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

Skip to comments.

End of the income tax?
WND ^ | Aug. 12, 2003 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 08/11/2003 10:17:08 PM PDT by FairOpinion

It's in the hopper. In the last Congress, the number was HR2525. This time, it's HR25. When I speak of HR25 on my show, the residual phone calls continue for days. When I talk up HR25 during a banquet speech, the deserts remain uneaten.

HR25 is called the Fair Tax Act of 2003, and its stated purpose is "To promote freedom, fairness and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the states.

I've been studying and promoting this idea for nearly 17 years. I've debated each and every possible point and objection, and have almost always drawn the opposing party to my side. HR25 has 32 cosponsors and absolutely no organized opposition. This is legislation that would transform our economy and our society for the better, yet this may well be the first time you've heard of it. It's time to bring you up to speed.

Here are the highlights. If The Fair Tax Act were to become law, the following would happen.

The law establishing the federal income tax would be repealed, both for individuals and for businesses.

A constitutional amendment repealing the 16th Amendment would be sent to the states for ratification.

All laws providing for payroll taxes for the funding of Social Security and Medicare would be repealed.

A sales tax would be instituted on the sale of all goods and services at the retail level. This retail sales tax would replace all payroll and federal income taxes.

Government funding would remain at present levels, and no changes would be made to Social Security and Medicare other than the method of funding those programs.

Does the idea sound pretty radical thus far? Stick with me a few hundred more words.

With the passage of HR25, you would receive 100 percent of your bi-weekly paycheck. If you make $1,000 a week, your paycheck would be $2,000 every two weeks. Of that $2,000, you would only pay tax on the money you spend at the retail level. All savings and investments would be tax free. Any money you spend at the retail level would carry a 23 percent sales tax.

Yikes! Did that man say 23 percent? Yeah, I know. It sounds awfully high, but here are some points you need to consider.

First, there are the embedded taxes on every single product or service you purchase at the retail level. Harvard economists have estimated this embedded tax to be around 22 percent of the cost of those goods. That 22 percent represents the payroll taxes and corporate business and income taxes paid by every manufacturer, shipper, wholesaler, merchandiser and retailer having any connection whatsoever with the product you have purchased. These taxes are all added to the cost of consumer goods.

As soon as these taxes vanish, economists agree that competitive market pressures will immediately cause prices at the retail level to fall. So, we almost have a wash here. The prices decrease by over 20 percent, and you start paying a 23 percent sales tax. Remember, though. You brought home 100 percent of your paycheck, and every dollar you don't spend at the retail level remains untaxed.

But what about the poor? They're not really paying federal income taxes anyway, so this big sales tax is really going to hit them hard, right?

Wrong. The Fair Tax Act provides that no family, rich or poor, will pay sales taxes on the basic necessities of life. The cost of these basic necessities is set at the federally determined poverty level for various sized families. At the beginning of every month the head of every household in America will receive a check, or an electronic credit to their bank account, in an amount equal to the sales tax they would pay on the basic necessities for their sized family. This provision is completely neutral as to income, so class warfare political rhetoric becomes useless.

HR25 has friends in high places inside the Beltway. When briefed on the idea, Vice President Dick Cheney told Congressman John Linder: "This needs to be put before the president." Commerce Secretary Don Evans, after being briefed, asked Linder: "Why haven't you passed this?"

And just why hasn't it passed? Because the idea is so bold that many politicians, while personally praising the concept, just assume it can't pass.

It can pass, my friends. It can pass if the people of America learn the details and then let their elected officials know that they want some action. If you have the slightest interest, just go to the website for Americans for Fair Taxation. Every detail is covered, every question is answered.

If America is now ready to accept the possibility of the Red Sox winning the World Series, we can certainly support an idea as daring as the Fair Tax Act.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: axixofevil; fairtax; hr25; hr2525; incometax; irs; salestax; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 last
To: Taxman
We would all do well to fear, not our government, but some of the power mad egomaniacs who burrow into all levels of the government to subvert the US Constitution and maliciously do harm to We the People.

HST, first the income tax and the IRS. Then the Fed. Then Social Security and Medicare. Don't forget welfare.

And I am leaving our some other pernicious "social justice programs" that we must eliminate, as well.

Simply put, we are about getting the government out of our pockets and off of our backs!

We are about destroying all vestiges of Socialism and the "Divine Right of Kings" (read that as "Big Government"). Think ash heap of History.

The ash heap of History, now that I think about it, is too good a place for the evil LIEberal/Socialist/Marxist Bastards and their evil body of thought. We'll find a better, more fitting final resting place for a social and economic evil that has cost the lives of so many millions of our fellow human beings!

That's strong! Just had to see it in print again!

101 posted on 08/14/2003 1:14:53 AM PDT by ovrtaxt ( Support real tax reform - HR 25! See http://www.fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
bump
102 posted on 08/14/2003 1:53:47 AM PDT by expatguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Taxman; OrthodoxPresbyterian; Veracious Poet; EternalVigilance
Here's are three accounting questions.

(1)

If the cost of a manufactured good is to drop by approx 22%, isn't that drop primarily due to the drop in wages. i.e. it will only happen if those involved with production and retail have their gross pay cut to their current net?

Or, is that 22% savings accounted for by the point of sale's income tax drop alone. In this case the retailers new gross drops to their current net, while the rest of us get our current gross to spend on goods that cost 1% more for domestic, 23% more for imports.

2. How can we implement this so that those currently holding inventory priced in the old tax system don't get screwed during transition when the identical goods are now available wholesale at 22% less. Say you have a warehouse full of widgets purchased Dec. 1st. Jan 1st is the start of the new tax structure, so any item distributed after that date will be double taxed. (We need to assure wholesalers that the NRST will only be applied to products PRODUCED after Jan 1, items sold after Jan1 that were built and taxed in the old system will need to be exempt for a given grace period)

3. Would it be better if the IRS eliminated, no actuall tax collected after, and the FED restricted to printing the currency spent by government (at a permanently fixed % of GDP). The FED would have to be dissolved and brought under the legislative branch. We're going to have a faux tax do to the fiat system, might as well be upfront about it.
103 posted on 08/14/2003 8:32:17 AM PDT by Dead Dog (Income tax is slavery, Wellfare is bribary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Dead Dog
I appologize for the syntax of #3. I typed it inbetween two other tasks.

#3 should be: Why not just adopt the faux Tax "levied" by the FED. In order to maintain checks and balances, they would have to be brought into the legislative branch (power of the purse, and to print money). We could set a limit on the amount they would be allowed to print and spend,
some % of GDP set by constitutional amendment. We could then eliminate all payroll taxes, with no NRST.

104 posted on 08/14/2003 9:15:30 AM PDT by Dead Dog (Income tax is slavery, Wellfare is bribary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
thanks
105 posted on 08/14/2003 12:48:47 PM PDT by wwcj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
thanks
106 posted on 08/14/2003 12:54:26 PM PDT by wwcj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Tuscaloosa Goldfinch
I would think you would have to pay that tax, but keep in mind contractors and service providers would not have to pay income tax and could reduce their cost..
107 posted on 08/14/2003 12:55:21 PM PDT by N3WBI3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs
I had heard Russia went to this type of system. Had no idea that they had done so well.

Bush ought to get behind this.

108 posted on 08/14/2003 1:03:34 PM PDT by agincourt1415 (I am for the NRST.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: agincourt1415
Yeah. Talk about a buried story. Every once in a while you'll hear, within the context of investment literature (emerging market mutual funds) that Russia is now, finally, a pretty hot place to be. Their stock market is on fire too.

Two big things happened: tax reform and legal reform. Contracts are more enforceable now than they were. Russia still has big problems, but they are climbing out of the hole.
109 posted on 08/14/2003 1:06:39 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Dead Dog
"2. How can we implement this so that those currently holding inventory priced in the old tax system don't get screwed during transition when the identical goods are now available wholesale at 22% less."

Very good question - it shows that you are thinking. There is a credit for the imbedded cost of the current system in inventory at enactment date built into the legislation. The idea is that prices will drop on day 1 of the new regime. I personally would not shop at any retailer whose prices are the same on the day that the FairTax is enacted as they were the day before.
110 posted on 08/16/2003 8:30:33 PM PDT by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: verity
I just found out that HR 25 will have (at least)2 new sponsors right after the August recess - Rep. Johnny Isakson of Ga and Rep. Jim DeMint of SC. Both are republican candidates for the US senate in 04.

August is a great time to go to Town Hall meetings and ask your representatives to support this bill! It is also in the senate as S. 1493, I believe.
111 posted on 08/16/2003 8:36:28 PM PDT by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Let's keep bringing it up !!!!


112 posted on 11/06/2004 9:39:26 AM PST by Nepe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Where do we sign up? ~LOL~

I soooooo want a consumption tax vs a flat tax... I know people are "talking" about it... but how can we guide them in the right direction AND get them seriously working on it?

113 posted on 11/06/2004 10:11:21 AM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dcam
If you purchased a house, boat, car, airplane, furniture, etc., that would be taxable. Rent? probably not... I suspect this would drive interest rates back down, and with no tax liablities to dilute your purchasing power, even more people would be able to afford homes; homeownership is a good investment, so wouldn't go out of "vogue."

Everything I've ever read or heard about a consumption tax is it's definitely the way to go over any other system.

After all if you are poor and not paying taxes now, you're not going to be buying million dollar yachts and paying a large sales tax... but ALL the underground money (drug dealers, prostitutes, etc.) would be caught in the form of sales taxes on their purchases of homes, cars, and the such...

We would probably collect much more money -- and there is another win-win -- just saw a segment on FOX that mentioned the costs of operating the IRS are HUGE!!!!! and would be a big boon for the government budget by disbanding them.

114 posted on 11/06/2004 10:18:37 AM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

We need to explain to our Dufriends that one difference between Democrats and Republicans is the Dems think we should all have just enough money to live on and the rest goes to them --- since they are sooooo much smarter than us and know how to spend our hard-earned dollars; vs Republicans who believe we should be allowed to keep our money and only pay what is absolutely necessary to the government -- - because WE know better how to spend or save our earnings.


115 posted on 11/06/2004 10:22:58 AM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

The exemption idea is stupid. Low-income people getting a monthly check amounts to more welfare. Just make the overrall rate lower, say between 15-20%, and everyone wins.


116 posted on 11/06/2004 10:29:38 AM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (EEE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Badray
I agree. If we don't go for a Consumption tax then IMO keep what we have with homeowner exemptions, medical exemptions, etc... no flat taxes. The flat tax actually hurts people on the lower end of the scale. Just look at the chart above here someone making 32,000 pays over 5K a year. Someone today making 32,000, with exemptions for medical, mortgage, etc.,pays much less and $32,000 is not a particularly good income these days...

Even with a Sales Tax everyone would probably still have to pay FICA so someone making 32K and paying 5K flat tax plus FICA wouldn't be served by a switch to flat tax, however that person would be very well served by a sales tax. (IMO)

117 posted on 11/06/2004 10:34:13 AM PST by Arizona Carolyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Out of curiosity, how much unemployment would the NRST cause? I'm referring to federal jobs in the IRS, accountants, tax attorneys and H & R Block types, as well as avoidance counselors.
118 posted on 11/06/2004 10:42:23 AM PST by JimRed (Investigate, overturn and prosecute vote fraud; turn more counties red!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-118 last

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.

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