Posted on 04/21/2002 5:42:46 PM PDT by Starmaker
Income Tax time has come upon us and people have grown to accept the fact that paying taxes is a way of life. Very little thought is given to the fact that the money we pay in taxes is our hard earned income and that it is essentially forcibly being taken away from us before we even get our hands on it. By withholding a portion of one's income the government essentially confiscates wage earnings before they are ever received.
It hasn´t always been this way but only the older people of our generation can actually remember that. The Federal Government has achieved the position of saying that these funds belong to them and it is the tax payers who are the criminal if they attempt to retain what they have earned. They own these funds and then gleefully pit one element of society against the other over the balance that they leave in the hands of the public. You are a bad person for making too much money and must therefore pay a disproportionate amount to the government, who becomes more and more to look like the Mafia. Honest citizens are made to feel like they may be liable for severe penalties should they not make the correct arbitrary decision relating to income and deductions.
A case in point is Nina Doherty who received stock options from an Internet company she worked for and subsequently exercised them in 2000. At that time the market value of the stock made her holdings worth $400,000 if she were to have sold them. It is a fact that the realized value of anything is only what revenue is received for it at the time it is sold. However, the income tax code defies this reality and although her stock is now worthless Nina is stuck with a tax of over $100,000 based on revenue that she never realized. Doesn´t that sound like an irrational and unfair tax code provision.?
Numerous similar onerous provisions exist in a tax code that has grown like a cancer over many decades. In fact, one could say that the very passage of the constitutional amendment creating the income tax in 1913 was similar to a carcinogen that created a cancer as Congress enacted laws that enabled and expanded its tentacles. Members of the federal government fed the cancer by inserting provisions in this law that conceded tax revenue to some at the expense of others. Over the decades they have used changes in the tax code for purposes of social engineering and to provide benefits to special interests and constituencies of respective legislative members. In return, of course, benefits accrued to those providers in a quid-pro-quo manner that bordered on bribery. In addition, this tax system seemingly contradicts the provisions of our Constitution in two ways.
1. The IRS process considers a tax payer guilty until proven innocent 2. It violates provisions of the 5th Amendment that protects against providing evidence against yourself. Information on a tax return has been used against a filer. There are incidents of filers submitting their return unsigned stating a signature would be applied only if there was a guarantee that its contents would not be used against them in the future.
It should be apparent to anyone having the ability to see the obvious, the ridiculousness of the present tax code. It is amazing that supposedly intelligent well meaning legislators are still attempting to solve all the economic needs of our country by tinkering with an antiquated, special interest oriented, unproductive and corrupt taxation system. It doesn't take a Nobel prize winner in economics to come to the conclusion that any taxation laws that rely on the arbitrary selection of tax credits, alternative minimum tax for selected types of income, loop holes, concessions to lobbyists and provisions that cater to political factions has little chance of providing anything resembling the proper economic ends that prompted the initiative in the first place.
The only reason taxes are imposed is to collect revenue to support government operations. It is entirely irreconcilable for taxes to be imposed for any other purpose. We should ask ourselves, what the derived revenue when applied in government spending is supposed to accomplish in fact? If we clearly think this question through I believe we must come to the simple conclusion that it is to provide our citizens, in the best manner possible, with the conditions that allow each individual citizen to live a reasonably free, safe and economically productive life. To provide this does not require manipulation of the manner in which the tax revenue is derived. In fact, it does require that the imposition of taxes does not infringe on freedom, safety or the ability for individual citizens to pursue their respective economic pursuits In essence it only requires the revenue.
There are elements in society that keep harping on the fact that the tax code should be fair. The definition of fairness in taxation can be quite broad. Contrasting the tax the rich in progressively higher proportion than others syndrome that surrounds us, I propose the following questions.
Is it fair to have your neighbor pay a higher portion of his income in taxes because he may have exercised his abilities and assets in a way that provided him with a higher income?
Is it fair to expect a person to still want to produce more when a disproportionate amount of his income is taken away by the Government in taxes?
Is it fair to tax an older person, who has just been able to reach the income necessary to contribute to his children's college education, at the same rate as a younger person who not having this responsibility but earning the same income, will probably have accumulated a greater degree of wealth at the same age?
Is it fair to tax a person on a capital gain he has made in an investment paid for by after tax dollars and also where the increase in appreciation caused by inflation is included in the gain?
Then the most important -
Is it fair to take away the creation of jobs for those who are in the lower income area by over-taxing those with high incomes who would invest their money directly or indirectly creating those job? Money that is taken away through taxes does not go into the savings and investment pool which creates jobs by providing the funds for companies to start up or grow.
A fair person should answer in the negative to all of these questions. True fairness requires completely abolishing the present tax code, thus eliminating its arbitrary elements and developing a new one that relies on simplicity, fairness and economic soundness. A sensible new way to provide the government with income would be one where every American would become a voluntary taxpayer, choose how much they wish to spend in taxes, and know that everyone is paying the same amount on purchases. One that provides for no taxation of low-income individuals and eliminates the taxes that seniors pay on Social Security benefits, pension benefits, investment income and the like.
Such a plan has been developed by the Fairtax organization. The FairTax would repeal all income taxes – individual and corporate – as well as payroll, self-employment, estate and gift taxes and abolish the I.R.S. In its place, the FairTax would levy a flat sales tax on the final sale of new goods and services with no exemptions and no exceptions. Further, the FairTax is revenue neutral so that the government will continue to take in the same amount of money it receives currently and thus will not be forced to cut government services. The removal of payroll taxes along with income tax will offset the sales tax. In order to ensure that low-income individuals are not unduly burdened under the FairTax, the FairTax simply "untaxes" these workers. Every household is to receive a monthly rebate equal to the tax on spending up to the federal poverty level. Should you wish to learn more you are referred to their website .
It is unlikely that tax reform will be addressed by our government as long as it is preoccupied with the threats to our country that presently exist. However, it is in such times when necessary reforms are put to one side that it is necessary for concerned citizens to express to the degree possible the continuing need for government to address violations of the basic tenets of our Constitution. There should be no doubt that the application of the 16th Amendment to the Constitution should be considered such a violation.
To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Ben at ratadv@pacbell.net .
The taxbase as a whole.
Are you recommending that government employees not pay a National Retail Sales Tax or Income/Payroll taxes today, because they get there money from taxes lewislynn?
Please note that when a government purchases goods from retail suppliers today it pays the same taxes levied and embedded in the prices of those goods as everyone else.
Not according to Wisconson tax law. Apparently you read it, yet still don't understand the simple wording.
Sales of goods and services to the federal government or to any of its incorporated or unincorporated agencies or instrumentalities are exempt from the sales tax.Which part do you not understand, specifically?Taxing purchases by the federal government would violate the U.S. Constitution, so the fiscal effect of this exemption has not been estimated.
Besides if it is unconstitutional just don't pay it lewislynn, just like not paying the income tax, there is always the black market cash economy. LOL
Other than possible dementia, I have no idea what prompted you to ask that stupid question.
Not according to Wisconson tax law.
Constitution for the United States of America:
Wisconsin tax law, cannot tax federal entities. That has nothing to do with Federal Law taxing Federal entities.
This piece of vermine has fathered 6 kids, the kids and the females who bore them are supported by us through the welfare give-away program. The "father" has never seen the kids nor has he ever contributed one dime toward their support.
This miscreant reports a low wage income to the IRS and because he claims the 6 kids he gets a huge "refund" known as the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Happy post 4/15 bump for the children y'all.
Deducting taxes from wages is one thing. giving the impression that the government is taxing itself for sales and services as if it has money to pay itself is quite another.
BTW, the sales tax on "any government" payroll is ON the payroll, not deducted from it....BIG HUGE DIFFERENCE.
giving the impression that the government is taxing itself for sales and services as if it has money to pay itself is quite another.
As if it has money to pay itself, LOL. Of course it has money to pay itself it gets it from you in the first place.
When govenment purchases anything from private enterprise it pays the full cost of employee gross wages, employer payroll excises and any property, and other kinds of taxes embedded into the price of the product by virtue of financing all such elements from gross sales receipts.
That is a fundmental fact that cannot be avoided by the very nature of taxation. All a Retail Sales Tax does different is create a receipt detailing the tax burden separating it from the natural(i.e. taxfree) price of a product.
Everyone. government entities too, pays federal taxes through the corporate income/payroll tax VAT system.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
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.