We The People

[Zeb_Carter]

Sure, I'd favor paying by what you draw off of everything. The rich would still be paying more, though, I'll bet. And single mothers would be dying in the streets. That would be fun.

Although I have no idea what you are talking about, you would find single mothers dying in the street fun.

What I'm talking about is a consumption tax...with a prebate of the tax up to the poverty level. The more you spend the more you pay. Life's necessities are not taxed per say, as the rebate would cover the tax on money spent up to the poverty level. The individual states would collect this tax as they are already experts at doing so. They would then pass it along to the Treasury, minus their cut for collecting said tax.

The tax would be imposed on all new items or services when sold at the retail level. Items that the tax has already been paid on would not have the tax imposed again.

And as I do spend quite a bit then I would be paying my fair share.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, oh well, it's you loss.

 

[Liar]

Ah, I just remembered something about consumption tax.

A percentage added to the price of what you buy, when you buy it. Right?

You know what happens when there's an econommic slump? The first thing to take a nose dive, the canary in the coal mine of impending hard dimes, if you will, is consumption. People stop buying things. If lots of people stop buying things at the same time, recession or even depression is at the gates.

Compared to consumption, wages and employment levels are much more stable constant. If the entire state and federal tax revenue is based on consumption, it will be much more sensitive to the ever so present business cycle. Especially if there's that prebate thing. If lots of people limit their consumption to the bare essentials, will anything be left for the Guvmint?

Not sure that's a good thing, pragmatically. It might be the fairest thing, but would it cause trouble down the road?

 

[TE999]

Ah, I just remembered something about consumption tax.

A percentage added to the price of what you buy, when you buy it. Right?

You know what happens when there's an econommic slump? The first thing to take a nose dive, the canary in the coal mine of impending hard dimes, if you will, is consumption. People stop buying things. If lots of people stop buying things at the same time, recession or even depression is at the gates.

Compared to consumption, wages and employment levels are much more stable constant. If the entire state and federal tax revenue is based on consumption, it will be much more sensitive to the ever so present business cycle. Especially if there's that prebate thing. If lots of people limit their consumption to the bare essentials, will anything be left for the Guvmint?

Not sure that's a good thing, pragmatically. It might be the fairest thing, but would it cause trouble down the road?

One other thing a consumption tax would bring about is the damndest black market you ever saw. Remember Prohibition? That would be childs play. Smuggling would be rampant and an underground network of barter and trade would spring up overnight.

The insidiousness of the present system is you never see the tax money being taken...when you get your pay, it's already gone...no arguments. But if it's the choice of a $10.00 T-shirt in the store or a $5.00 shirt from someones car trunk...guess what...you can have two shirts for the price of one. Such a deal.

 

[Liar]

Well...maybe. Dunno how it is in the US, but many countries have a 25% VAT on lots of goods, clothes included. Can't say that there's any big demand for a black market shirts and pants there.

 

[TE999]

Well...maybe. Dunno how it is in the US, but many countries have a 25% VAT on lots of goods, clothes included. Can't say that there's any big demand for a black market shirts and pants there.

That's a thought. There's no VAT here...just sales taxes. It's what you become accustomed to I suppose. Again, just like corporation and business taxes, the VAT is passed on to the consumer and you never see it coming from your wallet...it's part of the price.

Given the basic contrariness of most Americans, I'm guessin' a black market and a barter system would spring up overnight.

 

[Boxlicker101]

That's a thought. There's no VAT here...just sales taxes. It's what you become accustomed to I suppose. Again, just like corporation and business taxes, the VAT is passed on to the consumer and you never see it coming from your wallet...it's part of the price.

Given the basic contrariness of most Americans, I'm guessin' a black market and a barter system would spring up overnight.

It almost certainly would. VAT is similar to sales taxes, except the latter is just added onto the final sale to the consumer. If something is to be resold, there is no tax added to its sale, and there is no tax on most services, such as haircuts, auto repairs (except on the parts), janitorial services and most other things. I am referring to CA, where I know something about sales taxes, but other states are similar. There is also no tax on food from the store, with some exceptions, or on prescription medicines or some other necessities.

A 25% VAT would be enough that a good many sales would be by one store owner to another, with no money, just merchandise changing hands. This is still taxable, so far as sales taxes are concerned, but harder to track. Not impossible to track, but harder.

 

[TE999]

It almost certainly would. VAT is similar to sales taxes, except the latter is just added onto the final sale to the consumer. If something is to be resold, there is no tax added to its sale, and there is no tax on most services, such as haircuts, auto repairs (except on the parts), janitorial services and most other things. I am referring to CA, where I know something about sales taxes, but other states are similar. There is also no tax on food from the store, with some exceptions, or on prescription medicines or some other necessities.

A 25% VAT would be enough that a good many sales would be by one store owner to another, with no money, just merchandise changing hands. This is still taxable, so far as sales taxes are concerned, but harder to track. Not impossible to track, but harder.

I know the UK has the Department of Inland Revenue that tracks down VAT violators...prolly the IRS or Treasury Agents would perform that function here. I think VAT enforcement would be like Prohibition...only much more widespread...gangsters would muscle in and have another commodity than narcotics... and the cops would get even fatter wallets.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

One other thing a consumption tax would bring about is the damndest black market you ever saw. Remember Prohibition? That would be childs play. Smuggling would be rampant and an underground network of barter and trade would spring up overnight.

The insidiousness of the present system is you never see the tax money being taken...when you get your pay, it's already gone...no arguments. But if it's the choice of a $10.00 T-shirt in the store or a $5.00 shirt from someones car trunk...guess what...you can have two shirts for the price of one. Such a deal.

Oh and right now there isn't a black market of barter and trade to avoid income taxes? And the same would hold true today about that t-shirt from the trunk.

So that leaves what complaint?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

That's a thought. There's no VAT here...just sales taxes. It's what you become accustomed to I suppose. Again, just like corporation and business taxes, the VAT is passed on to the consumer and you never see it coming from your wallet...it's part of the price.

Given the basic contrariness of most Americans, I'm guessin' a black market and a barter system would spring up overnight.

And the consumption tax would be part of the price, just like those corporate income taxes that are added into the price currently, about 22%...say isn't that a coincidence that the almost the same amount as the consumption tax 23%...that's amazing. Do you think someone did some research on this?

 

[amicus]

Congratulations to Desert Pirate for a long lasting, interesting thread.

Might I suggest first reducing the size and expenditures of government, at all levels before worrying about a method of taxation?

For example: abolish the Social Security program as a government venture and turn it over to the private market. The same with Medicare and the Education Department, all of whom have huge budgets and many thousands of government employees.

Reduce the size of government, pay off the debt and the deficit and then concern your self with lowering the tax rate and how it is collected to fund the 'authorized' functions of government.

Amicus

 

[Boxlicker101]

And the consumption tax would be part of the price, just like those corporate income taxes that are added into the price currently, about 22%...say isn't that a coincidence that the almost the same amount as the consumption tax 23%...that's amazing. Do you think someone did some research on this?

Yes, it is a coincidence, but where did the 23% figure come from? The only actual % I have seen is something Liar posted, and that was 25% in some countries. If the current tax on corporate profits is only 22%, it should be quite a bit higher, maybe twice that.

I know that some people are going to be protesting that corporate income taxes are passed on to consumers, just like any other business expense. That is only partly right, because income tax is calculated AFTER profits have been determined, and before dividends are issued. At least, that's the way it's supposed to work.

ETA: BTW, Ami, I agree with what you said about reducing the size of government. We probably don't need a federal Dept. of Ed. at all, since this can be done better at lower levels. I also think many departments can be merged, such as DOA and DOI and some others.

 

[DesertPirate]

I know the UK has the Department of Inland Revenue that tracks down VAT violators...prolly the IRS or Treasury Agents would perform that function here. I think VAT enforcement would be like Prohibition...only much more widespread...gangsters would muscle in and have another commodity than narcotics... and the cops would get even fatter wallets.

That is why a flat tax on income is better. The size of the IRS could be cut by half or better. Simple laws are easier to enforce.

 

[TE999]

I found a highly interesting book the other day browsing in a local bookstore. It's titled For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization Charles Adams is the author. It chronicles taxes from ancient times to the present and is a fascinating read. Empires have risen and fallen due to first reasonable and equal and then burdensome and unjust taxation combined with various governments that squandered money on a host of questionable pursuits.

It's especially relevant in light of todays spending sprees and this thread.

 

[DesertPirate]

I found a highly interesting book the other day browsing in a local bookstore. It's titled For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization Charles Adams is the author. It chronicles taxes from ancient times to the present and is a fascinating read. Empires have risen and fallen due to first reasonable and equal and then burdensome and unjust taxation combined with various governments that squandered money on a host of questionable pursuits.

It's especially relevant in light of todays spending sprees and this thread.

I think I'll see if it's in the library here.
Thanks Tom!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Yes, it is a coincidence, but where did the 23% figure come from? The only actual % I have seen is something Liar posted, and that was 25% in some countries. If the current tax on corporate profits is only 22%, it should be quite a bit higher, maybe twice that.

I know that some people are going to be protesting that corporate income taxes are passed on to consumers, just like any other business expense. That is only partly right, because income tax is calculated AFTER profits have been determined, and before dividends are issued. At least, that's the way it's supposed to work.

ETA: BTW, Ami, I agree with what you said about reducing the size of government. We probably don't need a federal Dept. of Ed. at all, since this can be done better at lower levels. I also think many departments can be merged, such as DOA and DOI and some others.

Am I glad I'm not a partner or stockholder in any business you run/own. Every corporation in America can back into a per unit tax cost on every item/unit they sell, which then becomes part of the sales price. The amount of profit they want to earn is also in figured in that price. If it's not done that way they wouldn't be in business very long.

As I have said in the past...Corporations/Companies...DON'T...PAY...TAXES...only individuals pay taxes...ALL THE TAXES.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

That is why a flat tax on income is better. The size of the IRS could be cut by half or better. Simple laws are easier to enforce.

I hate to inform you but, that's what we have now. In 1980 the tax code was changed to a flat tax of 15% and 25%. Then through the years over one million words were added to that code to take into account special interest group and the evil rich.

 

[DesertPirate]

I hate to inform you but, that's what we have now. In 1980 the tax code was changed to a flat tax of 15% and 25%. Then through the years over one million words were added to that code to take into account special interest group and the evil rich.

I disagree, you might fit one copy of the tax code in a semi trailer but not 2. There is not one single person on the planet capable of understanding the entire bloated pile of crap.
17% for individuals and businesses alike, no exceptions, no excuses, no loopholes.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I disagree, you might fit one copy of the tax code in a semi trailer but not 2. There is not one single person on the planet capable of understanding the entire bloated pile of crap.
17% for individuals and businesses alike, no exceptions, no excuses, no loopholes.

What about all those off the books professions? How would you get them to pay their 'fair' share?

With the fair tax everyone pays their share, no matter how they earned the money. No loop holes at all.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I hate to inform you but, that's what we have now. In 1980 the tax code was changed to a flat tax of 15% and 25%. Then through the years over one million words were added to that code to take into account special interest group and the evil rich.

Are you serious? I was paying income taxes in 1980, and there were deductions for state and local taxes and credit card interest and various credits etc. It wasn't much, if any, less complicated then than it is now.

 

[DesertPirate]

What about all those off the books professions? How would you get them to pay their 'fair' share?

With the fair tax everyone pays their share, no matter how they earned the money. No loop holes at all.

To over them would still require less than half of what's used for enfoement now.
The fair tax would cause a bigtime blak market.
I used to live near the Southern border, I have experience with the black market.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Are you serious? I was paying income taxes in 1980, and there were deductions for state and local taxes and credit card interest and various credits etc. It wasn't much, if any, less complicated then than it is now.

That's what happens when politicians decide.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

To over them would still require less than half of what's used for enfoement now.
The fair tax would cause a bigtime blak market.
I used to live near the Southern border, I have experience with the black market.

You mean bigger than the one that's there now? Bigger than all the places paying employee's in cash to avoid having to pay the employer portion of the SS tax and Medicare tax?

So you think Wal-Mart is going to go into the barter and trade business? The dishonest citizens will be dishonest no matter what system you have in place, no more nor less than is there now. Honest citizens don't become black marketeers just because the tax burden has shifted from their income to what they spend. Plus without payroll taxes they get a raise as their take home pay is their gross pay.

Corporations are now relieved of the burden of tax preparation and can concentrate on producing their product.

The fair tax would move the power from Congress and K street to the people.

And you obviously really don't understand the fair tax. And probably don't want to understand.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Originally Posted by Zeb_Carter

I hate to inform you but, that's what we have now. In 1980 the tax code was changed to a flat tax of 15% and 25%. Then through the years over one million words were added to that code to take into account special interest group and the evil rich.

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
Are you serious? I was paying income taxes in 1980, and there were deductions for state and local taxes and credit card interest and various credits etc. It wasn't much, if any, less complicated then than it is now.

That's what happens when politicians decide.

What I said was intended to disagree with what you said in your Post 341. We have NEVER had an actual flat tax. As I recall, there was a minor GOP candidate, maybe Steve Forbes, stumping for a flat tax in 1980 or 1984, but he and it never got anywhere.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Originally Posted by Zeb_Carter

Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
Are you serious? I was paying income taxes in 1980, and there were deductions for state and local taxes and credit card interest and various credits etc. It wasn't much, if any, less complicated then than it is now.




What I said was intended to disagree with what you said in your Post 341. We have NEVER had an actual flat tax. As I recall, there was a minor GOP candidate, maybe Steve Forbes, stumping for a flat tax in 1980 or 1984, but he and it never got anywhere.

We did have a flat tax, Reagan proposed it and it was passed...it was done in the eighties.

 

[DesertPirate]

We did have a flat tax, Reagan proposed it and it was passed...it was done in the eighties.

What was asked for and what Congress spewed out were 2 different things. A true flat tax would have no deductions or other loopholes of any kind. What was don then was a bit better but left the cottage industry of tax accountants and lawyers fully employed fudging they system.
The flat tax I want has zero wiggle room.