While you are working on the nominal issue of decreasing the rate, I am working on the important issue of decreasing the amount and keeping the distribution of tax burden as it is, currently. When I suggest increasing the FCA and the tax rate you oppose raising the rate as if you think a higher tax will be paid. You’re wrong. If FCA and rate\are both raised in proper proportions it merely changes distribution of the tax not the amount of it.
The state tax authorities, who charter and licenses retail businesses and keep track of em for tax purposes, don't seem to have much trouble with such. 80 percent of retail sales go through 10% of the businesses.
The shenanigans will be at all businesses not just retail businesses. For example, businesses can give cars to key employees as business expenses rather than give higher salaries so employees can buy their own cars (and hundreds of things like that). Also, are you not aware of the level of cheating on sales tax?
You really should watch your "it seems", "I say", "I think", and keep the discussion to something less than total speculation.
You do the same thing but put forth your opinion as objective truth. I’m being more honest and humble.
Somehow I fail to worry over apparent concerns of where rich folks put there money. Seems to be a personal problem for you though.
You conclude this from what? The fact that I prefer not to shift the tax burden from the upper incomes to the middle class?
Deuce: I have repeatedly asked you for material dealing with distributional effect
Ancient_Geezer: None exist in the form you wish, Mastromarco and Jorgensen's studies address the issues via model and links to that material has been provide which you say you have not studied.
I am interested in the distribution of tax burden. Most people are going to want to know this if this concept ever gets off the ground. Knowing that the tax burden is shifted downward, however much you welcome it, is not a feature likely to gain broad based popular appeal.
Upper income class pays more tax in proportion to income than any other class.
As a group, they also pay a smaller portion of their wealth and less than the benefits they receive.
Upper income class pays more tax in proportion to income than any other class.
As a group, they also pay a smaller portion of their wealth
Wealth is income earned and retained after taxes. They have paid far more in proportion to their income in aquiring that wealth than any other class. Your hyperbole merely points once again to the personal problem you have concerning what the rich do with their after tax income.
Even page three of this JCT Study you refer others to, and you base you distribution calculations on says otherwise:
and less than the benefits they receive.
benefits from government? benefits in proportion to tax they pay? Definitely not. Again from your own sources, those who receive the greater share of government largess in proportion to their incomes, the poor, pay the least in taxes:
This leaves the great in between middle class which receive:
Your own sources you rely on, disprove your statements and show your socialist agenda and ingenuousness for what it is.
Ancient_Geezer to Deuce: Your own sources you rely on, disprove your statements and show your socialist agenda and ingenuousness for what it is. 902
That's how I see it too, as would any rational, honest person.
Deuce: I am interested in the distribution of tax burden. Most people are going to want to know this if this concept ever gets off the ground. Knowing that the tax burden is shifted downward, however much you welcome it, is not a feature likely to gain broad based popular appeal. 899
From what I can tell you have a collectivist groupthink mentality about it wherein you join the corralled group herded into thinking it is okay to sacrifice a portion of the individual's life-and-property rights to the supposed betterment of the group.
"Taxation is necessary to gain revenue but honest principle, integrity, honoring and protecting individual life-and-property rights are primary unit. All those in bold are violated when taxes are imposed greater on one group than another. It sacrifices a portion of the individual for the supposed betterment of the group. It is collectivist groupthink. Like voting for the lesser of evils always begets evil -- how so many people thinking they're right can be so wrong. Politics, and especially reflected in politics of taxation, suck. Politics suck objectivity out and insert irrationality in. Individual life-and-property rights are primary and must be protected, honored and respected -- not sacrificed." 888