If I truly understand something I can reduce it to a paragraph or two in my own words. Don't you have that ability? 
Posted on 11/06/2002 1:39:57 PM PST by Tree of Liberty
If I truly understand something I can reduce it to a paragraph or two in my own words. Don't you have that ability?
WHo knows, but that's not the issue.
THe issue in question was your assertion that business doesn't like this nrst bill. However, after posting numerous links to business organizations that strongly support the nrst bill, you (gasp) change the subject.
Typical lefty.
The trade union has what they believe as the best interest of their members at heart. Their members are BUSINESS OWNERS.
This is phun!
It's funny that nobody has to ask whether you've read it. Clearly you have not. Further, it's clear your agenda is to keep the socialist/marxist income tax in place.
But afraid to identify your real motivation, you rely on false information to promote your agenda.
It's really quite easy to hammer your bs. It helps educate lurkers too. Thanks.
But you know I have. You made plenty of comments to the analysis I posted on FR a couple years ago. Why do you say things like this? Hoping a lurker will read it, believe it and not read the response? You are probably right in that. But it doesn't not contribute to an honest dicussion nor does it contribute to finding the truth of a matter.
If dishonest tactics, diversion, misdirection, and deceit are necessary to push a program, what does that say about the program?
But Will, if you really have read the bill, why do you say that it will be regressive? It is not regressive - indeed the poorer you are, the lower your effective tax rate. And if you are below the poverty level, you have a negative tax rate.
How could someone who claims to have read the bill not have absorbed such fundamental information???
And Will, if you really have read the bill, why do you say that your business purchases will be taxed??? It is a fundamental component of this bill that business purchases are not taxed.
How could someone who claims to have read the bill not have absorbed such fundamental information???
Your material misstatements regarding these two issues alone easily suffices for evidence that you haven't a clue. Saying you've read and understood the bill but making these fundamental errors is analogous to an individual claiming to be a carpenter but not knowing what a hammer, saw, or nail is.
SUre you can post incomplete snippets interspersed with your own commentary - but a 5 year old could do that. You do it with the intent to decieve though.
The rebate may be claimed by sending a form to the government (IRS) consisting the names of the members, their social security numbers, the family member the check will be made out to, certification of citizenship for each member, certification of completeness of list of members, certification that no member were incarcerated as of date and the address, signed under penalties of perjury by all of-age members. Filing for a rebate is not necessary, unless you want the rebate.
For filing a false rebate form you face criminal indictment. For a mistaken or wrong rebate form you face civil penalties. These are covered by Section 505.
Notice the last paragraph. What kind of organization would be necessary to do this?
Department of Justice, and the Social Security Administration same as now. Certainly not an "IRS" as the particular form you mention happens to be for claiming the Family Consumption Allowence, a payment from the government, and not a Tax on an individual. Note the application for the FCA is voluntary. If you do not want to receive the FCA, you are not required to make the application. If you do apply you are required to be truthful DUH!!
Like the forms retail businesses must send in, it will be sone monthly. If it is done yearly, how will that help?
Retail businesses report their sales and remitted the sales tax they collect monthly to their state sales tax authority under the NRST. Which just goes to demonstrate your incapacity to read the bill with any comprehension you mix disparate sections and attempt to make invalid comparisons.
Each family, living in the same residence, composed of individual, spouses, and other direct relatives who have social security numbers, and are citizens can claim a rebate on taxes paid for a month (Section 302 and 305) of the current tax rate x the poverty rate (Section 303) determined by the Department of Health and Human Services. Section 302, 303 and 305 are complex with many inclusions and exceptions requiring administration and oversight.
What kind of organization will be needed to administrate the process?
Department of Health and Human Service, and the Social Security Administration which are already doing that work now. inclusion & exceptions ?? in regard to statistical analysis of the aggregate economy, not the NRST levied at the cash register. That is what the Bureau of Statistics does now you know. No IRS required hear.
Once again we see the clear demonstration of your intent to twist the content of the legislation to your own agenda. Rather than an objective analysis of what is really in the bill.
Note you make claims for a "rebate" where the bill addresses the Family Consumption Allowence, and try to tie that into being a tax return such as an IRS would demand. The application you point to is voluntary and does not have one bit of financial information in it.
Such twists and turns are the clear actions of the demogogue not the objective analyst you would like other's to believe to be.
It is sufficient to provide the references for others to determine this for themselves from the following references:
H.R.2525
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 07/17/2001)
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 retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
But you know I have.
I know you have extracted bits and pieces to construct your invalid analysis. You claim to understand the bill, only goes to expose you as the demogogue you are when others read the bill and compare it with your supposed objective analysis for themselves.
H.R.2525
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 07/17/2001)
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 retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
If dishonest tactics, diversion, misdirection, and deceit are necessary to push a program, what does that say about the program?
I'll let others decide where the dishonest tactics, divdersion, misdirection, and deceipt are coming from from the hyperlinks to the bill and solid information above.
I whole heartedly argree that one who pushes their views in such a way has an agenda that is not good for others. No just what is the program you are pushing, You still shoveling out the tax evasion non-sense you have previously supported and claimed to engaged in?
It is interesting to note that those who have not paid taxes by failing to report income under the current tax system have a great deal to be concerned about under the NRST. They might actually have to pay taxes like everyone else when they buy their goodies. NRST put a crimp in your style Terrell?
Why haven't you explained to folks your real concerns about the NRST in this thread? That would certainly clarify your position in these matters. It is much easier to hide income from an IRS and get away with it for long periods of time, than it is to evade the NRST making purchases at the local grocery store. Let the folks now about your real agenda in all this, where is that honesty you are claiming for yourself. Seems to me you have a hidden agenda in your attempts to demogogue HR2525.
Why so nasty? Do I threaten your desires?
1) under the nrst your co will no longer pay any income tax! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
So what, my 30 years of experience of payroll system says that companies spend a tiny amount collecting and sending taxes to the fed. I've already detailed the process. As far as income tax, the tax relief from fed and FICA won't near cover the 30% reaise in prices of everything new I buy.
Have you seen how companies duck most of their income taxes by adjusting their taxable gross by a slew of expenses and deduction, many at 100% of expense spent?
You don't have very much experience with the inner working of companies, large and small, do you? I have. I spend many years as a consultant.
2) under the nrst your co will no longer have to collect any payroll taxes from wage earners' paychecks!"You wouldn't be affected" huh?
Only a slight amount is spent by any company collecting and paying payroll taxes. I detailed that process already.
3) under the nrst, your co will no longer have to pay matching FICA to the feds! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
Well now, you're right on matching FICA, but I don't pay it. Any that work for me are legitimate contract sew machine owners, so I didn't have the reference. But this and state unemployment do not add anywhere near 20%-30% to the thousands of individual items producted by a production company in a year.
4) under the nrst, your co will no have no need to have a budget item for tax compliance! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
I don't have one now. Most businesses I did payrolls for didn't either. They just had a bank account to hold the extracted taxes.
5) under an nrst, your co will not have to collect or remit ANY tax (you've claimed you sell to retailers, not to the final consumer)...so there is no tax at all related to anything your company does!!! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
I don't now. I use legitimate contractors. That's right there's no tax to speak of to be relieved of, so I would have to raise prices so that I would make enough money to buy the things I'm used to buying at a 30%+ increase in everything. Yes, in that way, I'm affected.
6)under an nrst, all of your employees would receive 100% of their check free of any federal deductions. The only deductions from anyone's check would be those the employees chooses to have deducted (retirement, medical, etc). NO TAX WHATSOEVER will come out of ANY employee's check! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
See answers above.
I don't doubt that taxes that companies actually pay are passed on to the consumer. But my experience as a consultant argues against it being a significant amount.
I have had one on one experience with small and large business in exectly this area for more than two decades. I don't organize blanket theories that spin on projections based on statistical analyses, I have been right there when the events occured and helped with problems.
And I'm telling you that the notion that prices will fall after business deduct tax expenditures is false. Most of the data you link to comes from companies that produce hundreds of thousands of comsumer items a year, which is why they give price breaks on high orders. The costs spread over all these items are minimal. Your economists have their heads up their asses.
But all that discussion totally revolves around theoretically relieving the perception of of a 30%+ increase of consumer goods and services. There is no evidence that companies will take that amount out of their prices.
Competition is valid only if companies in an industry don't collude to keep the price at a certain level, which they do now.
Tell me, why don't you want to eliminate the income tax, and replace it with nothing? In 1985, the amount collected of income tax and FICA almost exactly matched the expenditures of socialist programs and welfare distributions. So it's not like we would defund true constitutional government.
Now, what the NRST will do is put off the crisis in social security. Is that what you're worried aobut?
Don't you want to remove socialism from America? If so, why do you advocate funding it?
Another time.
Not at all, infact the NRST will allow folks to decide whether or not to participate in SS for themselves. The more folks leave that system the lower the NRST rate will go, automatically.
You don't want Social Security benefits calculated for your earned income and force a tax rate decrease? Don't tell Social Security what what your earned income for the year is.
`(d) OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE RATE- The old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate shall be determined by the Social Security Administration. The old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate shall be that sales tax rate which is necessary to raise the same amount of revenue that would have been raised by imposing a 12.4 percent tax on the Social Security wage base ... The rate shall be determined using actuarially sound methodology
`(e) HOSPITAL INSURANCE RATE- The hospital insurance rate shall be determined by the Social Security Administration. The hospital insurance rate shall be that sales tax rate which is necessary to raise the same amount of revenue that would have been raised by imposing a 2.9 percent tax on the Medicare wage base ... The rate shall be determined using actuarially sound methodology
SEC. 903. WAGES TO BE REPORTED TO SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.
a) IN GENERAL- Employers shall submit such information to the Social Security Administration as is required by the Social Security Administration to calculate social security benefits.
I'm sure the government will be more than happy to not pay you SS benefits. And reduce the tax rate, thank you very much.
It's at least a novel way to end Social Security, go for it:
23%........... HR2525 (NRST) rate
14.91% ..... rate if Social Security and Medicare were privatized
14% .......... rate if Nat'l Endowment for the Arts were eliminated
11.9%........ rate if Dept. of Education were eliminated
10% .......... rate if welfare were eliminated
9.8%.......... rate if foreign aid were eliminated
etc.
Hmmmmmm....... It's do able, with time and effort, once the blinders are removed from the electorate.
3) under the nrst, your co will no longer have to pay matching FICA to the feds! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
Gee, I thought the nst promised 100% of their paychecks to employees. How would he comply with YOUR promise if he doesn't first collect it.
4) under the nrst, your co will no have no need to have a budget item for tax compliance! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
Business records and books will still be kept. Employee's wages and self employment income would still be reported to SS...How is that not having to comply?
But, you see, the statement about the poor not having to pay tax oin necessities was framed as "The poor won't have to pay NRST on necessities, which communicates that they at the point of purchase will pay a lower amount than the others standing in line. This is a attempt to mislead.
Yo dude, get a quote and actually quote it. You have one set of quote marks ( " ). I never said the poor nor anybody else doesn't pay the NRST. Go find the quote where you claim I did or admit your error and correct it. I have been clear and unambiguous in showing where you've attempted to mislead the reader. You're failing miserably in your attempts to paint me as having mislead.
The statement "The poor won't have to pay NRST on necessities" amounts to a lie.
I never wrote that nor did I imply that. Either you go find a place where I said the above quote or correct your error. While you're at it an apology would be nice. Once again you have attempted to deceive the reader. You have been compounding your errors into intentional dishonesty.
BTW, why are you so nasty? What's your problem?
I'm not being nasty. I'm being honorable by not catering to your dishonesty and instead exposing the deception and dishonesty for other readers to benefit. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions -- you're clueless.
All right then, if you have read and understood it, answer this question. If the NRST collections at a certain percentage didn't maintain the set (the current level at the initial implimentation of HR 2525) level of social security, what, by law would have to happen?
See my statement in the paragraph right above. Then read this, again: "I have no need or desire to educate "heathens". 678
Jezz you are obnoxious. I answered your question in the post you have just responded to. Here's the quote of you asking and me answering:
William Terrell: Have you even read HR2525, much less studied it?746
Zon: Yes. And I comprehend it better than you as noted below.774
I have questions to probe your understanding of it.
As I said in my post 834 to you (and I quote you so as to maintain the context):
William Terrell: BTW, why are you so nasty? What's your problem? 803
Zon: I'm not being nasty. I'm being honorable by not catering to your dishonesty and instead exposing the deception and dishonesty for other readers to benefit. You probably think you can mislead and try to deceive the reader and that they should just comply with you and answer your questions -- you're clueless. 834
Tell me, why don't you want to eliminate the income tax, and replace it with nothing?
Without first removing the programs requiring the tax payment, government would merely be funded by the printing press and the nation would be subject to hyper inflation and no accountability of government, nor accountability of the electorate for their demands for largess.
Besides that was tried before with the Continental Congress under the Articles of Confederation. Didn'd work to neat, ever here the expression "not worth a Continental" that was due to the valueless script being issued as a consequence of that war's debt that could not be honored for lack of authority to collect a tax to pay the debts and general expenses of the new United States of America? We damn'ed near found ourselves right back under England's rule because of it, or worse yet the French owning our hides.
One of the dominant reasons the Constitution was written was to assure the power to lay and collect taxes was available to the Federal government. With the perferred mode through the levy of indirect taxes collect from business or the individual as opposed to Apportionment upon the states
In 1985, the amount collected of income tax and FICA almost exactly matched the expenditures of socialist programs and welfare distributions. So it's not like we would defund true constitutional government.
So work to repeal the excess burden, then the NRST rate would be driven downward towards reasonable limits.
23%........... HR2525 (NRST) rate
14.91% ..... rate if Social Security and Medicare were eliminated
14% .......... rate if Nat'l Endowment for the Arts were eliminated
11.9%........ rate if Dept. of Education were eliminated
10% .......... rate if federal welfare programs were eliminated
9.8%.......... rate if foreign aid were eliminated
etc.
One does not get rid of an itch by scratching it, that only causes more irritation and infection. You get rid of the itch by addressing its cause with medication and hygiene, not its effect by continuing to scratch making the problem worse.
That's so they know how much money to send you, not so they can tax you! If you want to receive your SS check, they need to know how much they "owe" you.
Nowadays the IRS needs to know your earnings- all of it, not just wages- so they can tax you. Under the nrst, if you want your SS check, you need to show them you've earned it.
BTW the SSA already does all this now.
Why so nasty?
It's not "nasty" to point out that someone is clueless about the topic they're discussing. "Clueless" is a nice thing to say about someone who says they've read and understood hr2525 but doesn't even know that necessities are untaxed and doesn't even know that business ot business transx are not taxed.
So what, my 30 years of experience of payroll system says that companies spend a tiny amount collecting and sending taxes to the fed.
So your 30 years of experience has not been at the ownership level- or near it. You simply gloss over the fact that fica taxes and an employer's accompanying "contribution" cost a LOT by saying "it doesn't cost that much to collect and send them in". Good grief, did you forget the cost of the tax itself?!
You don't have very much experience with the inner working of companies, large and small, do you?
LOL. Nice try. You "forgot" about the cost of tax itself. Yeah, you're a real experienced, talented consultant. Had trouble finding work lately?
Ohmigosh you forgot income taxes paid by your company. Ohmigosh you forgot that your investors will have a reduced ROI based on the expense of those taxes.
Ohmigosh you don't know what you're doing. I hope whoever you work for gives you CLEAR instructions.
5) under an nrst, your co will not have to collect or remit ANY tax (you've claimed you sell to retailers, not to the final consumer)...so there is no tax at all related to anything your company does!!! "You wouldn't be affected" huh?
I don't now. I use legitimate contractors. That's right there's no tax to speak of to be relieved of,...
Yes there is tax to be relieved of! Your contractors will not have to pay income, payroll, or any taxes - hence they can lower prices to you. Also, anyone your contractor buys from will be relieved of any and all federal tax obligations also.
...so I would have to raise prices so that I would make enough money to buy the things I'm used to buying at a 30%+ increase in everything.
Again, your fundamental position is wrong. Prices for your business purchases will decrease, not increase.
I don't doubt that taxes that companies actually pay are passed on to the consumer. But my experience as a consultant argues against it being a significant amount.
And I would believe you, an income tax lover, over the vast universe of existing data compiled by verifiable experts why???? Further, you have shown to be quite ignorant on the bill itself, asserting that it is regressive (it's obviously not) and asserting that business purchases are tax (they're not). These two "mistakes" are so fundamental that you either really have no idea about the bill or you're lying. Either way, I don't trust your posts.
Your economists have their heads up their asses.
Perhaps you haven't had the vast experience with smaller businesses? Maybe take a look at a few of the small business organizations that endorse the nrst like say, oh, NATIONAL SMALL BUSINESS UNITED. Or do they not know as much as you... "have their heads up their arses" as you put it?
Tell me, why don't you want to eliminate the income tax, and replace it with nothing?
I never said this wasn't the case. However, try getting a Congressman to submit such a bill.
You claim to be have read and understood the bill. But you don't know it from your arse. You thought the nrst was regressive - it's not... see the info on thread. The poorer you are, the less tax you pay; and folks below the poverty line have negative tax rates. How could you say you've read the bill but not know this Will???
You continue to post that your business purchases will be taxed under the nrst- they won't be. How on earth you could be on these thread for more than 10 minutes and think that is beyond me. I can only deduce that it is purposefully misstating.
You also claim 30 years exp. in consulting in tax related areas. That's funny. You may have been an employee for 30 years, but you don't get the big picture of taxation and business.
Yes, I want to eliminate socialist policies, that's precisely why I advocate the nrst. The fact that this bill would put an immediate stop to socialist polices is exactly the reason liberal dems oppose the nrst so vehemently.
You also claim 30 years exp. in consulting in tax related areas. That's funny. You may have been an employee for 30 years, but you don't get the big picture of taxation and business.
He claims to be a "Tax Consultant" , while he indicates others here on FR need not pay their income and payroll taxes using the 861 TP argument and such clap trap. LOL.
You know like in Thurston Bell's organisation, you can pay him several thousand dollars and call your self a consultant, charge hundereds of dollars an hour, hyping Bell's Americans aren't required to pay income taxes line of the 861, subChapter 'N bovine excretement and similar such clap trap getting folks into deep trouble.
Like one of Bell's protoge's who failed to remit FICA for his employees and then keeps it for himself instead and not informing them or giving them therr full paycheck so they can submitt FICA on their own as independant contractors.
Real nice bunch of guys these are.
United States v. Sloan, 939 F.2d 499 (7th Cir. 1991)
Argued that there is no law imposing a tax on income, that state citizens are exempt from income tax.
KANNE, Circuit Judge.
- Like moths to a flame, some people find themselves irresistibly drawn to the tax protestor movement's illusory claim that there is no legal requirement to pay federal income tax. And, like the moths, these people sometimes get burned. Lorin G. Sloan believed these claims and because he acted upon them now faces four months in a federal prison; there can be little doubt that he has been burned.
- The real tragedy of this case is the unconscionable waste of Mr. Sloan's time, resources, and emotion in continuing to pursue these wholly defective and unsuccessful arguments about the validity of the income tax laws of the United States. Despite our rejection of Mr. Sloan's legal analysis of the tax laws, we are not unmindful of the sincerity of his beliefs. On the other hand, we are less sure of the sincerity of the professional tax protestors who promote their views in literature and meetings to persons like Mr. Sloan, yet are unlikely ever to face the type of penalties incurred by him. It may be that our decision will not alter Mr. Sloan's views regarding the tax laws of this country, for he has stated that if we affirm his conviction without applying the law as he understands it, our decision will be "a sham to which I WILL NOT SUBMIT." It may also be that serving his sentence in prison will not alter Mr. Sloan's view. We hope this pessimistic assessment is incorrect.
- We AFFIRM the conviction of Lorin G. Sloan on all counts.
A good article published in The New American to read and consider:
Patriot Beware!
by Thomas R. Eddlem
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/1997/vo13no04/vo13no04_patriot.htm
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.