stays flat.
"The problem is spending."
No, it is not 'the' problem, it is 'a' problem. And it is a totally separate problem that can only be helped by the FairTax because of the transparency of the FairTax.
Please be sure to wake me up when Utopia happens.
Since the appearance of Boortz' book, Fair Taxers have bandied a 23% rate while admitting the truth in fine print. The citations to that effect are in the link I provided you. The truth is that it is 23% of the total with the tax included. That's a 30% rate on the sale price. Add the sales taxes I pay here and it's 39%.
The von Mises Institute called it a lie too. You call them an enemy of liberty?
The IRS will be abolished and state tax collection agencies will collect the NRST, just as they did before the 16th Amendment.
No it won't. Somebody will have to enforce collections.
As for enforcement, the FairTax is orders of magnitude more efficient than the Income tax. First, it ***takes two*** people to cheat under the FairTax, a buyer and a seller.
It also makes convictions of cheaters more problematic, because they'll support each others stories. Moreover, without a Federal income tax the States will likely drop their State income taxes and either hike property taxes or add to the sales tax. To replace a 12% income tax in California with a sales tax would push the total sales tax with NRST to somewhere near 50%. Hence, because of the amount of money involved, and because of the difficulty in collecting from private parties, the enforcement scheme will have to be more draconian and invasive than it is now, not just once a year.
And at that 50% rate, you think NRST will sell? And you think people won't cheat in droves? If massive numbers of people cheat, you think there won't be an intrusive IRS tracking EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION to get their cut? That's so unrealistic as to be flamingly dishonest.
Second, more than 70% of all retail transactions are carried out by about 3000 corporate chains.
And you think that won't change? You think Federal, State, and local governments won't go after that 50% with a vengeance by forcing individuals to abide by the same reporting standards as "forced" upon corporations? Get real. Loading sole proprietors with the same bureaucratic "reporting" and "compliance" requirements as the big guys can handle easily has been the game in every other form of regulation for nearly a century.
No, it is not 'the' problem, it is 'a' problem. And it is a totally separate problem that can only be helped by the FairTax because of the transparency of the FairTax.
Nonsense. With 30% of all transactions in private, the cost of that "transparency" will be a police state like we've never seen. You're in fantasy land.