Text 12935, 60 rader
Skriven 2005-05-26 20:23:04 av John Massey (1:123/789.0)
  Kommentar till text 12913 av EARL CROASMUN (1:275/311)
Ärende: Fair Tax
================

"EARL CROASMUN -> JOHN MASSEY" <1:275/311> wrote in message
news:10773$POLITICS@JamNNTPd...
 ->> Anybody care to show how this is not a good thing?

 EC> An old idea that never catches on but never goes away.  The most obvious
 EC> problem is that sales taxes are regressive.  There was a suggestion of a
 EC> "rebate" to solve that.  I'd have to know more about the "rebate" system
 EC> before commenting on it in depth, but it sounds like it would replicate
 EC> the function(and the burden) of the IRS.

# How does the rebate work? All valid Social Security cardholders who are
U.S. residents receive a monthly rebate equivalent to the FairTax paid on
essential goods and services, also known as the poverty level expenditures.
The rebate is paid in advance, in equal installments each month. The size of
the rebate is determined by the Department of Health & Human Services'
poverty level multiplied by the tax rate. This is a well-accepted, long-used
poverty-level calculation that includes food, clothing, shelter,
transportation, medical care, etc.


 EC> But here's a bigger problem: it is utopian.  There is no practical way
 EC> to get there incrementally.

That is a problem. there is no way to get there incrementally. You just set
a date and start collecting the tax.


 EC> You can flatten the marginal tax rates
 EC> incrementally, doing a little in one year and then a little more when
 EC> you have the next opportunity.  You can reduce marginal rates the same
 EC> way, in steps.  You can eliminate tax expenditures, subsidies, and
 EC> "loopholes" the same way, one at a time if necessary.  But this proposal
 EC> wants to change the entire basis of all federal taxation, including
 EC> Social Security payroll taxes, with a Constitutional amendment that
 EC> burns the bridge behind it.  There would be chaos and dislocations in
 EC> the years leading up to the implementation (one random example off the
 EC> top of my head: people going into debt to buy things now, figuring that
 EC> the interest on the debt will be less than the sales tax they would have
 EC> to pay after it goes into effect) and in the years immediately after
 EC> implementation.  People would be flooding to accountants to see about
 EC> getting incomes deferred to future years.

Hadn't though of that.

 >But the biggest problem with
 EC> it being utopian is that it wouldn't happen.  Congress wouldn't make the
 EC> big jump into the unknown.  Everyone who profits (or who thinks they
 EC> profit) from the present tax structure would be running ads, lobbying,
 EC> and bribing to block the legislation.  IF there were enough of a
 EC> grassroots movement behind it, the idea would wind up being coopted into
 EC> having a federal sales tax ON TOP OF the income tax.

The Fair Tax Plan sponsored by John Lender and Fairtax.org  is incumbent on
repelling  the 16 amendment.
If you are interested go to http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/main.html and
read the latest news.

--- Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
 * Origin:  (1:123/789.0)