Posted on 02/08/2003 5:56:38 PM PST by Bigun
White House Floats Idea of Dropping Income Tax Overhaul By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
WASHINGTON, Feb. 7 — President Bush, having already set off a firestorm over his proposals to cut taxes and revamp retirement accounts, suggested today that the time might be near to drop the income tax as a whole and replace it with some form of consumption tax...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
NRST propagandists prefer using the deceptive practice of "tax inclusive" rates, which produces a mathematicly smaller number. However, the way most normal people are accustomed to calculating percentages, the rate is approximately 30%
Posing as "tax reform", the NRST (HR 2525) also represents a "land grab" where business interests are favored over individuals purchasing for their own use:
This a significant inequity between individuals trying to buy their own new homes and landord/investors looking to buy the same single family dwelling as a rental investment. This disparity has long term implications affecting the distribution of private property. The American tradition favoring individual property rights is reversed. The NRST would discourage individual "consumption" of real property.
While this example illustrates how the NRST affects purchase of a new home, it also applies to all other retail sales, including necessities such as food, clothing and medicines. It also applies to the necessity for shelter, not only for new home purchase, but also to rent charged by landlords.
Thank-you for asking and providing me the opportunity to explain how incredibly heinous and opressive this tax is!
Second, I see nothing to convince me that if a 23% tax is levied on *every* "new good or service for personal consumption" that that won't have drastic economic consequences. If I am right, and prices didn't decrease because of the removal of the federal income tax, then there are many goods & services America will decide to do without, or do without more often. Many people work their way into the middle class by providing personal services to people without that much more money than them: hair braiders, hair stylists, manicurists, etc. All these services would have a 23% automatic price increase.
It is completely untrue that "consumption tends to be more constant than income." People's levels of consumption WILDLY vary throughout their life cycle. (Ask any parents with a new baby and a toddler.)
This part is particularly screwy: Perhaps most importantly, to ensure that no American will pay tax on necessities, the FairTax plan provides a prepaid, monthly rebate for every registered household to cover the 23% consumption tax spent on necessities up to the federal poverty level.
This says to me that the consumption tax *will* be charged on food and medicine at the point of sale, and that if you want your money back, you *register* with the government and get some amount back *up to what you would have spent had you been poor.* In other words, those who buy better quality food, medicine, or medical care are *penalized* by a limitation to the amount rebate. Instead, ALL tax on necessities should be refunded or better yet, not charged at the point of sale at all.
Notice also this line from the bill's section on registering to get your rebate: Said registration shall be signed by all members of the qualified family that have attained the age of 21 years as of the date of filing. In other words, if you are 18, living on your own,NOT a student supported by your parents, you can't register & thus get your rebate?
If I've misunderstood this point, please clarify. But the more I read about this, the worse it sounds.
It looks like that to me, too. For instance, you would pay federal tax on a new house, but not on a "used" house. Do you pay a federal tax on land every time it's sold? (Seems like it to me.) Since all land on the face of the earth is "used," seems like there should be NO sales tax on land sales, or that the lot itself should not be taxed.
Attempting to tax lots when they're bought by individuals but NOT by developers for re-sale is fundamentally wrong, anti-populist, and a way to create a landed, feudal class & a peasantry, even though it doesn't seem like that now.
Exactly!
It is an inherently regressive tax that wipes out the Middle Class.
The long term result is a two-tiered, socio-economic, 21st Century, eco-feudal system.
And please don't be misled by claims of a 23% tax. NRST advocates use a deceptive method of calculation they call "tax inclusive" that works like this:
Imagine an item that costs $1.00, tax-included.
Under the NRST method, this means that 23¢ is tax that is collected by the government and 77¢ is the cost of the item due to the seller.
This is how they claim a 23% tax rate.
Yet most people would calculate this 23¢ as 29.87% of a 77¢ item. (Still producing a $1.00 total)
Ironicly, when challenged that the NRST proposal does nothing to reduce government spending, they claim that it makes taxes "more visible" to the taxpayers who would in turn demand a reduction in spending. Yet they hypocritically bury the tax in the purchase price of an item with this "tax-inclusive" pricing methodology!
Yeah, right.
It should not be a surprise to anybody that the NRST was first sponsored in Congress by certified lunatic and convicted felon James Traficant.
Hear Here!
, if I believed that the nrst had ANY chance of being implemented the way it is worded, I would support it. However, I am afraid that it has NO chance whatsoever of being implemented this way, and would eventually devolve into a VAT. Ick
Ahhh! I really hate to be the one to inform you but for all practical purposes, our corporate tax is a VAT. The NRST is designed to reverse that situation as well as repeal the individual income tax.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/foundationmessage03-00.html
"Under the WTO definition of the term, a sales tax is an indirect tax, as is an European-style VAT. The economic equivalence of an European-style VAT and a subtraction-method VAT is well-established. A subtraction-method VAT is essentially identical to a business income tax except that all purchases of plant and equipment may be expensed, rather than depreciated as under current U.S. law."
And every man woman and child in the nation, pays federal taxes through that VAT.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
The full impact of the federal tax system(taxes in gross wage/salaries & other compensation + business income/payroll taxes) added onto the base(taxfree) price of retail consumption goods and services is 36% for federal taxes alone.
I'm in favor of sticking with the Devil I know rather than dancing with the Devil I don't know.
Doesn't look like you know the Devil you are dancing with too well at all, from my perspective.
SO TRUE! Your thought about the future if this should ever come about is probably true. And it reminds me of President Johnson, after the civil rights legislation, said, paraphrased, 'this will put the blacks under our thumbs for the next 200 years'. And as some the the programs sprung into massive action, like the one that encouraged young black girls to have babies out of wedlock in order to qualify for free government housing and food stamps, etc, the precious, once tight knit and cohesive black familys began to crumble-leading to a lifestyle of government dependence. Democrats took this dem designed victemization status and ran with it-using it to powerfully keep our blacks out of the promise that is all Americans.
If our President and his advisors are serious about repealing the income tax, it won't be to keep people voting republican, it will be because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO. Our founding fathers are knocking on some powerful hearts....I hope it continues!
Posing as "tax reform", the NRST (HR 2525) also represents a "land grab" where business interests are favored over individuals purchasing for their own use:
Posing?
H.R.25
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 01/7/2003)
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.
Refer: http://www.fairtax.org & http://www.salestax.org
Sure looks like tax reform to me.
Willy, how many years you going to continue with the same wornout irrational diatribe? You never change it or try even to clean it up to present a more coherent and rational argument for your postition. Just through it out there to bump a thread because you don't like seeing the NRST touted as a alternative to the income tax.
You continually throw it out inspite of the fact it has been totally refuted everytime you have posted it.
Now to answer your specific allegations:
- Landlord/investors enjoy a 23% discount compared to the individual personal home buyer.
- Individual personal home buyers must pay 29.87% more than landlord/investors.
This a significant inequity between individuals trying to buy their own new homes and landord/investors looking to buy the same single family dwelling as a rental investment.
ROTFLM(_|_)O!
Still playing rich man against poor man aren't you Willy.
You do know of course, that investors are home buyers and renters too, don't you?
Why don't you mention:
These factors more than overcomes any imagined advantage of investor over the homebuyer so that all homebuyers can become an investors too.
But then good socialists never consider becoming investors themselves now do they W.G.
A typical family purchasing their own new house today has 25% or more of their gross income extracted by the Federal government before they even think about buying a new or even an older house. That is not even counting the tax costs and costs of compliance placed on businesses of an additional 20 to 30% and embedded in the price of the new house.
Of course that landlord/investor also pays the same tax on the house he lives in or rents before he can ever become an "investor/landlord" in the first place. Or do you figure such folks live in NY allies and sleep on park benches.
Additionally, a buyer of an older home, is not charged the NRST, which is the case of most first time buyers of homes.
Actually not, as the Landlord/invester pays the 23% tax on the home he lives in whether rented or purchased, the same manner as any other individual.
Again untrue, the landlord/investor pays the same tax on the home he rents or buys new for his personal use. All individuals are treated the same under the NRST. Infact, because the individual receives the full benefit and control of his gross income, as opposed to merely after tax income under the current system. That plus the NRST prebate paid to ALL households provides an enhanced opportunity for everyone to become investors.
Under the current Income/Payroll tax system, the total contribution of the federal tax system(including taxes in gross wage/salaries) to the price of retail consumption goods and services is 36% for taxes alone. Including cost of compliance at around $600billion/year, increases that percentage to about a 47% total burden with respect to current family consumption expenditure caused by the federal tax system as it exists today.
Frankly, I'll be happy to pay 23% of the total payment for new goods and services, or as you would put it (30% added on) to the tax free price any day. Considering that I have available my full gross pay from which to accrue tax free growth of my savings and investments.
Compared to what we are hit with now:
We must . . . End Tax Slavery Now; Nov '97
by Jarret B. Wollstein
HOW MUCH DO YOU REALLY PAY?
According to the Tax Foundation, in 1994 the average American paid 22.4% of his or her income in federal taxes, plus 11.8% in state and local taxes - 34.2% total.
But that's just the beginning! Dr. James Payne of the University of California found that in addition to direct taxes we also pay huge, hidden taxes including:
- Compliance costs - record keeping, monies spent on tax planning, computers and software purchased to fulfill IRS requirements, etc.
- Enforcement costs - IRS audits, field investigations, service center corrections, criminal investigations, litigation, and forced collections.
- Emotional, moral and cultural costs - families forced onto welfare, time and creative energy lost figuring out how to avoid taxes, etc.
For every $1 we pay in direct taxes, we spend an additional $0.65 in compliance costs. And even that figure doesn't include the cost of import duties, license fees and other government regulations. For a typical U.S. family, the real cost of taxes and regulations is at least:
Federal taxes 22.4% of income
State & local taxes 11.8%
Compliance costs 22.2%
Regulatory costs 12.7%70.1% of your income is now consumed by government
Federal bureaucrats. New rules. New enforcement. Feel that chill down your spine yet?
State administration of the NRST, not federal, infact the change to most states allow for a simpler system than already exists.
States collect and enforce the NRST passing collection on to the United States Treasury.
H.R.25
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 01/7/2003)
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.
Refer: http://www.fairtax.org & http://www.salestax.org
How is this going to make my life better?
The individual family is relieved of liability for report or remitting the tax, that is the province of the retail business, just as it is today for retail sales tax currently in existence. The Feds are no longer in the personal business of the family.
but why should I believe that it will actually produce what it is supposed to produce?
Simply put ,the bill will do as it says, Read it. Don't support the bill and work for its enactment nothing will be produced. Support it, and it becomes the tax law. Nothing more, nothing less.
But then you can not believe and continue to live under the Devil that is and the federal intrusiveness that goes with it.
We must . . . End Tax Slavery Now; Nov '97
by Jarret B. Wollstein
HOW MUCH DO YOU REALLY PAY?
According to the Tax Foundation, in 1994 the average American paid 22.4% of his or her income in federal taxes, plus 11.8% in state and local taxes - 34.2% total.
But that's just the beginning! Dr. James Payne of the University of California found that in addition to direct taxes we also pay huge, hidden taxes including:
- Compliance costs - record keeping, monies spent on tax planning, computers and software purchased to fulfill IRS requirements, etc.
- Enforcement costs - IRS audits, field investigations, service center corrections, criminal investigations, litigation, and forced collections.
- Emotional, moral and cultural costs - families forced onto welfare, time and creative energy lost figuring out how to avoid taxes, etc.
For every $1 we pay in direct taxes, we spend an additional $0.65 in compliance costs. And even that figure doesn't include the cost of import duties, license fees and other government regulations. For a typical U.S. family, the real cost of taxes and regulations is at least:
Federal taxes 22.4% of income
State & local taxes 11.8%
Compliance costs 22.2%
Regulatory costs 12.7%70.1% of your income is now consumed by government
Gee wheezer, that seems to contradict the statements made by other NRST shills.
Are you sure you have permission to make statements like that?
"A home is NOT an investment, W/G, but merely a place to live."
Posted on 03/26/2001 16:27:50 PST by pigdog
BTW, what ever happened to pigdong?To: pigdog, Willie Green
It's amazing how many people view a home as an "asset," as well. It's a frickin' LIABILITY.
Federal taxes 22.4% of income State & local taxes 11.8% Compliance costs 22.2% Regulatory costs 12.7% 70.1% of your income is now consumed by government
Let's see. You want to eliminate the 22.4% Federal tax and replace it with a 30% (at least) National Retail Sales Tax. The other taxes will continue. So under your scheme we will have to pay a total of 77.7% total taxes. Hey, let's jump right on that.
What makes you think state and local taxes, compliance costs, and regulatory costs will go away after the NRST is implemented? Will the Clean Air Act be repealed? Will the ADA be repealed? Will there be no one to enforce the collection of the NRST at the point of purchase?
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. "
Please. We don't need this one repealed! What's wrong with you?
tell me how this magical NRST is going to make things better in the real world?
It will give you first control of your pay check before government gets any cut. From there it is up to you how you spend or invest your income.
Live frugally purchase used or do for yourself and invest, you receive maximum benefit to the accumulation of the basis for wealth accumulation by the private individual.
Spend it all, government gets a take of 23% of what you spend.
You stand in control of how much tax is extracted from you by your own choices.
How is this going to make my life better?
You have greater liberty and control over you life. You are burdened less by government by the reduction of the costs of compliance (65 cents for every dollar collected under the current system) on business, meaning greater profitibility of investments and potential for lower prices through competition.
If you can't find a better economic life with those working for you, stay with the current system.
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.