[LS]

I agree all forms of taxation have economic implications. I strongly disagree that a tariff is the least intrusive. It appears so only because the APPARENT burden falls on the consumer. But the real burden falls on producers/comepetitors who will either be made unproductive by this or who gain unfair market advantage by fiat of government. A flat tax is the most unobtrusive of all. Very simple. You earn, you pay 10% or 15%. End of story.

Equally important, tariffs are hugely political---as I mentioned before---because they reward SOME businesses and punish some consumers, which means that the states with the clout will always dominate those with fewer votes.

[Willie Green]

But the real burden falls on producers/comepetitors who will either be made unproductive by this or who gain unfair market advantage by fiat of government.

Correction: on foreign producers/competitors who are not subject to the same set of laws, regulations and taxes imposed on our domestic producers/competitors.

I see no reason to extend priveleged access to the "free market" defined by the sovereign jurisdictional boundaries of our Constitution to entities not bound by that Constitution. So long as the federal government imposes restrictions through taxation/regulation on America's ability to fully utilize and enjoy its own resources, tariffs remain the least intrusive form of generating federal revenue.