Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Willie Green

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:

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.


Now, lets take a look at some of your points and see how they hold up:

  • A family purchasing their own new home house(residential land is not taxed) for $200,000 pays NRST at a tax-included 23% rate. This means that of the $200,000 paid, $154,000 goes to the seller, and the Gov't receives $46,000 in tax.
  • 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.  

  • A landlord/investor can exploit the business exemption of NRST and purchase the same new single family dwelling tax free as a rental investment for only $154,000. Tenants pay NRST on rent and Landlords act as tax collectors for the government
  • 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.

  • The $154,000 vs. $200,000 purchase price advantage that landlord/investors enjoy over individual personal homebuyers can be expressed two ways:
    • Landlord/investors enjoy a 23% discount compared to the individual personal home buyer.
  • 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.

    The Individual Income Tax return(1040) that captures everyone's attention each April, is merely a partial VAT accounting sheet the government cons individuals, held at ransom, into filling out. Its misdirection puts blinders on the eyes of the electorate, and totally distorts their perceptions as to the real impact of taxation in their lives.

    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.

    All wages and the taxes on them are paid for out of sales receipts to business,(i.e. consumption expenditure).

    Federal tax revenues collected as % of current family expenditure = fed/(1-state-fed-savings) =

    23.5/(1-.235-0.102-0.012) = 36.09%

    If we add in the cost of federal tax compliance, planning, litigation & enforcement, the percentage that truely represents the burden on the family due to the Federal income/payroll tax system, product prices are increased by more than 55% over taxfree prices.

    Where Have All the Dollars Gone?
    How the government robs Peter to pay him back.
    By economist James L. Payne, Reason Magazine February '94

    When the overhead costs are added together, (24 percent compliance costs, 33 percent disincentive costs, and 8 percent other costs), they total 65 percent of tax revenue.

    Current total Federal tax revenues are about $1900billion, more than $1,000 billion additional dollars are added on onto consumption prices due to the business costs of complying with the federal income/payroll tax laws.

    (Payne '97, Pilla '95, AGCCA 2000, Williams 2000)

    The percent total current federal burden (taxes + compliance costs) of consumption dollars = 36*(1900+1000)/1900 = 54.95% economic burden added on to base retail(i.e. taxfree) prices.

    Too bad that citizens don't get a receipt detailing those "hidden sales taxes" buried in their consumption purchases. If they ever did, some of those 70% of the public clamoring for more from government, thinking someone else foots the bill, might be tempted to change their mind.

    36 posted on 02/14/2003 12:03:58 PM PST by ancient_geezer
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


    To: ancient_geezer
    When it comes right down to it, geezer, you STILL haven't explained how you're going to prevent masterbating monkeys like Daschle, Kennedy, Schumer, Boxer, Feinstein, Gephardt, etc. etc. from squawking and boogering up your bogus utopian tax scheme anyway.

    It's bad enough we already have excise taxes on Alcohol, Tobacco and Gasoline.
    The only thing you dipwads are going to achieve is putting Frist in a corner where he'll have to compromise, negotiate and cave-in. Then we'll still be stuck with the blasted Income Tax on top of even more Excise Taxes on other items.
    You extremists should just stuff a sock in it.

    39 posted on 02/14/2003 12:13:49 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
    [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

    Free Republic
    Browse · Search
    News/Activism
    Topics · Post Article


    FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
    FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson