Replies

Further regarding this topic. I wrote about why according to our constitution why I believe it won't work but here is the real reason why it won't.

Anything as dramatic as a shift from the income tax to a sales (or value added) tax will not be readily accepted. There are some downsides, of course. But before anyone writes it off, he should at least consider the benefits of such a system.

It puts a natural cap on the size of government as the politicians won't be able to continue raising the rates without facing the wrath of the voters. (credits to Jimrob for this one)
The IRS will not have to be a monitor of other law enforcement agencies such as the ATF or DEA,
No longer will the primary source of revenue be W-2 filers, whereby the entire underground economy gets off scott free, by some indicators amounting to as must as $1 trillion.
Tens of thousands of pages of regulations, ruling and court decisions relating to various esoteric definitions of income can hit the shredder,
Instead of 125 million taxpayers, the IRS (or equivalent) can concentrate on only a fraction of businesses,
The tax will be truly voluntary, that is, if you don't want to buy the item, don't,
Politicians cannot use the tax for non-revenue purposes, that is, to influence behavior or to punish, but simply to raise revenues.
An entire federal agency does not have to continue to learn each and every economic trend to stay abrest of the various tax evasion and avoidance schemes,
Even the drug dealers have to buy their Cadillacs...so you don't have to worry about their income. Let DEA worry about that.
When investment decisions are made either by individuals or businesses, that decision can be based solely on economic considerations, not to be influenced by what kinds of tax benefits, loopholes or liabilities may exist.

Most European countries utilize value added taxes very substantially as a supplement to the income taxes they collect. The US still has the lowest total taxes of almost every first world country.

You are correct in expressing doubts. But without a substitute, the tax protesters dreams of the end of the income tax system is simply that...a dream.

It looks real pretty. Initially, as I said it might do all the things you claim. However, as soon as someone asks for a deduction that will require paperwork that requires information about you, it will start all over again.

You have also added more reasons as to why congress won't legislate a National Sales Tax. Because as I pointed out they have it all now so why should they give it up?

To get to whatever method you want, indeed if followed to the letter of your law and barring any court decision that will give a different meaning then as you outlined, yours is not a half bad plan.

The record for the gubermint telling the truth and following it's own laws and promises is like Charlie Brown's continued attempts at kicking the ball while Lucy is holding it. "Today is the day Lucy won't pull up the ball. I'm going to kick it finally today. Ouch!” It just won't happen. History continues to tell it that way.

Though to get where you want to go you will have to have enough pissed off people stand in front of the Federal dog and stop feeding it and get its' attention. That is really the only way. Tell Fido to stop whimpering everything will be all right. Give Fido a reason to obey.

That's where the so-called "tax protestors" help out. We are the one's who have caused much change. The word "voluntary" has been removed from the IRS Mission Statement since Irwin Schiff has made such a big stink out of it. According to the gubermint he has caused a loss of 56 million dollars in tax revenue. That is getting someone's attention isn't it? It is the so-called "tax-protestors" who continues to say the sky really is blue no matter what the courts say. We can look out the window to the outside and see for ourselves.
____________________________________________________________
‘IRS management does what it wants, to whom it wants, when it wants, how it wants with almost complete immunity,’ retired Internal Revenue Service official Tommy Henderson told the U.S. Senate Finance Committee.”

You wrote:

You are correct in expressing doubts. But without a substitute, the tax protesters dreams of the end of the income tax system is simply that...a dream.
____________________________________________________________
What was it that was said by those that challanged and rejected abusive authority?

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn,

that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

(I broke up this into bite sized bits for emphasis.)

These are the words of those that dreamed of a different government then we have today. I want that dream back.
____________________________________________________________