Posted on 02/08/2003 5:56:38 PM PST by Bigun
Taxing the wealthy at what they're currently taxed at will result in everyone else being taxed at a level more or less what they pay now. I'd call that perceptible.
2) Business will not willingly go for the complexity of a selective tax laid upon them once they are free of the current system and have experienced the freedom and advantages of the NRST,
3) The person levied with an additional tax is not likely to be too happy about the situation.
4) Either house can block legislation with failure of majority, The senate can block legislation to change the tax system by a minority of 41 votes, and a president can veto it.
And these three advantages were present when the imcome tax system was implented in the first place, but that didn't seem to put any dampers on it.
It is up to the people as always isn't it? That is why you have nil support for a tariff only tax system.
Am I to understand that your argument against my idea is that it currently has little support? That's kind of a circular argument, that we shouldn't support something because it has no support. I've never once denied that my ideas aren't currently popular. But popularity isn't the necessarily the mark of a good idea, is it, at least according to that Scottish judge whose statement you keep posting.
I think that the most devastating argument you feel you have against the tariff proposal is that it won't generate enough revenue to enable government to do its legitimate job. It seems you and I have different ideas of what government's legitimate job is. One big difference is that I don't base my ideas on what government is currently doing. My approach is to work from the ground up, and ask, What do we really need, under normal peacetime conditions?
Certainly we need a decent defense capability, though we don't need troops in every country, or ships all over the world, or a President bombing Yugoslavia or doing some other feel-good operation whenever he finds it politically convenient. So what's that leave us with? I'd say a few carriers, a few air bases, a satellite fleet, a missile fleet, a small number of troops, and a well-regulated militia like we used to have. We can keep far more in mothballs, to be brought out when the situation calls for it. And we've proven quite resoundingly that we can grow a huge force in a very short period of time when the emergency arises.
Looking at the other items on the list, the reason the court system and "general government" are so expensive is that society is severely overregulated, well beyond what's needed (you didn't seem to have gotten my sarcasm in Post 612 when I "conceded" that government's job might be a bit more complicated today). And as for the payments on the debt, the feds can go a long way towards completely paying off the debt by selling its gazillions in land holdings that aren't even remotely being used for a purpose authorized by the Constitution. As for what's left of the debt, I wouldn't consider it unreasonable to have an internal tax until it's paid off.
I'm thinking that $60-100 billion a year should cut it. If I'm wrong, I'll have no problem admitting it, though I'd still argue that maximum-revenue tariffs, even if they do need to be further supplemented, are the best way of keeping foreign manipulativeness at arms length while still preserving good trading relations with the rest of the world, which is the point I was initially making.
Taxing the wealthy at what they're currently taxed at will result in everyone else being taxed at a level more or less what they pay now. I'd call that perceptible.
Not to the majority, and on election day, majority is what counts.
And these three advantages were present when the imcome tax system was implented in the first place, but that didn't seem to put any dampers on it.
We had a Corporate Tax (see Flint) in place prior to the individual income tax, and businesses were plagued with numerous license taxes, duties, tariffs and all sundry of business taxes laid by the federal government. The game of tax the business and let it pass the tax down to the customer price has been around forever, the tariff being only one of many such taxes.
You make your blanket statements but I notice you never back them up.
Am I to understand that your argument against my idea is that it currently has little support?
No only that it has no support where it counts, as a bill to be enacted by Congress. You have yet to let us in on how you intend that this tariff system of yours will be put in place without Congress Critters and Presidents involved. You know, the folks who get elected by providing the current gravy train?
I think that the most devastating argument you feel you have against the tariff proposal is that it won't generate enough revenue to enable government to do its legitimate job.
You would be wrong. The argument I have is that you do not get to decide what the ultimate size to do its legitimate job is.
One big difference is that I don't base my ideas on what government is currently doing. My approach is to work from the ground up, and ask, What do we really need, under normal peacetime conditions?
The NRST is revenue neutral with the current tax system, avoiding the pitfall of enactment of most reform proposals and clearly the primary pitfall of you tariff only system. Unlike your tariff, the NRST replaces the current tax system sustaining current revenue stream it does not put an immediate threat to incumbancy nor current programs.
From there it is up to the good people of this nation to decide what programs and what size of government they desire and press for with knowledge of the tax burden that the visibility of the NRST provides. The choice is not your's or mine as to the extent of this government, it is upon the Congress as elected representatives of the American people to determine that through the processes laid out in the Constitution.
What you may think is the best way to determine the size of government relative to your liking is only relavent insofar as you are able to effect the election of representatives to the legislative branch of government. That's where it ends, and that is where your fantasy of a tariff only system ends.
I'm thinking that $60-100 billion a year should cut it. If I'm wrong, I'll have no problem admitting it,
That's good of you. Hope you aren't to disappointed when you never see it happen.
though I'd still argue that maximum-revenue tariffs, even if they do need to be further supplemented, are the best way of keeping foreign manipulativeness at arms length while still preserving good trading relations with the rest of the world, which is the point I was initially making.
Still trying to figure out how a National Retail Sales Tax that impacts both foreign and domestic goods the same does not do the job just as well if not better as a single rate NRST impedes the setting of individual rates and favored treatment of goods based in political and foreign manipulation. In fact an NRST would go along way preserving good trading relations while extracting that maximum revenue possible from the sale of imported goods you seem to think is so desirable.
Considering the NRST is applied equally to domestic goods and foreign imports one can expect that for a given rate of tax, substantially more revenue can be extracted from imports than would be possible under a tariff only situation allowing the setting of much lower rates of taxation for a given level of revenue to the government.
You want a $60-$100 billion government, that would translate to a 0.6 to 1.11% NRST. At current import levels we now experience a 2% overall tariff going to 1.1% or less would just assure greater trade and more revenues. Trying to extract $60-$100billion from a tariff only situation would demand a tariff rate of 6 to 10% which probably would not achieve the objective for lost sales volume of imports in favor of untaxed domestic products.
I fail to see any advantage to be gained from your "revenue tariff" whatsoever, especially noting the advantages of the NRST in lower rates and expanded trade, both domestic and foreign, that would arise as a consequence of minimal tax burdens focused into the general retail sector where the tax burden is visible and the electorate can directly monitor the impact of government on their economic lives on a daily basis.
Sorry I just don't by your argument for "revenue tariffs" to sustain any level of government. You simply do not provide a substantive reason as to why we should weigh down import trade with 10+ times higher tax rates using "revenue tariffs" over the tax rates of the NRST collecting the same level revenues.
I feel though that as long as there is an income tax, it is our duty as citizens to fight the IRS and the tax system.
When everyone ignore the IRS and their supposed laws, then and only then will real reform occur.
I've written my senators and congress for over 20 years with no result.
Many people have decided that this government will not adress the grievences of the overtaxed in this country. The only way to fight is to use the law and overwhelm the IRS and the DOJ with passive resistance.
Many people have dropped out or are using the underground economy to fight this beurocratic nightmare which is the tax system.
My favorite quote of Albert Einstein is when he was asked the question..."Mr Einstein, is there anything that man can never understand?"
His reply was..."Yes, the tax laws of the United States."
When everyone ignore the IRS and their supposed laws, then and only then will real reform occur.
Supposed laws? Those laws are quite real and have a real consequence when not abided by.
The violation of any law breeds only disrespect for all law, and the rule of law is destroyed s as a direct result.
Advocating the destruction of the rule of law, is not consistant with defending and protecting the Constitution nor the Republic it guarantees.
No I do not agree with your assessment not the route you advocate.
I've written my senators and congress for over 20 years with no result.
Might mean you are demanding the wrong things or offering no viable alternative. Better look at your message both to congress and to your freinds and neighbors the elect Congresses.
You indicate you want to end the power of the IRS. But that will not happen through disrespect for or ignoring law, that just encourages the strengthening of enforcement efforts and strengthening the very institution you say you want to get rid of.
To end the IRS one must offer a better alternative and encourage the electorate, Not just individual Congress Critters, towards making the change through Constitutional processes, not lawlessness.
John Linder (R Georgia) offers a comprehensive bill to kill all income and payroll taxes outright, and provide a IRS free replacement:
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
Strange, that in your supposed desire to end the IRS you have not suggested getting removing of the law that is the basis for their existence. The means exists to do so, I suggest you start working for the change by reaching out to your friends an neghbors (the electorate) to enable appropriate and lasting change for the better.
Doing it your way, the guy sitting behind bars is removed from the fight as is the one impoverished by fighting perpetual legal battles. Neither has much capacity to render aid to anyone's cause.
Constitutionality, and legality, have little to do with morality. A Moral law is dependant upon moral persons acting to ensure only moral law is enacted and immoral laws are removed.
Under this republic and its Constitution that can only be accomplished by legislative means. The alternative is the destruction of the Republic, and you are up for grabs as to what follows. Under the moral condition of our current society I can guarantee what follows will bear no resemblance to the result envisioned by the forefathers of this nation.
Wait a minute I thought Linder claimed that HR 2525 would be 'revenue neutral'. How can HR 2525 be revenue neutral AND save the taxpayers $2.5 trillion over the next 10 years as claimed later in the article?
And if this policy does result in political manipulation of rates, at least the manipulation is confined to the foreign sphere, rather than on our lives as citizens. But the best way to reduce that tendency is to constitutionally restrict government's ability to raise revenue in the first place (a long-term goal, to be sure, and one which would require a lot of convincing on the part of the public), so that it would have the greatest incentive to focus on revenue, not politics.
This actually brings me to another point. You spoke of the NRST's low tax burdens resulting from people's ability to gauge it directly. Again, this is provided the tax burden isn't alleviated by inflation, or that the people don't vote in an income tax on the wealthy once again. So my suggestion to you is to back up your proposal with a proposal for a constitutional amendment to make it stick, while you still have the momentum for it. If there's support for the NRST as you say, then there should be support for an amendment as well. Five years from now, when people are demanding to soak the rich again, you may wish you had it.
Because the 2.5 trillion mentioned here is not revenue but IS money currently being squandered needlessly in order to COMPLY with the current income tax code!
My reason for supporting discriminatory tariffs remains -
You said you were after "revenue tariffs" now we are going to "discriminatory tariffs". What is the distinction that such is not the dreaded "protective tariffs" you have said your tax is not supposed to be?
provided that they are geared towards revenue considerations only, not political considerations.
How do you intend to enforce that, considering who has the authority to enact law, (i.e. CONGRESS).
And if this policy does result in political manipulation of rates, at least the manipulation is confined to the foreign sphere, rather than on our lives as citizens
We'll just manipulate that other guy's livelyhood, (i.e. importers.)
don't tax you, and
don't tax me,
We'll just tax that guy behind the tree?
Once again, How do you intend to enforce no political ramifications in implementing "discriminatory tariffs". Once the door is opened, it remains out there to be applied against all citizens. Foreigners don't pay tariffs American citizens do.
Again, this is provided the tax burden isn't alleviated by inflation,
Your suggestion? Seeing that inflation is driven ultimately by demand for largess exceeding government revenues. The point of an NRST is to provide folks with a measure of the real burden, to discourage demand for additional largess that induces the tendency towards inflationary taxes(e.g. deficit financing).
The only guarantee to attempt to deal with that problem is to support an amendment such as:
H.J.RES.22
Sponsor: Rep Istook, Ernest J., Jr. [OK-5] (introduced 2/13/2003)
Latest Major Action: 2/13/2003 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Title: Proposing a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
or that the people don't vote in an income tax on the wealthy once again. So my suggestion to you is to back up your proposal with a proposal for a constitutional amendment to make it stick,
Tells me you haven't bothered to learn the first thing about the NRST proposal, nor read the bill itself which calls for a constitutional amendment to prohibit all taxes on income, payroll, and gift estate taxes as part of putting the NRST in as a replacement to the current tax system.
It is up to you to support appropriate amendments to get the job done, ones like H.J.RES.15 which is already in committee:
H.J.RES.15
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 1/28/2003)
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
Though it should be modified to prohibit all income, payroll, gift estate taxes as the NRST proposal H.R.25 calls for in anticipation of ultimate enactment of a bill like H.R.25.
You can be encouraging people to get behind that or a like amendment now, while encouraging the enactment of a better tax system.
,I would conjecture that it would probably be considerably higher than the 2% we've been imposing across the board,
We are already imposing your "discriminatory tariffs" now, 2% is simply the overall average of all revenues received from tariffs across all imports, many are quite high depressing selected imports while most imports have none at all.
Under the NRST all imports would be taxed, which is what you stated as desirable. However, recognize that an NRST does not prohibit tariffs or other excises. I just don't believe that they are that great a tool to achieve the ends that adherents for such taxes claim for them, they serve only to inhibit markets which is a political tool of social and economic control more than mere actions with collecting revenue in mind.
Where oil is concerned, personally I would rather use up some other nation's resources before exhausting our own. IWhen oil prices rise for more than temporary fluctuation, our own resouces will be brought on line all to soon. I see no reason to encourge premature utilization of such reserves while not needed.
But then those are merely my views of such things. I are certainly allowed to express your own. In the end it will be Congress as representatives of the American electorate that will be the determiner such things.
For now, I try to focus on specific fights that I believe will lead towards the conditions leading to a better nation. It is far too easy to spread one's self so thin demanding instant results all over the place, that nothing is achieved.
The distinction is that it would still be geared towards maximum revenue. Once you're over that hump for any particular item, then you're into "protective" country.
How do you intend to enforce that, considering who has the authority to enact law, (i.e. CONGRESS).
I told you, with a constitutional amendment limiting Congress' ability to extract internal taxes, such that they'd have the greatest incentive to get the best revenue they can out of tariffs. This would reduce the tendency to play around with the rates for political purposes. I suppose we could go further by requiring the appointment of an apolitical board (something along the lines of judges) whose job would be to determine those rates.
How do you intend to enforce no political ramifications in implementing "discriminatory tariffs". Once the door is opened, it remains out there to be applied against all citizens.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Tariffs can't be used to tell people what school to send their kids to, or when to buy a home, or what kind of health insurance or retirement plan they should have. They are extremely limited in their potential for manipulativeness.
Foreigners don't pay tariffs American citizens do.
Something I've never denied. Does this mean you'll now stop accusing me of wanting to avoid a tax burden for myself?
Your suggestion?
No, inflationary spending is most definitely not something I'd suggest. Read my post again.
Tells me you haven't bothered to learn the first thing about the NRST proposal, nor read the bill itself which calls for a constitutional amendment....
You're right, I was only relying on your statements to me. After all, you're the one trying to sell this proposal to the rest of us, so it's up to you to highlight the features that would make us want to accept it. I even provided you with a golden opportunity when I asked you what would prevent the people from wanting to reinstitute the graduated income tax. You gave me four answers, none of which mentioned anything about a constitutional amendment. But I'm glad to hear it's part of your proposal.
Nothing in any of my posts to you "demanded instant results". Please stop making assumptions about me.
Just do me this favor. Please. No case law. No.."You must pay or else..." PLease show me where in the tax code does it make you or I liable. I have the tax code right in front of me. I have read it all. I cannot see anywhere where we are liable.
If I am wrong, then please show me my error.
PLease show me where in the tax code does it make you or I liable.
Your answer has been given you through Melton, laying out the tax code that makes an individual citizen liable for taxes on income.
Accept it or not, that is your problem, and not mine. The DOJ enforces the statute, the Courts apply the statute in accord with the intent of Congress, and you're stuck with it whenever they figure its worth getting out of your hide when not collectable in any other way.
If it is established in the courts that you have "gross income in excess of the amount requiring the filing of a return" you are a "person liable."
That's life buba, get over it. Its the only answer you are going to get and all that is necessary to wring the change out of your pockets.
United States v. Melton, No. 94-5535 (4th Cir. 1996)
ARGUED: Lowell Harrison Becraft, Jr.[one of Schulz & Co. legal beagles], Huntsville, Alabama, for Appellants.
- "Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a federal tax on the taxable income of every individual.
26 U.S.C. s 1."
- "Section 63 defines "taxable income" as gross income minus allowable deductions."
26 U.S.C. s 63.
- Section 61 states that "gross income means all income from whatever source derived," including compensation for services.
26 U.S.C. s 61.
- Sections 6001 and 6011 provide that a person must keep records and file a tax return for any tax for which he is liable.
26 U.S.C. ss 6001
26 U.S.C. ss 6011.
- Finally, section 6012 provides that every individual having gross income that equals or exceeds the exemption amount in a taxable year shall file an income tax return.
26 U.S.C. s 6012.The duty to pay federal income taxes therefore is "manifest on the face of the statutes, ...
Each Melton brother had gross income in excess of the amount requiring the filing of a return in each of the years at issue. Therefore, each was a "person liable."
Nothing in any of my posts to you "demanded instant results". Please stop making assumptions about me.
Wheww, that's good. Give me a call when you have some legislatative language before Congress to evaluate.
After all, you're the one trying to sell this proposal to the rest of us
Not selling a thing, its free info for anyone to look into if they are interested in tax reform.
so it's up to you to highlight the features that would make us want to accept it
First of all, I am not interested in making anyone want to accept. They are either ready for tax reform or not, I merely offer a system that I believe to be a better answer than the current ways of doing things, and that has been proposed to Congress providing some measure of hope that with support could be successfully implemented.
I provide hyperlinks to legislation and sites containing information about the NRST for a purpose. I expect that others will take the effort to read and learn about it.
Detailed and broad discussions have been going on for years on the topic of the NRST some of which are referenced within this thread.
I can lead a horse to water, however it is up to the horse to drink it.
For other discussions across the years on FR about tax reform and comment on the NRST both pro and con, have at it everything you never wanted to really know about tax reform:
- Lindsey Says Bush Will Seek Tax Reform After Tax Cuts [ ...
- DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX AT THE SUPERMARKET [Free Republic]
- The Original Intent of the Income Tax
- THE TAX DEBATE. TRUE FLAT Vs CURRENT Vs NRST -#1[Free Republic]
- LIBERAL TAX MYTH EXPOSED [Free Republic]
- The Fair Tax Alternative to the IRS Is It Constitutional [Free Republic]
- Tiptoe Through The Tax-code Tinker Tango [Free Republic]
- Criticism of the Sales Tax for Residential Real Estate Isn't Built on a Solid Foundation
- Tax Protestors Why Don't You Back The NRST [Free Republic]
- Transcript of Testimony before Ways and Means-Chairman of Americans for Fair Taxation
- Taxes [Free Republic]
- Real Tax Reform [Free Republic]
- Fair Tax FReepers...Prepare For Cyber-War!!! (Thread #3) [Free Republic]
- Fair Tax FReepers...Prepare For Cyber-War!!! [Free Republic]
- The Price of Civilized Society Surges to $10,298 Per Person in the U.S.
- National Small Business United Endorses The Fair Tax Plan [Free Republic]
- Bill Before Congress that will Abolish the Abusive Income Tax and Gestapo IRS!
- Bipartisan plan would replace IRS with sales tax [Free Republic]
- Bartering the tax bill Salem’s got a kernel of a good idea
- Lindsey Says Bush Will Seek Tax Reform After Tax Cuts [Free Republic]
- Forbes 17% 46.3% (minimum) Flat Income-Vat Tax Scam!
- Tax stalemate could cost middle class [Free Republic]
- Forbes 46.3% (minimum) Flat Income-Vat Tax Scam! [Free Republic]
- Tax Relief Ammunition [Free Republic]
- HOUSTON...We Have A Problem (with hidden taxes) [Free Republic]
- A Proposal to Abolish the Corporate Income Tax [Free Republic]
- NTU Endorses FAIR TAX NRST [Free Republic]
- 23 Reasons to Support a 23% Fair Tax [Free Republic]
- Quayle May Support Transition to Fair Tax [Free Republic]
- The Original Intent of the Income Tax [Free Republic]
- It's Not Over When the Tax Lady Sings [Free Republic]
- The Great American Tax Scam [Free Republic]
- YOU STILL PAY OVER 40% OF YOUR INCOME IN TAXES!
- Pursuit of Liberty Head Tax [Free Republic]
- How to dismantle the IRS - The FairTax [Free Republic]
- ~~~SHOCKER~~~Non-Filers pay over 40% of their income in taxes! (Thread #2)
- FairTax vs. Flat Tax - The final word [Free Republic]
- States Take Seven Percent of Americans’ Paychecks [Free Republic]
- The Code Must Go! [Free Republic]
- RON PAUL Tax Day- A National Nightmare [Free Republic]
- Walter Williams tells it like it is! [Free Republic]
- Alan Keyes Explains His Tax Plan [Free Republic]
- ALAN KEYES Abolish The Income Tax! (repost) [Free Republic]
- I'll do away with income tax, Keyes says [Free Republic]
- Forbes MathMagician Flat Income Tax [Free Republic]
- New Questions on the NRST [Free Republic]
- House Resolution 4199 (formerly 1049) Vote 13 April - Tax Reform [Free Republic]
- Confessions of a Flat Taxer [Free Republic]
- What's so fair about a tax on income [Free Republic]
- GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION [Free Republic]
- National Taxpayers Union Endorses The FairTax [Free Republic]
- CAN FREE REPUBLIC HAVE AN HONEST DISCUSSION OF THE FLAT TAX AND THE NRST (Lies of the Fair Tax) [Free Republic]
- CAN FR HAVE AN HONEST DISCUSSION OF THE FLAT TAX AND THE NRST (new thread) [Free Republic]
- Can FR have an HONEST discussion of the FLAT TAX and the NRST (thread 3)
- Flat Tax as Seen by a Tax Preparer (It's not as simple as you thought) [Free Republic]
- National Retail Sales Tax Rates = Fraud, Lies and Deception [Free Republic]
- FAIR TAX VS FOUNDERS' ORIGINAL PLAN [Free Republic]
- Governors group pushing voluntary 'Net taxes [Free Republic]
- Grams and the IRS The bogyman attacks need to stop [Free Republic]
- Hidden Taxes [Free Republic]
- History of the Income Tax [Free Republic]
- How Taxes Trickle Down [Free Republic]
- How the FairTax Act will eliminate the WTO, NAFTA and GATT [Free Republic]
- I'll do away with income taxes, Keyes says. [Free Republic]
- Introducing Supply-Side University to Free Republic activists [Free Republic]
- Linder's FairTax Home Town Meeting [Free Republic]
- LP Politicians shouldn't tax the Internet [Free Republic]
- MILLION TAXPAYER MARCH [Free Republic]
- MN.FairTax Town Hall Congressman wants to remake tax system [Free Republic]
- Why liberals love income-flat tax & HATE the National Retail Sales Tax.
- A Conservative Winning Agenda For Election 2000 [Free Republic]
- Nafta has destroyed 440,172 American jobs - A simple solution [Free Republic]
- NATIONAL RETAIL SALES TAX FAQ [Free Republic]
- Polls showmany Ioans like flat tax [Free Republic]
- Replace all direct taxes with one retail sales tax [Free Republic]
- Serious Question About Taxes [Free Republic]
- Since Y2K didn't crash your 'puter-Can we now discuss taxes [Free Republic]
- Spending & Tax Facts Bush vs Gore [Free Republic]
- TAX ALLIANCE REACHES OUT TO YOUTH [Free Republic]
- Tax Cuts vs. Government Revenue [Free Republic]
- Tax Reform IMmediately -- Lower Taxes Throught Less Government [Free Republic]
- Taxes Top GOP Presidential Debate [Free Republic]
- The Fair Tax Do the Numbers Add Up [Response] [Free Republic]
- THe Boston Tea Party was Over 2% Tax. Americans Pay 50% to the Government. Where is the Revolt [Free Republic]
- The Bush Tax Plan isn't BOLD - It's Marxist Lite! [Free Republic]
- 737 Billion Reasons to Abolish the IRS! [Free Republic]
- The Impact of Tax Complexity on Small Businesses [Free Republic]
- The National Retail Sales Tax - My Title [Free Republic]
- Income Tax vs National Retail Sales Tax - You be the judge [Free Republic]
- ELECTION 2000 A Conservative Winning Agenda [Free Republic]
- Doin' Hard Time for the Government [Free Republic]
- THE TAX DEBATE. TRUE FLAT Vs CURRENT Vs NRST -#2 [Free Republic]
- THE TAX DEBATE. TRUE FLAT Vs CURRENT Vs NRST -#3 [Free Republic]
- WHY YOU CAN'T TRUST THE IRS [Free Republic]
- Tired of Penalties, Interest, Liens, Seizures, Garnishment of Wages, Audits and IRS Abuse [Free Republic]
- Fair Tax FReepers...Prepare For Cyber-War!!! (Thread #2) [Free Republic]
- Why the FairTax Can and Should be Passed Into Law [Free Republic]
- Freeper Report on Phoenix Fair Tax Town Hall Meeting [Free Republic]
- Freeper Report on 8-24 Fair Tax Meeting in Atlanta [Free Republic]
- Washington Windfall [Free Republic]
- How much do you Really know about the GOP tax cut Here are the details [Free Republic]
- Fair Tax Town Hall Meeting on C-Span at 8PM EST Tonight! Don't miss it! [Free Republic]
- Support for demise of IRS rises, but so do questions [Free Republic]
- Thinking about tax reform [Free Republic]
- Time for a National Retail Sales Tax [Free Republic]
- Tiptoe Through The Tax code Tinkering Tango [Free Republic]
- Contractors Association Endorses FairTax [Free Republic]
- Income tax ban scares officials [Free Republic]
- IRS Website May Deceive U.S. Teens About True Tax Bite [Free Republic]
- PROBLEMS COLLECTING A NATIONAL SALES TAX [Free Republic]
- The ONLY Campaign Finance Fix Destroy Gucci Gulch [Free Republic]
- Tax Bites [Free Republic]
- About That Income Redistribution [Free Republic]
- The cost of taxes [Free Republic]
- Petition to Abolish the IRS Code [Free Republic]
- The Fair Tax Do the Numbers Add Up [Free Republic]
- Abolish the Income Tax
- A National Sales Tax Doesn't Add Up [Free Republic]
- Well-known economist infected with Y2K bug while passing through Muleshoe environs. [Free Republic]
- Top 10 Secrets of a National Retail Sales Tax [Free Republic]
- Time The true tax burden [Free Republic]
- Time to Kill the Code [Free Republic]
- Who Pays Taxes [Free Republic]
- Alan Keyes Demands Abolishment of the Income Tax! [Free Republic]
- What's so special about e-commerce that it should be exempt from taxation [Free Republic]
- The Truth About Who Benefits From Bush's Tax Cuts [Free Republic]
- FairTax Hearing April 11, 2000...Legislative Alert! [Free Republic]
- The FairTax Bill has been Reintroduced in the House [Free Republic]
- The Six Major Misconceptions about the FairTax [Free Republic]
- The Founding Fathers Never Intended that there be an Income Tax [Free Republic]
- Actual IRS Request for Tay Payment [Free Republic]
- A Clear Vision for Tax Reform [Free Republic]
- (Thread 2) The FairTax Bill has been Reintroduced in the House [Free Republic]
- 40 of 51 Senators Supported 28% Top Tax Rate in 1986 [But 33% today is too low] [Free Republic]
- AMERICANS FOR FAIR TAXATION ANNOUNCES FAIRTAX BILL INTRODUCTION [Free Republic]
- Corporate Fat Cats Wrote Sales Tax Scam (my title) [Free Republic]
- AMERICANS FOR FAIR TAXATION ANNOUNCES FAIRTAX BILL INTRODUCTION [Thread #2] [Free Republic]
- Bush, After Gaining Tax Cut, Now Takes Aim at Tax Code [Free Republic]
- Calculate your Tax Savings under the Alan Keyes Tax Plan [Free Republic]
- E-Mail Campaign CALL TO ACTION! Abolish the Income Tax...2 weeks to go
- Freeper asked to testify before Mays and Means Committee on FairTax.
- Don't Miss C-Span Tues. 745AM...Abolish The Income Tax! [Free Republic]
- Did Pat Buchanan Flip-Flop on Taxation You be the judge [Free Republic]
- NEVADA REFORM PARTY SUPPORTS NRST - FAIRTAX [Free Republic]
- Dirty Little Lies About The FairTax [Free Republic]
- Dirty Little Secrets of the National Sales Tax [Free Republic]
- The 20.1% Jackpot
- 1st Ever Report here on FR...IRS SHOWDOWN SYMPOSIUM!!! [Free Republic]
- Tax Reform What the politicans-media don't want you to know [Free Republic]
- TAUZIN AND TRAFICANT INTRODUCE LANDMARK BILL TO ABOLISH IRS & FEDERAL INCOME TAXES [Free Republic]
- The Fairtax Good for Taxpayers, Good for Businesses, Good for the Economy
- The 'Fair Tax' and Tax Compliance An Analytical Perspective [Free Republic]
- FairTax FReepers . . . Prepare For CyberWar! (Phase I)
- FReeper Transcript of Ways and Means Testimony Today!
- FReeper Transcript of Ways and Means Testimony! [Mentions FR] Thread II
- HOUSTON - Set Your VCRs!
- Houston Golf Tourney & Dead Chicken Munch-off [Free Republic]
- Imagine There’s No Income Tax
- Would The National Sales Tax plans Contribute To The Further Expansion Of Government...YEP! [Free Republic]
- I Pay HOW MUCH in Hidden Tax Under the Income Tax [Free Republic]
- Redesigning the Federal Tax System for the Information Age [Free Republic]
- Linder offers relief with national sales tax proposal [Free Republic]
- Income redistribution [Free Republic]
- Argentines Turn to Bartering (National Retail Sales Tax) [Free Republic]
- Many `Hidden' Taxes Not Exposed to Taxpayers [Free Republic]
- OUR INCOME TAXATION THE DARKER SIDE [Free Republic]
- Replace Income Taxes with Consumption Taxes [Free Republic]
- Sprint CEO Endorses FairTax [Free Republic]
- Students, Welcome to Anti-Marxist Taxation 101.2 [Free Republic]
- Farrands Records containing Madison's notes
- Tax-reform drive building up steam [Free Republic]
- The FairTax Benefits Commercial Real Estate [Free Republic]
- The I.R.S.'s Dirty Little Secret Hidden Taxes [Free Republic]
- THE POWER TO DESTROY [Free Republic]
- The Top 16 Differences In The New Friendlier IRS [Free Republic]
- Transcript Fox News Interview with Rep. Linder on the FairTax [Free Republic]
- Why Retailers Should Support the FairTax [Free Republic]
- Unfair Taxation Violating Our Sacred Constitution
- Open Request for Freeper Participation in the Income Tax Hearings [Free Republic]
- Corporate Welfare or Who Pays Taxes
- Hard-up states hide stick, offer carrot to tax dodgers
- Hearing on Fundamental Tax Reform [Free Republic]
- Australian GST (national sales tax)-How it really works.. [Free Republic]
- Abolish The Income Tax! [Free Republic]
- HB 2525 A National Retail Sales Tax [Free Republic]
- I.R.S. Is Allowing More Delinquents to Avoid Tax Bills [Free Republic]
- Double All The Money You've Ever Made, And Double Your Income For The Rest Of Your Life!! [Free Republic]
- A Flat Tax Doesn't Do It [Free Republic]
- What Percentage Do YOU Pay $50K+ Pay 92.5% of ALL INCOME TAXES!
- HIGH-INCOME TAXPAYERS pay a growing share of the nation's tax bill. [Free Republic]
- Die to enrich government [Free Republic]
- Time to deep-six federal death tax [Free Republic]
- Clinton wants more money for IRS audits [Free Republic]
- $3,400,000,000,000 (Trillion) of Taxpayers' Money Is Missing [Free Republic]
- International Comparison of Effective Tax Rate on INDIVIDUAL TAXIATION. [Free Republic]
- International Comparison of Income Tax Systems [Free Republic]
- How to spend $400,000 to save a $40,000 job. [Free Republic]
- International Comparison of the Relative Shares of Income, Consumption and [Free Republic]
- Constitutional Challenge [Free Republic]
- GOP ISN'T PUSHING TAX REFORM [Free Republic]
- One day, income tax system has got to go
- Sales tax vs Flat tax...Q & A...Research Source [Many Links]
- The Hole In Your Paycheck
- March on the Capital For Tax Reform(4-15-99)
- Let's Stay Constitutinal in all cases...
- POWER TO THE PEOPLE ON TAXES
- Ambassador Alan Keyes On Taxation & Government Spending
- Republican Cave. Some Congress Bills Died Quietly
- DEMOCRAT DELAURO 'FACT IS, DEMOCRATS AREN'T FOR TAX CUTS'
- It's Time to Have Real Tax Cuts
- TAX REFORM
- You've worked hard for taxes this year
- elimination of sweat
- A Modest Proposal This Plan Would Eliminate State Taxes Forever
- The History of the 16th Amdndment.
- March on the Capital for Tax Reform
- Tax Form Madness!!!!
- Clinton To Seek Tax On Corporate Civil Damages
- Clinton Seeks Crackdown On Tax Shelters
- GOP Vows To End Marriage Tax
- Proposed Amendment Requiring 2-3 Majority on Tax Bills Floated
- GASOLINE Fill-up is now a holdup
- Highway Toll Proposal Criticized
- Clinton vows to veto budget bill with unfunded tax cuts
- The Case Against the Sales Tax
- IRS overhaul cleared by Senate panel
- Abolish the Corporate Income Tax
- Key GOP Legislators May Seek To Toughen Bill to Reform IRS
- A New Tax Revolt
- Marriage Keeps Getting More Taxing
- Senate Opens Hearings Into IRS Abuses
- The tax code and its enforcers
- 'Spirit and Intent of HR 367 Will Be Rolled into IRS Reform Bill'
- Income, taxes and demagoguery
- Taxpayers Group Blasts Congress' 'Kosovo Cop-Out'
- Tax Trauma
- Taxed To Death
- Protest the Gas Prices
- NTU Study Each American Pays $2,462 in 'Hidden Taxes'
- The National Retail Sales Tax bill.
- TAXING MARCH MADNESS (FOR YOU BASKETBALL FANS)
- The IRS' Enemies List [Free Republic]
- Flat Tax vs Sales Tax
- Taxing March Madness (formatted to be readable)
- The REAL difference between the Flat Tax and The National Retail Sales Tax (NRST).
- Whole Idea of Free Lunch Has No Place on 21st Century Menu [Free Republic]
- Press Release the bill is introduced [Free Republic]
- Problems loom for sales tax [Free Republic]
- Tax Reform House vs Senate vs Sales Tax Plans--Which would you vote for
- Tax Reform What Would YOUR Wish List Look Like [Free Republic]