The FairTax Thread: Discussion Only [Archive]

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:17 PM

The Fairtax: I would like to tell everyone in this country about this tax plan. Please read everything below and post any questions you have. Please critique it, please ask questions. I will answer any and every question, but please be civil. This is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue. This is just a way for you to receive 100% of your paycheck and bring more jobs to this country. Please don’t make this a partisan debate. Please be civil. I wrote every word on this post, do me the courtesy of doing as I asked. Thank you, now onto the Fairtax:

1. Paycheck
2. Corporate Taxes Embedded Taxes.
3. Economy.
4. Prebate
5. Critics

We need a Fairtax. The Fairtax, or HR 25 as known in Congress, is a comprehensive Tax plan to overhaul the entire US Tax Code by eliminating the following:

-Payroll taxes
-Income Taxes
-Death Taxes
-Gift Taxes
-Corporate Taxes
-Social Security Taxes
-Medicare Taxes

All of these taxes will be balled up and place at the end of the retail sale, called the Fairtax. I will be going into detail how these taxes affect the Retail price and the economy as a whole.

1. Paycheck:

You receive 100% of your paycheck. No more Income taxes to be taken out of it. You actually see what your real pay is. I can’t stress this enough. 100% of your paycheck! Currently, if you make $50,000 a year, you are paying about $16,500 in Federal Taxes alone. The average is about 33%, nationwide. With all of the Income taxes and Payroll taxes are out, you get to see a shiny check with 100% of the money you earned!

2. Corporate Taxes, Embedded Taxes

Corporate Taxes are a Myth. If you ever hear a Politian come out and say that they want to lower your taxes by taxing Big Corporations, they are lying to you. Read more to learn how:

HYPOTHECITAL SITUATION: I’m going to make the math simple, but the principle is still the same: Image I make Widgets. These are amazing widgets. 100% Made in America Widget. Everyone needs one of my amazing Widgets. I run the Business and I hired someone to make Widgets. It currently costs me $50 to make a widget. I sell this Amazing Widget for $100. That is a 50% markup. That means after I sell this Widget, I have $50 “gross profit” and $50 to go out and make another Widget. This year we had a great year, I report to the Government by April 15th that I sold 100 Widgets. That means that I made great profit! Now I can invest in a 2nd Widgeteer and we can hopefully sell 200 Widgets next year! The government looks at the Reporting I sent in April 15. The Politicians who want to get elected go out and tell their Voters, “I’m going to lower your taxes by taxing the Evil Widget Makers, they have Record Profits this year!” Now they lower the Income Taxes by .03% per Person! But the Government has to make up the lost revenue somewhere so they tax my Widgets. The Government lost $300 dollars, so now they tax me an extra $300 a year.
I could do one of a few things, (Option #1) fire my new Widgeteer to keep my Widgets the same cost, now that is affecting this young aspiring Widgeteer. Or (Option #2) I could start to order cheaper Widget Making Parts from China. Now, that means that the People that supplied the Widget Making Parts in America are out of a Job and the end consumer doesn’t have as a high quality Widget that they once had. Or (Option #3) I increase the prices of the Widgets. Any way you look at it, the Somebody loses.

Consumer pays all taxes in this country. Not Evil Corporations, you and me. Let’s look at Option #3. The Widgeteers make $250 a year, and pays 30% income tax and 3% in Medicare and Social Security taxes. That is going to leave the Widgeteer with only $167.50 on his paycheck. Less money to save for his kids college, or that fancy TV or even food.
As a business owner who only makes 50% margin, I have to pay payroll taxes, this “Widget” tax of $300 a year, Matching Medicare and Social Security Taxes. I have to past this cost in the price of my Widgets to make up for the “Embedded” taxes. This makes the price of Widgets go up.
In the End, Consumers always pays.

In a Fairtax world, there are no Income Taxes; the Widgeteer takes home the $250 he was hired at. The Business owner doesn’t have to file with the Government on Profits. There are no Payroll Taxes. This will lower the Price of the goods, by an equal amount of the taxes that were applied and then the 23% Fairtax is applied at the end, so the Consumer sees exactly what he is paying for and pays the tax and gets his Amazing Widget. No Paperwork, no filing, everything is visible and out in the open. Not a burdensome, impossible to understand tax code.

3. Economy

Currently with our tax code, the Taxes are built into the price on the goods we sell over seas. This inflated cost on goods only hurt the American Manufacture and his employees back home. Now in a Fairtax world, these widgets are sent to an overseas market. The Fair Tax is not applied to it since it is not sold in the United States. This will make the Widget market in that country really favor the American Made Widget, costs on the widget is down 23% compared to before, we know that American craftsmanship is the best in the world. They gobble it up. Now back home, The Widget Manufacturer needs to hire more Widgeteers, and order more supplies from the Widget Making Parts People. More and more good news at home! More money for the Widget Manufacturer means more he can pay his Employees. More Jobs!

Now, the International Variant of the Widget Manufacturer gets wind of the ZERO Taxes that Corporations have to pay, unlike in their Home Country. What do they do? IVWM sets up shop in the United States and bringing jobs and money pouring back into the American Economy. That would Increase the Value of the Widgeteer, I mean, he went to school a long time to be a Widgeteer.

4. Politics.
In Washington, you have 2 breeds of people: Lobbyists and Politician. Politicians write the Tax Laws, Lobbyists work for Corporations looking for Exclusions. By taxing every good and Service, you don’t leave much room for the Lobbyists for Corporations to try to get exclusions. By taxing everything, you reduce what a Politician can say “I’m going to tax only this group over here but not those people over there.” It makes it so we have more control over the people that represent us. And this is exactly what Most Politicians are scared of. No more easy elections, no more control through Class Warfare. No more looking like the good guy by increasing tax on these people to influence the decisions of others. Now Politicians have to do real work to keep their jobs.

The Fairtax is revenue Neutral, that means, it collect no more or no less than the system currently does, what it does do however, is makes it visible. You will know exactly what you are sending to the Government every time you buy something. That might make you a little bit wearier when you spend money, or really, what the Government is doing with your money. You earned that money; you want to make sure that they invest it well. Right now, you can’t begin to tell what you paid in taxes because of all the embedded taxes out there.

4. Prebate

This Fairtax would Tax Everything. It makes it fair. That’s why the Fair part is capitalized. People say that you would hurt the poor by taxing everything. Wrong, by taxing everything equally you make it better for you in the long run. (Remember, no Lobbyists for Huge Corporations trying to skate by the Tax Code) We would have what is called a Prebate. This Prebate is a refund of all the taxes you what pay on taxes for Necessities up to the Poverty Level. That means, the Poor will be untaxed! And everyone gets this. All the money you would spend for Food, and Doctor Visits, etc, you get the Taxes back. That means it’s about $196 a month for one person. The more people that you have as a dependant, the more Prebate you get. And this goes up with inflation as the Statistics come from the Department of Labor. They figure up every year what you pay in taxes for necessities, since this tax is based on a percentage. If inflation goes up, so does the Prebate.

5. Critics

1. One concern about the Fairtax is how it is measured. It is a 23% tax at the Retail level. It is an Inclusive Tax. That means if price tag says $1.00 you pay $1.00. $0.77 goes to the Retailer; $.023 goes to the Federal Government. Some people who don’t really understand the system. If was a Tax Exclusive system, like with most State Sales Taxes, it would be $1.00 on the Price tag and $.30 extra added on at the end of the sale. That’s why you would hear from time to time 30% or 23%. It all depends how you look at it.

2. People say it would hurt Home Buyers because the Home Mortgage Tax Deduction is eliminated. But, with no Income Tax to deduct anything from, that argument holds no water.

3. This will hurt the Poor, and make the Rich, richer. The Poor people would be untaxed. That means, anybody making at or below the Poverty level, DO NOT PAY TAXES. This is due to the Prebate. They would get all the money that they would send in Taxes on Food and Necessities back. The Rich have the money to by more things; they are going to pay more in taxes. The Fairtax also spreads the taxes across every person that buys anything in this country. That means, illegal aliens, drug dealers, pimps, prostitutes, tourists, you, me, the rich, anybody who buys anything, pays taxes, not just the Legal workers in the United States.

I may of missed something, but ask anything. I will do my best to answer you.
Thank you for reading

SupermanBeyond.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairtax
www.Fairtax.org

hammy

12-06-2007, 10:26 PM

I'd prefer a flat tax to this, I believe. Excluding the lower incomes, of course.

Mal'Akai

12-06-2007, 10:28 PM

The Fairtax: I would like to tell everyone in this country about this tax plan. Please read everything below and post any questions you have. Please critique it, please ask questions. I will answer any and every question, but please be civil. This is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue. This is just a way for you to receive 100% of your paycheck and bring more jobs to this country. Please don’t make this a partisan debate. Please be civil. I wrote every word on this post; do me the courtesy of doing as I asked. Thank you, now onto the Fairtax:

1. Paycheck
2. Corporate Taxes Embedded Taxes.
3. Economy.
4. Prebate
5. Critics

We need a Fairtax. The Fairtax, or HR 25 as known in Congress, is a comprehensive Tax plan to overhaul the entire US Tax Code by eliminating the following:

-Payroll taxes
-Income Taxes
-Death Taxes
-Gift Taxes
-Corporate Taxes
-Social Security Taxes
-Medicare Taxes

All of these taxes will be balled up and place at the end of the retail sale, called the Fairtax. I will be going into detail how these taxes affect the Retail price and the economy as a whole.

1. Paycheck:

You receive 100% of your paycheck. No more Income taxes to be taken out of it. You actually see what your real pay is. I can’t stress this enough. 100% of your paycheck! Currently, if you make $50,000 a year, you are paying about $16,500 in Federal Taxes alone. The average is about 33%, nationwide. With all of the Income taxes and Payroll taxes are out, you get to see a shiny check with 100% of the money you earned!

2. Corporate Taxes, Embedded Taxes

Corporate Taxes are a Myth. If you ever hear a Politian come out and say that they want to lower your taxes by taxing Big Corporations, they are lying to you. Read more to learn how:

HYPOTHECITAL SITUATION: I’m going to make the math simple, but the principle is still the same: Imagine I make Widgets. These are amazing widgets. 100% Made in America Widget. Everyone needs one of my amazing Widgets. I run the Business and I hired someone to make Widgets. It currently costs me $50 to make a widget. I sell this Amazing Widget for $100. That is a 50% markup. That means after I sell this Widget, I have $50 “gross profit” and $50 to go out and make another Widget. This year we had a great year, I report to the Government by April 15th that I sold 100 Widgets. That means that I made great profit! Now I can invest in a 2nd Widgeteer and we can hopefully sell 200 Widgets next year! The government looks at the Reporting I sent in April 15. The Politicians who want to get elected go out and tell their Voters, “I’m going to lower your taxes by taxing the Evil Widget Makers, they have Record Profits this year!” Now they lower the Income Taxes by .03% per Person! But the Government has to make up the lost revenue somewhere so they tax my Widgets. The Government lost $300 dollars, so now they tax me an extra $300 a year.
I could do one of a few things, (Option #1) fire my new Widgeteer to keep my Widgets the same cost, now that is affecting this young aspiring Widgeteer. Or (Option #2) I could start to order cheaper Widget Making Parts from China. Now, that means that the People that supplied the Widget Making Parts in America are out of a Job and the end consumer doesn’t have as a high quality Widget that they once had. Or (Option #3) I increase the prices of the Widgets. Any way you look at it, the Somebody loses.

Consumer pays all taxes in this country. Not Evil Corporations, you and me. Let’s look at Option #3. The Widgeteers make $250 a year, and pays 30% income tax and 3% in Medicare and Social Security taxes. That is going to leave the Widgeteer with only $167.50 on his paycheck. Less money to save for his kids college, or that fancy TV or even food.
As a business owner who only makes 50% margin, I have to pay payroll taxes, this “Widget” tax of $300 a year, Matching Medicare and Social Security Taxes. I have to past this cost in the price of my Widgets to make up for the “Embedded” taxes. This makes the price of Widgets go up.
In the End, Consumers always pays.

In a Fairtax world, there are no Income Taxes; the Widgeteer takes home the $250 he was hired at. The Business owner doesn’t have to file with the Government on Profits. There are no Payroll Taxes. This will lower the Price of the goods, by an equal amount of the taxes that were applied and then the 23% Fairtax is applied at the end, so the Consumer sees exactly what he is paying for and pays the tax and gets his Amazing Widget. No Paperwork, no filing, everything is visible and out in the open. Not a burdensome, impossible to understand tax code.

3. Economy

Currently with our tax code, the Taxes are built into the price on the goods we sell over seas. This inflated cost on goods only hurt the American Manufacture and his employees back home. Now in a Fairtax world, these widgets are sent to an overseas market. The Fair Tax is not applied to it since it is not sold in the United States. This will make the Widget market in that country really favor the American Made Widget, costs on the widget is down 23% compared to before, we know that American craftsmanship is the best in the world. They gobble it up. Now back home, The Widget Manufacturer needs to hire more Widgeteers, and order more supplies from the Widget Making Parts People. More and more good news at home! More money for the Widget Manufacturer means more he can pay his Employees. More Jobs!

Now, the International Variant of the Widget Manufacturer gets wind of the ZERO Taxes that Corporations have to pay, unlike in their Home Country. What do they do? IVWM sets up shop in the United States and bringing jobs and money pouring back into the American Economy. That would Increase the Value of the Widgeteer, I mean, he went to school a long time to be a Widgeteer.

4. Politics.
In Washington, you have 2 breeds of people: Lobbyists and Politician. Politicians write the Tax Laws, Lobbyists work for Corporations looking for Exclusions. By taxing every good and Service, you don’t leave much room for the Lobbyists for Corporations to try to get exclusions. By taxing everything, you reduce what a Politician can say “I’m going to tax only this group over here but not those people over there.” It makes it so we have more control over the people that represent us. And this is exactly what Most Politicians are scared of. No more easy elections, no more control through Class Warfare. No more looking like the good guy by increasing tax on these people to influence the decisions of others. Now Politicians have to do real work to keep their jobs.

The Fairtax is revenue Neutral, that means, it collect no more or no less than the system currently does, what it does do however, is makes it visible. You will know exactly what you are sending to the Government every time you buy something. That might make you a little bit wearier when you spend money, or really, what the Government is doing with your money. You earned that money; you want to make sure that they invest it well. Right now, you can’t begin to tell what you paid in taxes because of all the embedded taxes out there.

4. Prebate

This Fairtax would Tax Everything. It makes it fair. That’s why the Fair part is capitalized. People say that you would hurt the poor by taxing everything. Wrong, by taxing everything equally you make it better for you in the long run. (Remember, no Lobbyists for Huge Corporations trying to skate by the Tax Code) We would have what is called a Prebate. This Prebate is a refund of all the taxes you what pay on taxes for Necessities up to the Poverty Level. That means, the Poor will be untaxed! And everyone gets this. All the money you would spend for Food, and Doctor Visits, etc, you get the Taxes back. That means it’s about $196 a month for one person. The more people that you have as a dependant, the more Prebate you get. And this goes up with inflation as the Statistics come from the Department of Labor. They figure up every year what you pay in taxes for necessities, since this tax is based on a percentage. If inflation goes up, so does the Prebate.

5. Critics

1. One concern about the Fairtax is how it is measured. It is a 23% tax at the Retail level. It is an Inclusive Tax. That means if price tag says $1.00 you pay $1.00. $0.77 goes to the Retailer; $.023 goes to the Federal Government. Some people who don’t really understand the system. If was a Tax Exclusive system, like with most State Sales Taxes, it would be $1.00 on the Price tag and $.30 extra added on at the end of the sale. That’s why you would hear from time to time 30% or 23%. It all depends how you look at it.

2. People say it would hurt Home Buyers because the Home Mortgage Tax Deduction is eliminated. But, with no Income Tax to deduct anything from, that argument holds no water.

3. This will hurt the Poor, and make the Rich, richer. The Poor people would be untaxed. That means, anybody making at or below the Poverty level, DO NOT PAY TAXES. This is due to the Prebate. They would get all the money that they would send in Taxes on Food and Necessities back. The Rich have the money to by more things; they are going to pay more in taxes. The Fairtax also spreads the taxes across every person that buys anything in this country. That means, illegal aliens, drug dealers, pimps, prostitutes, tourists, you, me, the rich, anybody who buys anything, pays taxes, not just the Legal workers in the United States.

I may of missed something, but ask anything. I will do my best to answer you.
Thank you for reading

SupermanBeyond.

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairtax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairtax)
www.Fairtax.org (http://www.fairtax.org/)
For those who can't read it.

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:29 PM

For those who can't read it.
Thanks, I typed it up on Word, so I couldn't tell. Did you read it?

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:33 PM

I'd prefer a flat tax to this, I believe. Excluding the lower incomes, of course.
The thing about a Flat tax is, you are still only taxing people based on their income. Before too long, we are going to have more retired people than people that are legally working. That is going to be a huge strain on our Social Security and Medicare Programs, if we supplant the taxes at the end of every sale, everyone will pay. Not just the Legal Workers who pay taxes. No more audits, no more filing, 100% of your Paycheck. April 15 is just another spring day.

Kritish

12-06-2007, 10:40 PM

10 percent of Americans owns 80 percent of the countries wealth. Progressive tax FTW!

Mal'Akai

12-06-2007, 10:41 PM

Thanks, I typed it up on Word, so I couldn't tell. Did you read it?
To me, this will mostly affect the middle class. People like me who make to much to qualify as poor, yet not enough to really get ahead. Now, of course the rich are all for this, they would hardly be affected. I mean, if they make $1 million plus per year they aren't really going to feel a 23% sales tax. But someone like myself, who'd love to get his daughter a $250 Wii for Christmas would in turn have to pay $307.50 for it. Now that's $57.50 I could use for something else. And even if my income tax was gone, I'd still only be getting about an extra $400 per month. Not really enough to change much.

Also, if the IRS is dibanded, which government department would handle giving the "poor" back the money they spend on sales tax? Also, what about state income tax? Would the state's have to get rid of income tax as well? And how would they make up that lost revenue?

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:42 PM

10 percent of Americans owns 80 percent of the countries wealth. Progressive tax FTW!
That is correct. If we have a Fairtax, you would not be taxed on Savings or investments, and you recieve 100% of your paycheck. People below the Poverty line will not pay any taxes with the Prebate, so this will make the the Tax Code Fair!

hammy

12-06-2007, 10:45 PM

Supermanbeyond, please go back and edit your post. If you quote it, you'll see the color selected is white, you can change that to black. :up:

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:52 PM

To me, this will mostly affect the middle class. People like me who make to much to qualify as poor, yet not enough to really get ahead. Now, of course the rich are all for this, they would hardly be affected. I mean, if they make $1 million plus per year they aren't really going to feel a 23% sales tax. But someone like myself, who'd love to get his daughter a $250 Wii for Christmas would in turn have to pay $307.50 for it. Now that's $57.50 I could use for something else. And even if my income tax was gone, I'd still only be getting about an extra $400 per month. Not really enough to change much.

Also, if the IRS is dibanded, which government department would handle giving the "poor" back the money they spend on sales tax? Also, what about state income tax? Would the state's have to get rid of income tax as well? And how would they make up that lost revenue?

I see a couple of different questios, I'll answer each:
1. Your situtaion with the Wii.
Remember that you are going to receive 100% of your paycheck and the embedded taxes of the Wii are gone. The 23% National Sales tax added on to the end. The Wii will cost essentially the same give or tax a $1. But you have 100% of your paycheck so it's ok.
2. IRS is dibanded, which government department would handle giving the "poor" back the money they spend on sales tax?
It is not just the poor that will get the Prebate, every citizen with a Social Security Number will get the Prebate. The Department of Treasury will send you either a check or you would be able to set up a direct deposit into your account. They already send out the Millions of checks in Income Tax refunds, Pentions, Welfare, Etc. They would be able to do this with no problem.
3.Also, what about state income tax? Would the state's have to get rid of income tax as well? And how would they make up that lost
revenue?
This is a plan for Federal Taxes, not State taxes. But most states are set up with their State Income taxes being a percentage of the Federal Income. They would have to get rid of their State Income and move to an All State Sales Tax. It works that way. I live in Florida and don't pay a State Income tax, but I do pay a little higher Sales Tax.

SuBe

12-06-2007, 10:57 PM

Supermanbeyond, please go back and edit your post. If you quote it, you'll see the color selected is white, you can change that to black. :up:
Thanks, I fixed it.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 12:09 AM

I see a couple of different questios, I'll answer each:
1. Your situtaion with the Wii.
Remember that you are going to receive 100% of your paycheck and the embedded taxes of the Wii are gone. The 23% National Sales tax added on to the end. The Wii will cost essentially the same give or tax a $1. But you have 100% of your paycheck so it's ok.
2. IRS is dibanded, which government department would handle giving the "poor" back the money they spend on sales tax?
It is not just the poor that will get the Prebate, every citizen with a Social Security Number will get the Prebate. The Department of Treasury will send you either a check or you would be able to set up a direct deposit into your account. They already send out the Millions of checks in Income Tax refunds, Pentions, Welfare, Etc. They would be able to do this with no problem.
3.Also, what about state income tax? Would the state's have to get rid of income tax as well? And how would they make up that lost
revenue?
This is a plan for Federal Taxes, not State taxes. But most states are set up with their State Income taxes being a percentage of the Federal Income. They would have to get rid of their State Income and move to an All State Sales Tax. It works that way. I live in Florida and don't pay a State Income tax, but I do pay a little higher Sales Tax.
1. Well, I'd only receive 100% if Georgia dropped it's state income tax, which is not a portion of my federal, but in addition to it. Then you cannot honestly expect us to believe that under this plan the Wii would drop in price. No way, Nintendo would realize that people are already paying $250 for this thing and leave the price the same. They'd just pocket the money that they didn't have to pay in taxes.

2. If everyone gets a check for all the money they pay in taxes, how does the system work? You said that those living at or below the poverty level would pay no taxes. They would pay the taxes up front and then submit some form, I'm assuming, and get all of the money back. But if everyone gets this money back, then there are no taxes being paid at all.

3. So the states would add their own sales tax. Now you have to understand that Mongomery, AL is already at 10% sales tax. How much higher would this go?

See, the problem with this system is that people who live paycheck to paycheck are screwed here. I know several people who work as indipendant contractors. As a result, taxes are not taken out of their weekly paychecks. The are required to file a 1099 form each year. These guys are already having financal difficulty and they get 100% of their check. You jack up the sales tax they have to pay out, and they go from bad to worse.

cookiva

12-07-2007, 12:11 AM

See, the problem with this system is that people who live paycheck to paycheck are screwed here. I know several people who work as indipendant contractors. As a result, taxes are not taken out of their weekly paychecks. The are required to file a 1099 form each year. These guys are already having financal difficulty and they get 100% of their check. You jack up the sales tax they have to pay out, and they go from bad to worse.

QFT. It does hurt us, Mal. Not too poor, not yet center of middle class. Progressive ftw, just as Kri said earlier.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 12:20 AM

QFT. It does hurt us, Mal. Not too poor, not yet center of middle class. Progressive ftw, just as Kri said earlier.
Nice to see someone agrees with me. To me, and I know you said no partisanship, the "FairTax" is just a way for the Republicans to help the rich get richer and keep the poor poorer.

cookiva

12-07-2007, 12:25 AM

Nice to see someone agrees with me. To me, and I know you said no partisanship, the "FairTax" is just a way for the Republicans to help the rich get richer and keep the poor poorer.

Its true. I know that people will argue about it, and how everyone, EVERYONE, pays, but still, its pretty horrible for everyone.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 12:32 AM

I read up on this "fair tax" because the wording troubled me.
like "death tax" so I instinctively though "yeah this sounds weird"
needless to say that this is bull****.
this sounds suspiciously like a way for larger manufacturers to become even larger and for small upstarts to become extinct.

cookiva

12-07-2007, 12:33 AM

And thats another problem, Sparkle. I honestly cant see how anyone other than the richest of the rich like this idea.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 10:09 AM

1. Well, I'd only receive 100% if Georgia dropped it's state income tax, which is not a portion of my federal, but in addition to it. Then you cannot honestly expect us to believe that under this plan the Wii would drop in price. No way, Nintendo would realize that people are already paying $250 for this thing and leave the price the same. They'd just pocket the money that they didn't have to pay in taxes.

2. If everyone gets a check for all the money they pay in taxes, how does the system work? You said that those living at or below the poverty level would pay no taxes. They would pay the taxes up front and then submit some form, I'm assuming, and get all of the money back. But if everyone gets this money back, then there are no taxes being paid at all.

3. So the states would add their own sales tax. Now you have to understand that Mongomery, AL is already at 10% sales tax. How much higher would this go?

See, the problem with this system is that people who live paycheck to paycheck are screwed here. I know several people who work as indipendant contractors. As a result, taxes are not taken out of their weekly paychecks. The are required to file a 1099 form each year. These guys are already having financal difficulty and they get 100% of their check. You jack up the sales tax they have to pay out, and they go from bad to worse.

Please everyone, keep your cool. This is a discussion, I don't want this to be a heated debate.
1. This is a situation where the Free Market will force retailers to lower the prices, then add on the Fairtax. If one retailer complies with lowering the price of their goods, all others will to be competitive. And there are already a dozen retailers have signed the petition for the Fairtax. Walmart being one of them. Here is an example:

Under the current system: I make and sell Widgets. I include all taxes down the pike, and this are included at the retail level. I hear that the Fairtax is coming, So I can horde the extra 23%. Right? But my competitor XYZ Widget Co. is going to seize this moment to reduce his price of the widgets and gain more market share. I Mean, he can make the same profit as yesterday, and sell many, many more than I can at 23% more at the retail level. If I want to catch up, I have to reduce my price too. There is a real world example when the $5 Federal Airtavel Ticket Tax expired in 1996. The big airlines figured that this would be a good oppurtunity to keep the extra $5 dollars. It took 6 hours for a Smaller company to reduce its price, forcing the others change their prices.

2. You only get back what you pay in taxes on Necessities. Not on other goods. That includes Food, Medical Services, Etc. You would, with your employer, fill out paperwork, just like you do now, saying how many dependants you have. This paper work goes up to the Dept. of Heatlth and Human Services. On this form, it would have your SS# and an Address. They would send you the estimated Sales Tax on foods and necessities you purchase in a Month. See http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#3 for more information.

3. Remember, with the removal of the Embedded Taxes and the Addition of the Nation Sales Tax, the price of the goods would stay the same, before you add the State Sales tax. So, the Price tag on the item looks that same as it does today. If the State removes the State Income tax, that would mean that you would receive 100% totally. If they increae the State Sales tax a few Percentage Points to cover this, that is ok, because you would have all of your paycheck. So what if an Item costs $2 more for the item, you would be saving an Average of 33% from your paycheck that didn't have with our current tax code.

4. The Issue with your friends that pay all there taxes at the end of the year: Remember, they will not be filing taxes anymore. So no more having to save for that. No more having to put any money to pay off the Federal Government. They will pay the Taxes as they purchase, not a big lump sum.

I hope I answered all over these questions, if you have anymore, ask.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 10:18 AM

this sounds suspiciously like a way for larger manufacturers to become even larger and for small upstarts to become extinct.

Upstart Companies would be on a level playing field to larger manufacturers that currently could pay for Lobbyists that try to get tax breaks for their products. I work in an industry that is currently taxed Federally and in every state diffently. If we remove the Federal taxes, Very Large companies have people in Washington that try to get loopholes written into the Tax code for them. If these loopholes don't exsist, New companies could sell their products at a competive price and gain more Market Share. Instead of trying to sell their products, while big companies sell there products with the Loopsholes built in for the Big Guys.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 10:26 AM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 10:27 AM

And thats another problem, Sparkle. I honestly cant see how anyone other than the richest of the rich like this idea.what makes you think that? it would benefit everyone.

Ahura Mazda

12-07-2007, 10:28 AM

Actually there are many economists in favour of such a system as it allows for a greater influx into the conomy through private citizens. The fair tax tends to be progressive in a way as people tend to buy differnt set of products based on their income stream.

However, politically it is a very hard sell as people feel those earning more should contribute more in percentage terms. What allot of people do not realise is those earning more can generate more wealth for everybody if they have a greater percentage of their disposable income.

One thing to note is that I promise you that the really rich (above $2 billion) do not worry so much as they structure things in a way that they end up paying less taxes (in percentage terms) then you or I.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 10:33 AM

And thats another problem, Sparkle. I honestly cant see how anyone other than the richest of the rich like this idea.
Remember, you untax the poor, up to the Poverty level. If you are above the Poverty level, they pay their taxes, and get the prebate, covering their tax burden on Necessities. Everyone Gets 100% of their Paycheck. Never have to file Taxes before April 15th again. You can save the extra, spend it, you choose. The government can't tell you have to file before a certain date anymore, because their is no filing. Last year I paid $13500 in taxes. Most of it was paid before I ever saw it. When I had to file, I had to pay an extra $1000. I didn't have that in my bank, so had to put it onto a Credit Card. So now, I had to pay more, in addition to what was on taken out of my payeck, and since I didn't have the money to pay $1000 and had to put it on a credit card, I have to pay the intrest on top of it.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 10:47 AM

One thing to note is that I promise you that the really rich (above $2 billion) do not worry so much as they structure things in a way that they end up paying less taxes (in percentage terms) then you or I.

You are correct. The thing that a lot of people don't understand is most people who are worth $2 billion. Dont "Earn" $2 billion in a year. Bill Gates does't earn Income. He is living off of what he has gained on Investments. If we have a system where you pay based on Income, and somebody with that much money didn't even earn income, how is that fair? But, everybody spends money. Right? So if you tax if when you spend it instead of when you earn it, that is fair. Drug Dealers don't "earn" income. But they spend it. People that get work under the table doesn't "earn" income, but they spend it. Bill Gates doesn't "earn" income, but he does spend money.

Ahura Mazda

12-07-2007, 11:59 AM

You are correct. The thing that a lot of people don't understand is most people who are worth $2 billion. Dont "Earn" $2 billion in a year. Bill Gates does't earn Income. He is living off of what he has gained on Investments. If we have a system where you pay based on Income, and somebody with that much money didn't even earn income, how is that fair? But, everybody spends money. Right? So if you tax if when you spend it instead of when you earn it, that is fair. Drug Dealers don't "earn" income. But they spend it. People that get work under the table doesn't "earn" income, but they spend it. Bill Gates doesn't "earn" income, but he does spend money.

I agree 100% of what you just said and that does reflect actually some of the current thinking among quite a number of economists.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 12:10 PM

I agree 100% of what you just said and that does reflect actually some of the current thinking among quite a number of economists.
Thank you. If you have any questions or misunderstandings about the Fairtax, Please just ask.

Ahura Mazda

12-07-2007, 12:17 PM

Thank you. If you have any questions or misunderstandings about the Fairtax, Please just ask.

I don't have many questions because I had read a treatise on creating such a tax in France written by an economist. I understand the theory behind it and as much as it makes sense, I think it will be politically a very hard measure to get through because of the level of knowledge of the general public. Appearance is often more important then actual justifactions.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 12:32 PM

I don't have many questions because I had read a treatise on creating such a tax in France written by an economist. I understand the theory behind it and as much as it makes sense, I think it will be politically a very hard measure to get through because of the level of knowledge of the general public. Appearance is often more important then actual justifactions.
You are correct about how difficult it will be to pass because of the lack of Public Knowlegde. That is my reason for starting this thread. I would like to convince as many people of the Fairtax, that hopefully one day, we can truly be free of oppression from the Federal Government. There is no perfect way to be taxed. But, the Fairtax is so much simpler than our current system. The Fairtax is only 138 pages. The Current tax code is as big as an Encyclopedia. We need a Simpler, visible tax code, that is Fair.

Like I said before, this is not a Right vs. Left, Rich vs. Poor, Democrat vs. Republican debate. This is a discussion.

Ahura Mazda

12-07-2007, 12:40 PM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:11 PM

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:14 PM

i suggest you read up on it further, because it seems that you misunderstand it.

:huh: there's really nothing to misunderstand is there?
based upon what I've read seems that the unfair advantage from implementing something like this would obviously go to the large manufacturers, unless there were policies in place so that there's a differentiation between the smaller and larger businesses in the United States.
otherwise those businesses with more developed infrastructures would have a clear upper hand on developing industry.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:16 PM

Just one thing, I don't quite agree with "the oppression from the Federal Government". I just think progressive tax is a very accepted policy today which could be improved upon and not decrease the government's income. I do not hold the theory that the government should not be involved at all.
Ok, I exagrated. But it would be hard to deny that People in Politics use the Tax code to justify behavior control. "Sin Tax" it is called. Taxiation shouldn't used as a tool to make you think twice about a purchase. As in Cigars. Cigars are a luxary item. But Cigar Smokers are everyone from Garbage men to doctors. But if they tax the item for your "own good", that isn't fair. Tax everything the same. The Government shouldn't use the Tax Code to alter a persons behavior.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:17 PM

don't kid yourself; it is oppression. the government is forcibly taking from you what is yours. the progressive income tax is a basic tenet of the communist manifesto (as is public education).
I would prefer not to veer off topic. This is a thread to discuss the Fairtax and the Effects that it would have. Anything else would be irrevelant.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:19 PM

hahaha! only the those who can afford it deserve knowledge!

ahahahahahahaha!

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:23 PM

:huh: there's really nothing to misunderstand is there?
based upon what I've read seems that the unfair advantage from implementing something like this would obviously go to the large manufacturers, unless there were policies in place so that there's a differentiation between the smaller and larger businesses in the United States.
otherwise those businesses with more developed infrastructures would have a clear upper hand on developing industry.
As I explained earlier. From a Manufacturers Standpoint, Larger Corporations today have lobbyists in Washington that try to convice Legislatures to exclude them from a certain Tax Bill. This is happening in my industry right now. The Lobbyists, under a Fairtax, wouldn't exsist because there wouldn't be a tax bill to be excluded from. This would make the playing field fair, and the Free Market will decide. If a Smaller/Upstart company would want to gain a bigger market share, it would have to sell their products at a lower margin or supply something the Larger Corparations can't do. But, with our current tax code, this is hardly possible. Larger Companies have the ability to invest in Lobbyist, Small companies don't.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:27 PM

As I explained earlier. From a Manufacturers Standpoint, Larger Corporations today have lobbyists in Washington that try to convice Legislatures to exclude them from a certain Tax Bill. This is happening in my industry right now. The Lobbyists, under a Fairtax, wouldn't exsist because there wouldn't be a tax bill to be excluded from. This would make the playing field fair, and the Free Market will decide. If a Smaller/Upstart company would want to gain a bigger market share, it would have to sell their products at a lower margin or supply something the Larger Corparations can't do. But, with our current tax code, this is hardly possible. Larger Companies have the ability to invest in Lobbyist, Small companies don't.

:huh: so the upstart would have to provide a lower cost from the already disadvantageous position of having a small infrastructure to support it's production?
really doesn't seem like a "fair" playing field at all.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:29 PM

:huh: there's really nothing to misunderstand is there?
based upon what I've read seems that the unfair advantage from implementing something like this would obviously go to the large manufacturers, unless there were policies in place so that there's a differentiation between the smaller and larger businesses in the United States.
otherwise those businesses with more developed infrastructures would have a clear upper hand on developing industry.there's plenty to misunderstand, which people do when it comes to the FairTax. there is no unfair advantage. the FairTax is just a shift from one revenue system to another; the embedded rates are equal. embedded taxes are in place at any level of manufacturing, but those businesses (large and small) don't pay the taxes; they're passed down the line to the final consumer.

the advantage goes to everyone, private individual and private business, no matter what income level and no matter the size of business. additionally, it brings in black market monies and tourism dollars. obviously, income in the black markets is not reported, but under the FairTax, that revenue is collected at the retail level.

additionally, everyone - regardless of income level, regardless of rich or poor - receives a prebate check every month to offset the cost and tax of basic necessities.

zenile

12-07-2007, 01:30 PM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:31 PM

I would prefer not to veer off topic. This is a thread to discuss the Fairtax and the Effects that it would have. Anything else would be irrevelant.
you can't discuss the FairTax and the motivations behind it without knowing the history of the progressive income tax. the authors of the FairTax book, Boortz and Linderman, call it the biggest potential transfer of power from centralized government to the people. the ideas behind the drive for the FairTax mirror those of the founding of this country. it is very much relevant.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:32 PM

How is the gubernment going to determine who qualifies for the tax exemption?
what tax exemption are you talking about? :huh:

if you aren't paying income tax, then what you need an exemption for? :huh:

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:33 PM

zenile

12-07-2007, 01:35 PM

what tax exemption are you talking about? :huh:

if you aren't paying income tax, then what you need an exemption for? :huh:

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry?id=46443

tax exemption

immunity from the requirement of paying taxes. Federal, state, and usually local law provide exemption from taxation for a wide variety of organizations, usually not-for-profit, such as churches, colleges, universities, health care providers, various charities, civic leagues, labor unions, trade associations, social clubs, and political organizations. Such policies date back to 1894, when the U.S. Congress passed income tax laws that provided exemptions for certain institutions.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:36 PM

the advantage goes to everyone, private individual and private business, no matter what income level and no matter the size of business. additionally, it brings in black market monies and tourism dollars. obviously, income in the black markets is not reported, but under the FairTax, that revenue is collected at the retail level.

and you don't think this gives and advantage to those with higher acquisition power than others? and by default in some cases further cripples the capacity to advance in the economy.
for instance, it would totally work for me if I was a US citizen, but if i was a small manufacturer it would completely mess me up, as I would have to lower my prices ( which would have to be high since I don't have sweatshops overseas and other things) and If I was poor, the hike in prices would severely damage my already tight budget.

seems kind of weird to me.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:38 PM

:huh: so the upstart would have to provide a lower cost from the already disadvantageous position of having a small infrastructure to support it's production?
really doesn't seem like a "fair" playing field at all.
While it may be unfair that the Larger company would have more capital. The Small company has a more Fair shot than with a tax code that would from the beginning be "disadvanageous" as you put it. The Fairtax would close all the loopholes that Larger Companies could take advanage of. And with a Small Company with less overhead, they wouldn't be bound to the same margins as a Larger Company would. They would be able to also focus on a more Quality, Warranties, Customer Friendly, etc. In the Industry I am in, this very reason is why we are as successful as we are, is because we can offer something that Larger Companies can't. But, they wouldn't be put into a position where it would be unfair from the getgo.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 01:38 PM

The "fair" thing to do would be to elliminate the income tax altogether and NOT replace it with anything.
Also, the most detrimental tax to the poor and middle class is the inflation tax.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:40 PM

that's the very nature of a free market. that isn't a result of a tax system.

but really, there hasn't been a free Market in the states for ages, to do so now only benefits those that have been benefiting from the US command economy- lite.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:44 PM

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry?id=46443

tax exemption

immunity from the requirement of paying taxes. Federal, state, and usually local law provide exemption from taxation for a wide variety of organizations, usually not-for-profit, such as churches, colleges, universities, health care providers, various charities, civic leagues, labor unions, trade associations, social clubs, and political organizations. Such policies date back to 1894, when the U.S. Congress passed income tax laws that provided exemptions for certain institutions.
There would be nothing to exempt. If you as an individual do not File anything, and recieve 100% of your money. You wouldn't need to file an Exemption under the Fairtax.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 01:44 PM

While it may be unfair that the Larger company would have more capital. The Small company has a more Fair shot than with a tax code that would from the beginning be "disadvanageous" as you put it. The Fairtax would close all the loopholes that Larger Companies could take advanage of. And with a Small Company with less overhead, they wouldn't be bound to the same margins as a Larger Company would. They would be able to also focus on a more Quality, Warranties, Customer Friendly, etc. In the Industry I am in, this very reason is why we are as successful as we are, is because we can offer something that Larger Companies can't. But, they wouldn't be put into a position where it would be unfair from the getgo.

there's also many loopholes for the smaller company to use, contrary to popular belief.
the "fair tax" when looked upon carefully is almost anarcho-capitalist in it's roots, and to be honest, government involvement IS necessary sometimes.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:52 PM

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry?id=46443

tax exemption

immunity from the requirement of paying taxes. Federal, state, and usually local law provide exemption from taxation for a wide variety of organizations, usually not-for-profit, such as churches, colleges, universities, health care providers, various charities, civic leagues, labor unions, trade associations, social clubs, and political organizations. Such policies date back to 1894, when the U.S. Congress passed income tax laws that provided exemptions for certain institutions.

i know what tax exemption means, that's not what i asked you. once again, when there is no income tax, why would someone need an exemption? do you not see the contradiction?

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:53 PM

I'm not sure this FAIR TAX would allow for complete disolvement of the IRS.

- What department is going to be responsible for receipt of all fair tax receipts and allocation to the various government departments?

- No Audits???!!!????!!!111!!! Sounds wonderful, only who's going to audit the companies to make sure that they have completely remitted all of their fair tax receipts that they have collected each month...or is this honor system based, because we know corporations would never cheat the government

- How is the gubernment going to determine who qualifies for the tax exemption? You mention that there is a form that will need to be filed...are we just to assume that this is honor system based, because we know all US citizens would never cheat the gubernment What would prevent me from slipping my tax exempt bud a $20 and having him buy everything I need...heck no one's going to audit us, and we both win!
1. The US Treasury Dept would be responible for Collection and allocation of the Revenue. Just like it is today. The IRS as we know it would be absorbed into the Treasury Dept.

2. No, there would no longer be any audit onto an Individual. With the Fairtax, the revenue is collected at the point of sale. The fairtax is sent to a County Collections Bureau, who would forward it to the State and then the State Treasury would forward it to the Federal Government. A very Small percentage would be kept at each level. But without going to all the details, www.fairtax.org (http://www.fairtax.org)., you as an individual would not be subject to audits. Only Retailers would.

3. Again, under the Fairtax, No one gets an exemption. But, you do receive what is called a prebate. This would basically be a refund of the taxes you would pay on food and Necessities. No common goods. Sorry, you wouldn't recieve the taxes back on that PS3 you bought.

This is a Link to a Video FAQ about the Fairtax. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq
Please check it out.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 01:55 PM

the "fair tax" when looked upon carefully is almost anarcho-capitalist in it's roots

Hahaha, what a joke.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any educated anarcho-capitalist who supports the FairTax. I mean, seriously. :o

And that's beside the fact that it's just plain ridiculous to call ANY tax anarcho-capitalistic.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 01:55 PM

The "fair" thing to do would be to elliminate the income tax altogether and NOT replace it with anything.
Also, the most detrimental tax to the poor and middle class is the inflation tax.
Our entire Federal Tax Code is unfair.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:56 PM

and you don't think this gives and advantage to those with higher acquisition power than others? and by default in some cases further cripples the capacity to advance in the economy.
for instance, it would totally work for me if I was a US citizen, but if i was a small manufacturer it would completely mess me up, as I would have to lower my prices ( which would have to be high since I don't have sweatshops overseas and other things) and If I was poor, the hike in prices would severely damage my already tight budget.

seems kind of weird to me.no, i don't, nor do i think it would cripple the capacity to advance in the economy. how does it? you don't have to lower your prices if you don't want to; that's your prerogative. and there isn't a hike in prices, either. currently, embedded taxes are at 22-23%. the FairTax replaces those embeded taxes - eliminates them - with an embedded sales tax of 23%. you're free to sell your product for whatever you wish, just as you are under the current tax structure.

zenile

12-07-2007, 01:58 PM

That is correct. If we have a Fairtax, you would not be taxed on Savings or investments, and you recieve 100% of your paycheck. People below the Poverty line will not pay any taxes with the Prebate, so this will make the the Tax Code Fair!

According to SupermanBeyond, if your below the Poverty line you will not pay any taxes...this means your tax exempt. So how would this be determined, you will still need some oversight to ensure that whoever is claiming tax exemption is truly tax exempt. Again, unless we're doing this on the honor system of course.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 01:59 PM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 01:59 PM

but really, there hasn't been a free Market in the states for ages, to do so now only benefits those that have been benefiting from the US command economy- lite.that's incorrect, but that's an entirely different topic and one unrelated to the FairTax.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:03 PM

Hahaha, what a joke.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any educated anarcho-capitalist who supports the FairTax. I mean, seriously. :o

And that's beside the fact that it's just plain ridiculous to call ANY tax anarcho-capitalistic.
Exactly. The Fairtax plan, does not desolve any Federal Power. It only change the way taxes are collected. If this was an Anarchistic plan, it would call to an end of the Government, which this does not do. Why would a Tax plan be Anarchistic?

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:04 PM

According to SupermanBeyond, if your below the Poverty line you will not pay any taxes...this means your tax exempt. So how would this be determined, you will still need some oversight to ensure that whoever is claiming tax exemption is truly tax exempt. Again, unless we're doing this on the honor system of course.that is in context to an income tax. under the FairTax, you get 100% of your paycheck. NOTHING is being withheld for income taxes. therefore, why would there be need of an tax exemption if one isn't being taxed on income? this is a very simple concept.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 02:04 PM

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:04 PM

"There can be no such thing as 'fairness in taxation.' Taxation is nothing but organized theft, and the concept of a 'fair tax' is therefore every bit as absurd as that of 'fair theft.'" - Murray Rothbard
You have to fund the Federal Government some how. The Fairtax Plan is just a different way of doing so that would simplify an impossible to understand tax code.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:05 PM

In a Fairtax world, there are no Income Taxes; the Widgeteer takes home the $250 he was hired at. The Business owner doesn’t have to file with the Government on Profits. There are no Payroll Taxes. This will lower the Price of the goods, by an equal amount of the taxes that were applied and then the 23% Fairtax is applied at the end, so the Consumer sees exactly what he is paying for and pays the tax and gets his Amazing Widget. No Paperwork, no filing, everything is visible and out in the open. Not a burdensome, impossible to understand tax code.

There is still going to be a filing, companies are still going to have to file some sort of pass-through tax form to the gubernment indicating total receipts, fair tax receipts collected, exemptions, etc. Therefore, there will still need to be audits.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 02:05 PM

no, i don't, nor do i think it would cripple the capacity to advance in the economy. how does it? you don't have to lower your prices if you don't want to; that's your prerogative. and there isn't a hike in prices, either. currently, embedded taxes are at 22-23%. the FairTax replaces those embeded taxes - eliminates them - with an embedded sales tax of 23%. you're free to sell your product for whatever you wish, just as you are under the current tax structure.

wrong.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:05 PM

"There can be no such thing as 'fairness in taxation.' Taxation is nothing but organized theft, and the concept of a 'fair tax' is therefore every bit as absurd as that of 'fair theft.'" - Murray Rothbardhow intellectually lazy. no one is forcing anyone to go out and buy anything; it is a voluntary and independent choice of the consumer. nice one, Murray. :whatever:

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:07 PM

wrong.somehow you are confusing the free market with a government collecting tax-based revenue. that isn't wrong at all; the government does not set prices. they don't do it now, and they wouldn't do it under the FairTax. you are completely free to charge $1 for your product just as you're free to charge $100.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:07 PM

:huh: "almost" key word there Bubba.

If it were even close, you wouldn't have anarcho-capitalist calling it worse than what we have now.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:09 PM

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:09 PM

that is in context to an income tax. under the FairTax, you get 100% of your paycheck. NOTHING is being withheld for income taxes. therefore, why would there be need of an tax exemption if one isn't being taxed on income? this is a very simple concept.

The person exempt from paying fair taxes is TAX EXEMPT. How can you not understand this! My wife works for our church...she has a tax exempt sales card whenever we buy supplies for our church. The fairtax would work similar to this, those below the poverty level would receive a tax exempt card.

AGAIN, some government agency will need to determine who qualifies for this and need to ensure that this is not being abused or taken advantage of.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:11 PM

There is still going to be a filing, companies are still going to have to file some sort of pass-through tax form to the gubernment indicating total receipts, fair tax receipts collected, exemptions, etc. Therefore, there will still need to be audits.
Yes there would be audits at the Retailer, not the Individual. That would the part of the Cost of doing business. But an Individual would never fear of being audited again. Currently there are about 140 million legal workers in the United States. That is a lot of people to potentionally could be audited. With the Fairtax, that number would drop considerably, since it would only be retailers that would get audited. And, retailers wouldn't cheat the Fairtax, why would they want to get audited. The Chances of that happening are much more under the Fairtax.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:13 PM

again i'll ask you: what exemption?

Okay, I'm going to try and provide an example of this.

Customer A goes to Best Buy and purchases a $100 tv and pays $23 of the fair tax. Customer B goes to Best Buy and purchases the same $100 tv, but doesn't have to pay $23 of the fair tax because they are below the poverty line (ie they are exempt from paying taxes, tax exempt). Quarter-end rolls around and Best Buy files its Fair Tax remittance with the government claiming $200 in sales, but only $23 of tax receipts. The government is going to say...Hey you owe me $46 of tax receipts based on your sales. Best buy is going to say, No, I had $100 of taxable sales, and $100 of tax exempt sales.

This is still going to be an auditable issue (I'm a CPA, and an auditor).

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:14 PM

The person exempt from paying fair taxes is TAX EXEMPT. How can you not understand this! My wife works for our church...she has a tax exempt sales card whenever we buy supplies for our church. The fairtax would work similar to this, those below the poverty level would receive a tax exempt card.

AGAIN, some government agency will need to determine who qualifies for this and need to ensure that this is not being abused or taken advantage of.
No, they would not receive a card saying tax exempt. They, as well as everyone, would receive a Prebate into their Checking account or a check in the Mail equal to the Taxes they would have paid on foods and necessities.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/FTRebate.png

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:15 PM

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:16 PM

how intellectually lazy. no one is forcing anyone to go out and buy anything; it is a voluntary and independent choice of the consumer. nice one, Murray. :whatever:

Mysterio on the SHH Boards is calling economist Murray Rothbard "intellectually lazy" :dry:

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:17 PM

Yes there would be audits at the Retailer, not the Individual. That would the part of the Cost of doing business. But an Individual would never fear of being audited again. Currently there are about 140 million legal workers in the United States. That is a lot of people to potentionally could be audited. With the Fairtax, that number would drop considerably, since it would only be retailers that would get audited. And, retailers wouldn't cheat the Fairtax, why would they want to get audited. The Chances of that happening are much more under the Fairtax.

Not true...there would still need to be audits of individuals otherwise, we would all share the tax exempt card of the people that are below the poverty line and no one would pay the fair tax. So a guy claims his income is $12k, below the poverty line, so he receives a card from the government stating he doesn't have to pay the fair tax. He then starts a side business, charging customers 15% commission on any purchases he makes but everyone makes money because I don't have to pay the 23% fair tax. What's to stop this type of abuse, if there are no audits of individuals.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:18 PM

Okay, I'm going to try and provide an example of this.

Customer A goes to Best Buy and purchases a $100 tv and pays $23 of the fair tax. Customer B goes to Best Buy and purchases the same $100 tv, but doesn't have to pay $23 of the fair tax because they are below the poverty line (ie they are exempt from paying taxes, tax exempt). Quarter-end rolls around and Best Buy files its Fair Tax remittance with the government claiming $200 in sales, but only $23 of tax receipts. The government is going to say...Hey you owe me $46 of tax receipts based on your sales. Best buy is going to say, No, I had $100 of taxable sales, and $100 of tax exempt sales.

This is still going to be an auditable issue (I'm a CPA, and an auditor).
This is were you are confused. You would recieve a Prebate in the taxes you would pay for Food and Necessities. A tv is not Food or a Necessity.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:18 PM

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:19 PM

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 02:20 PM

If it were even close, you wouldn't have anarcho-capitalist calling it worse than what we have now.

wow, I didn't even know you were anarcho-capitalist ( I know you mean Rothbard by the way), or maybe you're just a pissed off libertarian, but regardless look at the language of the post.
"almost anarcho-capitalist in it's roots"

"roots", also important.
not only as a great miniseries but as the fact that the roots are not the stem or the flower.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:20 PM

no one is forcing anyone to go out and buy anything; it is a voluntary and independent choice of the consumer. nice one, Murray. :whatever:

If the system is voluntary, then what if someone decides they don't want to pay any taxes to the federal government?
It is not voluntary because there is no way to avoid buying new items.

If you want to argue that the FairTax is voluntary ("Don't buy any new items and you won't have to pay taxes"), then our current tax system is also voluntary ("Don't make any income and you won't have to pay income taxes").

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:20 PM

No, they would not receive a card saying tax exempt. They, as well as everyone, would receive a Prebate into their Checking account or a check in the Mail equal to the Taxes they would have paid on foods and necessities. ouch. you shouldn't have done that. you're going to confuse him even more bringing in the prebates. this is a basic misunderstanding of the difference between an income tax and a sales tax, and for someone who claims to be a CPA, it's pretty frightening.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:20 PM

Not true...there would still need to be audits of individuals otherwise, we would all share the tax exempt card of the people that are below the poverty line and no one would pay the fair tax. So a guy claims his income is $12k, below the poverty line, so he receives a card from the government stating he doesn't have to pay the fair tax. He then starts a side business, charging customers 15% commission on any purchases he makes but everyone makes money because I don't have to pay the 23% fair tax. What's to stop this type of abuse, if there are no audits of individuals.
You wouldnt claim anything. You Do not file anything, as an individual. The only cards he would receive from the Government is a Social Security Card and possibly a Debit card for his prebate. Not an Exemption Card. I know what card you are talking about.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:22 PM

Not true...there would still need to be audits of individuals otherwise, we would all share the tax exempt card of the people that are below the poverty line and no one would pay the fair tax. So a guy claims his income is $12k, below the poverty line, so he receives a card from the government stating he doesn't have to pay the fair tax. He then starts a side business, charging customers 15% commission on any purchases he makes but everyone makes money because I don't have to pay the 23% fair tax. What's to stop this type of abuse, if there are no audits of individuals.THERE IS NO TAX EXEMPT CARD; IT'S NOT AN INCOME TAX. my god. EVERYONE regardless of income, is paying the FairTax. it's a freaking sales tax. the tax is collected at the point of sale.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:22 PM

No, they would not receive a card saying tax exempt. They, as well as everyone, would receive a Prebate into their Checking account or a check in the Mail equal to the Taxes they would have paid on foods and necessities.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/FTRebate.png

How is this prebate going to be determined? I assume I will be filing a form with the government stating my annual income, # of children, etc. No audits of individuals, what's to stop me from cheating on this form and getting a little extra spending cash each month?

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:24 PM

If the system is voluntary, then what if someone decides they don't want to pay any taxes to the federal government?
It is not voluntary because there is no way to avoid buying new items.

If you want to argue that the FairTax is voluntary ("Don't buy any new items and you won't have to pay taxes"), then our current tax system is also voluntary ("Don't make any income and you won't have to pay income taxes").
That would be 100% legal under the Fairtax. If you grow your own food, on a paidfor Farm with out electricity. Never spending a dime, you wouldn't be subject to paying any fairtax. That would be within your rights. But if you volunteer to buy anything, you would be subject to the Fairtax.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:26 PM

How is this prebate going to be determined? I assume I will be filing a form with the government stating my annual income, # of children, etc. No audits of individuals, what's to stop me from cheating on this form and getting a little extra spending cash each month?
The only thing you would do is when you get a job, or start one, you would fill with the US Treasury your SS#, plus the SS# of any dependants. No Income or anything like that. Just SS#s. The Government would double check your SS# and the SS#'s of those you claim, and you would receive your Prebate based on that. You could cheat on this form, but they run a check of SS#s. If someone else claims that same SS#, then theres an issue to be resolved, but this would be the answer 99.9% the time.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:26 PM

THERE IS NO TAX EXEMPT CARD; IT'S NOT AN INCOME TAX. my god. EVERYONE regardless of income, is paying the FairTax. it's a freaking sales tax.

That was where I was confused...in Texas we have a sales tax, and you receive a tax exempt card if you don't have to pay taxes (ie churches, non-profits, etc.). You have to file a form with Texas to receive this form

http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/taxforms/01-3392.pdf

Apparently, this method wouldn't require the sales exempt card, but would give a rebate instead.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:28 PM

wow, I didn't even know you were anarcho-capitalist ( I know you mean Rothbard by the way), or maybe you're just a pissed off libertarian, but regardless look at the language of the post.
"almost anarcho-capitalist in it's roots"

"roots", also important.
not only as a great miniseries but as the fact that the roots are not the stem or the flower.

nope, not even remotely related to anarcho-capitalism.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 02:30 PM

nope, not even remotely related to anarcho-capitalism.

the "diminished" influence on trade is not "remotely related" to anarcho capitalism?
:huh: you need to look up "remotely" and "related"

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:31 PM

That was where I was confused...in Texas we have a sales tax, and you receive a tax exempt card if you don't have to pay taxes (ie churches, non-profits, etc.). You have to file a form with Texas to receive this form

http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/taxforms/01-3392.pdf

Apparently, this method wouldn't require the sales exempt card, but would give a rebate instead.
I know exactly the Card you talking about. I believe in Ohio it was called a Resellers licence. That wouldn't exsist at the Federal Level in a Fairtax world, but could exsist because the State would detirmene that you wouldn't need to pay state sales tax. Remeber, we are talking about a Federal Sales Tax, not State Sales Taxes.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:31 PM

That would be 100% legal under the Fairtax. If you grow your own food, on a paidfor Farm with out electricity. Never spending a dime, you wouldn't be subject to paying any fairtax. That would be within your rights. But if you volunteer to buy anything, you would be subject to the Fairtax.

Not if I want to own a business.

My point still stands because your self-sufficient farm scenario wouldn't have to pay income taxes either.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:33 PM

That was where I was confused...in Texas we have a sales tax, and you receive a tax exempt card if you don't have to pay taxes (ie churches, non-profits, etc.). You have to file a form with Texas to receive this form

http://www.window.state.tx.us/taxinfo/taxforms/01-3392.pdf

Apparently, this method wouldn't require the sales exempt card, but would give a rebate instead.i knew this was going to happen, Supes.

it's a prebate, not a rebate, and EVERYONE receives a prebate check every month regardless of income. the prebate is for basic necessities. your sales tax exemption are based on tax status, which are tied to THE INCOME TAX and its code. i thought you're a CPA?

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:33 PM

Not if I want to own a business.

My point still stands because your self-sufficient farm scenario wouldn't have to pay income taxes either.
If you start your own business, but are not a retailer, yes, you would not be subject to a Fairtax. Remember, no Income tax would exsist with a Fairtax.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:34 PM

:grin: I know exactly the Card you talking about. I believe in Ohio it was called a Resellers licence. That wouldn't exsist at the Federal Level in a Fairtax world, but could exsist because the State would detirmene that you wouldn't need to pay state sales tax. Remeber, we are talking about a Federal Sales Tax, not State Sales Taxes.

Thanks! Makes more sense to me...I still think there is room for abuse, but I guess we already have that :woot:

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:36 PM

i knew this was going to happen, Supes.

it's a prebate, not a rebate, and EVERYONE receives a prebate check every month regardless of income. the prebate is for basic necessities. your sales tax exemption are based on tax status, which are tied to THE INCOME TAX and its code. i thought you're a CPA?
The only difference with at Prebate and a rebate is the timing of the transaction. It is a diffucult concept to grasp because is is progressive. It's new, and nothing like it exsists. You would receive a rebate, before you spend it on food taxes to ensure that you wouldn't have to spend the taxes out of your own pocket.

zenile

12-07-2007, 02:36 PM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:36 PM

Not if I want to own a business.

My point still stands because your self-sufficient farm scenario wouldn't have to pay income taxes either.Businesses don't pay taxes; their tax burden is passed on to the consumer. every item you buy contains approx. 22% of embedded taxes that are in there from the point of manufacture to the point of final sale. those embedded taxes are eliminated under the FairTax and exist only at the final sale point.

and owning a business is also your choice; it is also voluntary. no one is forcing you to own a business.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:36 PM

:grin:

Thanks! Makes more sense to me...I still think there is room for abuse, but I guess we already have that :woot:
Exactly. The Fairtax system, while not 100% perfect, is a much less abusive form of taxiation than what we already have. Right?

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:38 PM

the "diminished" influence on trade is not "remotely related" to anarcho capitalism?
:huh: you need to look up "remotely" and "related"

The FairTax does not lower the amount of taxes going to the Federal government, it only changes the way the taxes are obtained.

The FairTax also does not diminish the government's "need" for that money.

So, because of a supposedly "diminished" influence on trade, this new system is now "rooted" in anarcho-capitalism?

I'm sorry, but any anarcho-capitalist would find your comment laughable.

Lackey

12-07-2007, 02:41 PM

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:43 PM

Businesses don't pay taxes; their tax burden is passed on to the consumer. every item you buy contains approx. 22% of embedded taxes that are in there from the point of manufacture to the point of final sale. those embedded taxes are eliminated under the FairTax and exist only at the final sale point.

and owning a business is also your choice; it is also voluntary. no one is forcing you to own a business.
Embedded Taxes are another difficult to imagine circumstace:

Everyone imagine a loaf of bread at the Super Market, where did that Loaf come from? The Retailer bought from a Distributor. That Distributor has to pay Corporate Taxes, Payroll taxes, etc. He tacks on a couple percent to his price to the Supermarket. Where did the Distributor get the Loaf of Bread? He got it from the Bakery, who has Corporate Taxes, payroll taxes, etc. He has to pass that on in his price he charges the Distributor. Where did he get the supplies for the Bread? He has to buy the Wheat/Flour from the Supplier, He has Payroll and Corporate Taxes. So on and So one. Even the Farmer has Payroll Taxes and the Seeds for his Farm, they have taxes too, and the Machinery. Everything is taxed, Even the Plastick twisty tie. The Taxes from each level get passed down until it reaches the Consumer, you. And you pay all the taxes.

Mr Sparkle

12-07-2007, 02:44 PM

The FairTax does not lower the amount of taxes going to the Federal government, it only changes the way the taxes are obtained.

The FairTax also does not diminish the government's "need" for that money.

So, because of a supposedly "diminished" influence on trade, this new system is no "rooted" in anarcho-capitalism?

I'm sorry, but any anarcho-capitalist would find your comment laughable.

no, it's almost anarcho capitalist in it's roots.
two very different concepts, when you think about it.
one means the concept comes from the ideology, or just the concepts roots.
the other means that the roots themselves have comparable attributes.
hence, in my opinion they share an idea, which makes the concept "comparable to"

JEEEEEESUS Larkey.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:45 PM

so in other words, every business is forced to be a tax collector for the governmentno. the roles are the same under the current income tax as they would be under the FairTax. the process is the same.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:48 PM

so in other words, every business is forced to be a tax collector for the government
Yes, but only they retailers. Remember, they already collect taxes. State Sales, the Embedded, etc. They would collect the taxes, send them up to their County Tax Collectors. They would review the Math, and return 1/4 of 1% as a fee for Collecting. The County Tax Collectors would pass this on to the State Tax Collectors office, whom would review over the paperwork, and so one, then return 1/4 of 1% to the County Tax Collectors for Collection and Review. They would pass it up to the Federal Government.

No manufacturers and so on. Only Taxes are collected at the Retail level.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:51 PM

no. the roles are the same under the current income tax as they would be under the FairTax. the process is the same.
Nope, I corrected you. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips

Watch the video about collections.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 02:54 PM

Nope, I corrected you. http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips

Watch the video about collections.i understand it completely. my point is that nothing changes. Lackey is going to call business a bunch of tax collectors regardless. retailers collect taxes now just as they would under the FairTax. the point is the roles are the same; they aren't being forced into something that they aren't already doing.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 02:58 PM

i understand it completely. my point is that nothing changes. Lackey is going to call business a bunch of tax collectors regardless. retailers collect taxes now just as they would under the FairTax. the point is the roles are the same; they aren't being forced into something that they aren't already doing.

Yep, that is correct. And, with the Fairtax, they would receive a portion of that Collected tax as a fee for collecting it. Everyone is a winner.

bell110

12-07-2007, 03:15 PM

SupermanBeyond is a genius

SuBe

12-07-2007, 03:19 PM

SupermanBeyond is a genius

I'm Humbled. Thanks, please invite your friends to this thread for a quick read. They can ask anything they would like about the Fairtax. I will answer anything or point them in the right direction if needs be.

CK1

12-07-2007, 03:43 PM

From reading this thread, which politician is on board with this idea?

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 03:50 PM

of the candidates, only Huckabee has come out in support of it while Tancredo is a co-sponsor of the bill.

http://fairtaxscorecard.com/Replookup.phtml?LookupBy=name&LastIni=R

www.fairtax.org

http://www.amazon.com/Fair-Tax-Book-Saying-Goodbye/dp/0060875496/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197060799&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz/dp/0061540463/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1197060799&sr=8-2

SuBe

12-07-2007, 03:52 PM

From reading this thread, which politician is on board with this idea?
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_presScorecard

Thanks for asking. So far the 2 lead candidate for President that Support it is Huckabee (GOP) and Gravel (DNC). Theres a list I've attached that has the all the Politicians.

You could also check Fairtaxscorecard.com to check where your Representives stand on the Fairtax.

bell110

12-07-2007, 04:08 PM

I thought Paul was in favor of the FairTax.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 04:13 PM

I thought Paul was in favor of the FairTax.
He is, it is on my list. I only took the time to write the Top 2 contenders. One GOP and one DNC. I don't want this to become a Political Party thread, so I included a link that has every candidate that supports the Fairtax.

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 04:43 PM

I thought Paul was in favor of the FairTax.right, forgot about him.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 05:09 PM

right, forgot about him.
Yeah, It's easy to forget Ron Paul, but his is for the Fairtax.

In Washington we hear a lot of talk about tax cuts, but the rhetoric does not always match the reality. For most Americans, taxes remain too complex and too high. After the tumult of the upcoming midterm election, it is imperative that Congress gets back to basics and addresses our terrible tax system.
Lower taxes benefit all Americans by increasing economic growth and encouraging wealth creation. I’m in favor of cutting everybody’s taxes – rich, poor, and otherwise. Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes by forty dollars a month, or allows a business owner to save thousands in capital gains and hire more employees, the net effect is beneficial. Both either spend, save, or invest the extra dollars, which helps all of us more than if those dollars were sent to the black hole known as the federal Treasury.

Many conservatives have touted the Fair Tax proposal as an issue in the upcoming election. A pure consumption tax like the Fair Tax would be better than the current system only if we truly did away with the income tax by repealing the 16th amendment. Otherwise, we could end up with both the income tax and a national sales tax. A consumption tax also provides more transparency and less complexity. But the real issue is total spending by government, not tax reform. In other words, why change the tax structure if spending stays the same? Once we accept that the federal government needs $2.7 trillion from us – and more each year – the only question left is from whom it will be collected. Until the federal government is held to its proper constitutionally limited functions, tax reform will remain a mirage.

I apply a very simple test to any proposal to overhaul the tax code: Does it reduce or eliminate an existing tax? If not, then it amounts to nothing more than a political shell game that pits taxpayers against each other in a lobbying scramble to make sure the other guy pays. True tax reform is as simple as cutting or eliminating taxes. No studies, panels, committees, or hearings are needed. When reform proposals seem complicated, they almost certainly don’t cut taxes. Congress should simply focus on cutting existing taxes and reducing spending, instead of complicated overhauls of the system.

The question to ask yourself is this: What would I do with the money withheld from my paycheck each month? The answer is simple: you would spend, save, or invest the money, all of which do more for the economy and society than sending it to Washington. Thanks to the deception of income tax withholding, however, some people actually look forward to tax time and a much-anticipated refund. Imagine how quickly Americans would demand lower taxes and spending if they had to write the federal government a check each month!

Tax relief is important, but members of Congress need to back up tax cuts with spending cuts – and they need to vote NO on every wasteful appropriations bill until we start over with the federal budget. True fiscal conservatism combines both low taxes and low spending.
Cutting spending would not be hard if Congress simply showed the political will to tackle the problem. I’m not talking about cutting the rate at which government spending grows, but cutting the actual amount of money spent by the federal government in a single year.

If federal spending grows at 5% rather than 7% one year, that’s hardly a great achievement on the part of Congress. The current federal budget of around $2.7 trillion could be cut to $2.5 trillion quite easily. The vast majority of Americans would not even notice. But we must begin chipping away at the federal budget if we hope to address the underlying problem of government debt.

October 16, 2006
Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Steve Rogers

12-07-2007, 06:36 PM

SuBe

12-07-2007, 06:46 PM

Fair Tax is one of those things that is great in theory, but will never be fully understood until it is actually applied. Communism is wonderful on paper, but the practice of it is fair different. The problem with something like that is that we won't know if it works or not until we try it. If it doesn't work we are up a certain creek without a certain paddle.

The verdict is still out on this one for me. It seems like it could work, but so did trickle down economics-- and we all know how that turned out. If I understand Fair Tax correctly, rich people will be taxed on their big purchases. While that's all fine and dandy, an economic relapse resulting in fewer rich people purchasing fewer expensive items could only end in economic disaster. I think there are too many variables with Fair Tax.

Steve, it is not the rich would be taxed only on "Expensive" Purchases. Everyone would be taxed equally. Not everyone who is working is taxed on their income, but when you spend it. We know that economies can survive like this (without income tax) Florida is an example. We dont have income tax in Florida. The examples of the Free Market dictacting lower prices really happen. Watch these videos http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips.

They are very informative. If you have any specific questions, let me know.

Steve Rogers

12-07-2007, 06:54 PM

Steve, it is not the rich would be taxed only on "Expensive" Purchases. Everyone would be taxed equally. Not everyone who is working is taxed on their income, but when you spend it. We know that economies can survive like this (without income tax) Florida is an example. We dont have income tax in Florida. The examples of the Free Market dictacting lower prices really happen. Watch these videos http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips.

They are very informative. If you have any specific questions, let me know.And rich people make expensive purchases. My poor ass don't got a yacht.

SuBe

12-07-2007, 07:00 PM

And rich people make expensive purchases. My poor ass don't got a yacht.
Neither does mine, but with the Fairtax, you have the ability to save more of your money, instead of paying the Government before you even see your paycheck. You would be able to save up for a boat, easier, than under the current tax code. But if you have a question, ask.

Steve Rogers

12-07-2007, 07:07 PM

Neither does mine, but with the Fairtax, you have the ability to save more of your money, instead of paying the Government before you even see your paycheck. You would be able to save up for a boat, easier, than under the current tax code. But if you have a question, ask.But the big chunks of taxes will come out of big purchases like yachts, Ferarri's and mansions, does it not? So what if the rich start saving and stop spending? The bottom will fall out?

And yes, I have the oppurtunity to save more and buy my yacht, but--uh oh! Now that yacht is taxed like a motherf**ker! Now I can't afford it because the government wants their piece. Like I said, too many variables to just say "yeah, it works"

SuBe

12-07-2007, 07:46 PM

But the big chunks of taxes will come out of big purchases like yachts, Ferarri's and mansions, does it not? So what if the rich start saving and stop spending? The bottom will fall out?

And yes, I have the oppurtunity to save more and buy my yacht, but--uh oh! Now that yacht is taxed like a motherf**ker! Now I can't afford it because the government wants their piece. Like I said, too many variables to just say "yeah, it works"
Have you read all of the posts? Have you gone to any of the links I've posted? Please read up on the Plan. We have nearly 100 posts just talking about how the plan will effect the economy. I've sent you video FAQs. Please look it up.

hammy

12-07-2007, 07:55 PM

I'm always amazed at how many people are willing and resigned to continue feeding the uncontrollable insurrection that is big government. Some people are actually worried that under this system, the government won't get enough money. The government already gets far too much of our money, and happily mishandles and wastes it without regard to us, the taxpayers who earned it in the first place.

:mad:

Mistress Gluon

12-07-2007, 08:09 PM

I would feel bad for the people on the bubble of poverty.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 09:20 PM

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 09:39 PM

Please everyone, keep your cool. This is a discussion, I don't want this to be a heated debate.
1. This is a situation where the Free Market will force retailers to lower the prices, then add on the Fairtax. If one retailer complies with lowering the price of their goods, all others will to be competitive. And there are already a dozen retailers have signed the petition for the Fairtax. Walmart being one of them. Here is an example:(This is very naive. To think that a company would not just keep charging what they have been and just pocket the difference. As for the example of the $5.00 airline tax, that was $5.00, this would be $100+.)

Under the current system: I make and sell Widgets. I include all taxes down the pike, and this are included at the retail level. I hear that the Fairtax is coming, So I can horde the extra 23%. Right? But my competitor XYZ Widget Co. is going to seize this moment to reduce his price of the widgets and gain more market share. I Mean, he can make the same profit as yesterday, and sell many, many more than I can at 23% more at the retail level. If I want to catch up, I have to reduce my price too. There is a real world example when the $5 Federal Airtavel Ticket Tax expired in 1996. The big airlines figured that this would be a good oppurtunity to keep the extra $5 dollars. It took 6 hours for a Smaller company to reduce its price, forcing the others change their prices.

2. You only get back what you pay in taxes on Necessities. Not on other goods. That includes Food, Medical Services, Etc. You would, with your employer, fill out paperwork, just like you do now, saying how many dependants you have. This paper work goes up to the Dept. of Heatlth and Human Services. On this form, it would have your SS# and an Address. They would send you the estimated Sales Tax on foods and necessities you purchase in a Month. See http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#3 for more information. (Then why pay them in the first place. Also, this seems a lot like getting the Dept. of Health and Human Services to do what the IRS already does. And seeing as how the DHHS is already doing a bang-up job at their current responsibilities, I'm not sure I want them handling my money.)

3. Remember, with the removal of the Embedded Taxes and the Addition of the Nation Sales Tax, the price of the goods would stay the same, before you add the State Sales tax. So, the Price tag on the item looks that same as it does today. If the State removes the State Income tax, that would mean that you would receive 100% totally. If they increae the State Sales tax a few Percentage Points to cover this, that is ok, because you would have all of your paycheck. So what if an Item costs $2 more for the item, you would be saving an Average of 33% from your paycheck that didn't have with our current tax code. (Let's use my friend the contractor again. He already gets 100% of his check. Now, let's say his AC unit dies. Now, this easily a $1000 item that with the addition of this tax would now cost $1230. So, his situation goes from bad to worse. And what about buying a car? Do these taxes now go to 23%? suddenly a $20,000 car jumps to $24,600. So, I don't think trivializing a price increase is really the way to address these concerns. And if the state keeps it's income tax, but raises it a few percentage point, that's not ok.)

4. The Issue with your friends that pay all there taxes at the end of the year: Remember, they will not be filing taxes anymore. So no more having to save for that. No more having to put any money to pay off the Federal Government. They will pay the Taxes as they purchase, not a big lump sum.
(He's just trying to get from week to week right now. He's more worried about paying his mortgage than what he'll owe in taxes in April.)
I hope I answered all over these questions, if you have anymore, ask.
I've added some comments to your post, I hope they show you what a load of BS the idea of this "Fair Tax" is.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 09:55 PM

Handsome Rob

12-07-2007, 10:47 PM

OK, here's an example of how this "Fair Tax" would effect a single mother, living in Georgia, and working for minimum wage.

1st, she makes $5.15/hour, so that equates to $206/week, without factoring taxes. Now, she has a 9 year-old son, so she spends at least $60/week in groceries, $20/week in gas to get back and forth to work, $10/week for her son's school lunch, and at least $15/week for incidentals. Now, that's $105/week in expenses leaving $101/week for everything else. Now, if she wants to buy anything special for her son for Christmas it will now cost her 23% more. Let's use the Wii for example, it normally cost $250, now saving $15/week to save up for it would take her roughly 4.5 months to reach the $250. Now add the 23% tax and the price jumps to $307.50 and would take her over 5 months to come up with. Now, tell me how this "Fair Tax" helped her in any way?

But you have to factor in taxes. Going with a simple 10% witholding, she now takes home $185.00 (rounded). But, there's also Medicare Tax (approx $3.00) and SS Tax (approx $12.00). Now she's taking home $170. So, assuming the same cost of expenses, she now has $65 for everything else.

Now, for fun, let's take your expenses and multiply them by the Fair Tax rate of 23%, assuming these expenses do not go down in price. $105 * 1.23 = $129.15 in weekly expenses.

Here's a month's worth of money for her. Ready for this?

Before the FairTax, she has $65 * 4 = $260 a month

Now, with the FairTax, she will take home $824 a month (no taxes withheld, remember?). Less expenses of $517 (129.40 * 4 and rounded), she'll have $307 ($76 a week, which is more than she would have before the FairTax) left over.

BUT . . . that's not all! She gets a $262 prebate at the beginning of the month under the FairTax, which brings her monthly leftover money to $569. So, she now has $142 a week left over.

$142 - $101 = $31 more per week under the FairTax than under the system you laid out. Or, $77 more a week when income/SSN/MCare taxes are factored in (my example).

Check the math--the FairTax works.

First post! :)

EDIT: And, if she put the difference ($31) alone toward the Wii, she could buy it in 10 weeks, or approximately 2.5 months--roughly 2 months sooner than she could have, before.

Superman4ever

12-07-2007, 11:33 PM

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 11:49 PM

Fair Tax is one of those things that is great in theory, but will never be fully understood until it is actually applied. Communism is wonderful on paper, but the practice of it is fair different. The problem with something like that is that we won't know if it works or not until we try it. If it doesn't work we are up a certain creek without a certain paddle.it's a very simple concept, really. the tax code now is thousands of pages long. the FairTax is a pamphlet compared to it. it's basically a 23% national sales tax that will completely replace the federal income tax.

The verdict is still out on this one for me. It seems like it could work, but so did trickle down economics-- and we all know how that turned out. If I understand Fair Tax correctly, rich people will be taxed on their big purchases. While that's all fine and dandy, an economic relapse resulting in fewer rich people purchasing fewer expensive items could only end in economic disaster. I think there are too many variables with Fair Tax.you do not understand the FairTax correctly. everyone, regardless of income, is paying the FairTax at the retail level no matter if it's a yo yo or a yacht.

and trickle down economics did, and does, work. taxes and elimination of tax cuts stand in the way of trickle down economics. thankfully, the FairTax would eliminate that.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 11:49 PM

No, they would not receive a card saying tax exempt. They, as well as everyone, would receive a Prebate into their Checking account or a check in the Mail equal to the Taxes they would have paid on foods and necessities.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7a/FTRebate.png
So, under this system, the feds would send me a check for $525/month? What if I don't spend that much in sales tax for my essentials that month, or if I spend more than that? Who keeps track of this?

Mysterio

12-07-2007, 11:51 PM

But the big chunks of taxes will come out of big purchases like yachts, Ferarri's and mansions, does it not?lol, no.

And yes, I have the oppurtunity to save more and buy my yacht, but--uh oh! Now that yacht is taxed like a motherf**ker! Now I can't afford it because the government wants their piece. Like I said, too many variables to just say "yeah, it works"Steve, i don't know what the hell you're talking about, but i do know you aren't talking about the FairTax. currently, every item you purchase contains roughly 23% of embedded taxes. when you pay $100 for a tv, $22 dollars of taxes are already built into that price. under the FairTax, those embedded taxes are replaced by a 23% sales tax. you'll still be paying $100 for the television. there aren't "too many variables"; you're just making stuff up because you don't understand it. if you want to discuss the FairTax, we're more than willing. if you want to make up fictions about the FairTax because you don't understand it and then attack those fictions, that's another matter.

Mal'Akai

12-07-2007, 11:59 PM

But you have to factor in taxes. Going with a simple 10% witholding, she now takes home $185.00 (rounded). But, there's also Medicare Tax (approx $3.00) and SS Tax (approx $12.00). Now she's taking home $170. So, assuming the same cost of expenses, she now has $65 for everything else.

Now, for fun, let's take your expenses and multiply them by the Fair Tax rate of 23%, assuming these expenses do not go down in price. $105 * 1.23 = $129.15 in weekly expenses.

Here's a month's worth of money for her. Ready for this?

Before the FairTax, she has $65 * 4 = $260 a month

Now, with the FairTax, she will take home $824 a month (no taxes withheld, remember?). Less expenses of $517 (129.40 * 4 and rounded), she'll have $307 ($76 a week, which is more than she would have before the FairTax) left over.

BUT . . . that's not all! She gets a $262 prebate at the beginning of the month under the FairTax, which brings her monthly leftover money to $569. So, she now has $142 a week left over.

$142 - $101 = $31 more per week under the FairTax than under the system you laid out. Or, $77 more a week when income/SSN/MCare taxes are factored in (my example).

Check the math--the FairTax works.

First post! :)

EDIT: And, if she put the difference ($31) alone toward the Wii, she could buy it in 10 weeks, or approximately 2.5 months--roughly 2 months sooner than she could have, before.
Hmm, under this plan, she's actually making money from the prebate. It's giving her back about $65/week, yet under your example, she's only paying out about $24/week. Now the Fair Tax would have my vote. Of course the government can't really run by spending more than it's bringing in.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:00 AM

OK, so we pay taxes on food and other essentials, but the government gives us this money back? Then why even bother paying them in the first place. Unless, and this is the fun part, there would ultimately be a lapse in amounts. Meaning we'd eventually overpay and the government would pocket the extra.everyone receives a check at the beginning of the month that would offset the taxes on those essentials. one month maybe you'll spend $200 on groceries. one month maybe you'll spend $100. there's going to be fluctuation in your spending habits just as there is right now, but you aren't overpaying for anything.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:07 AM

everyone receives a check at the beginning of the month that would offset the taxes on those essentials. one month maybe you'll spend $200 on groceries. one month maybe you'll spend $100. there's going to be fluctuation in your spending habits just as there is right now, but you aren't overpaying for anything.
But you didn't answer the main question. Why pax this 23% sales tax on these essentials in the first place? If the government is going to give us "all" this money back, why pay it in the first place at all?

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:14 AM

I've added some comments to your post, I hope they show you what a load of BS the idea of this "Fair Tax" is.well, they don't.

To think that a company would not just keep charging what they have been and just pocket the difference. As for the example of the $5.00 airline tax, that was $5.00, this would be $100+.

this is the basic free market economy at work. embedded taxes are eliminated under the FairTax. those embedded taxes are around 23%. so 23 dollars of a $100 sticker price is embedded taxes. sure, some retailer could continue to sell that tv for $100 and keep his price point the same as it was with the embedded taxes, but others wouldn't. pretty soon, that guy is going to have to lower his price to market level if he doesn't want to be stuck with inventory.

Let's use my friend the contractor again. He already gets 100% of his check. Now, let's say his AC unit dies. Now, this easily a $1000 item that with the addition of this tax would now cost $1230. So, his situation goes from bad to worse. And what about buying a car? Do these taxes now go to 23%? suddenly a $20,000 car jumps to $24,600. So, I don't think trivializing a price increase is really the way to address these concerns. And if the state keeps it's income tax, but raises it a few percentage point, that's not ok.

your contractor friend does not get 100% of his paycheck; ultimately, he pays a check on April 15. as for prices, see my above point. that $1000 item contains $230 of embedded taxes. The FairTax REPLACES those embedded taxes. embedded taxes are an INCLUSIVE tax. the FairTax is an INCLUSIVE, not an EXCLUSIVE tax as you are mistakenly posting in your example here. that item will still be $1000 under the FairTax.

you have completely mischaracterized the FairTax. i urge you to read the FairTax book and to visit www.fairtax.org and this concept will be explained to you.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:17 AM

well, they don't.

To think that a company would not just keep charging what they have been and just pocket the difference. As for the example of the $5.00 airline tax, that was $5.00, this would be $100+.

this is the basic free market economy at work. embedded taxes are eliminated under the FairTax. those embedded taxes are around 23%. so 23 dollars of a $100 sticker price is embedded taxes. sure, some retailer could continue to sell that tv for $100 and keep his price point the same as it was with the embedded taxes, but others wouldn't. pretty soon, that guy is going to have to lower his price to market level if he doesn't want to be stuck with inventory.

Let's use my friend the contractor again. He already gets 100% of his check. Now, let's say his AC unit dies. Now, this easily a $1000 item that with the addition of this tax would now cost $1230. So, his situation goes from bad to worse. And what about buying a car? Do these taxes now go to 23%? suddenly a $20,000 car jumps to $24,600. So, I don't think trivializing a price increase is really the way to address these concerns. And if the state keeps it's income tax, but raises it a few percentage point, that's not ok.

your contractor friend does not get 100% of his paycheck; ultimately, he pays a check on April 15. as for prices, see my above point. that $1000 item contains $230 of embedded taxes. The FairTax REPLACES those embedded taxes. embedded taxes are an INCLUSIVE tax. the FairTax is an INCLUSIVE, not an EXCLUSIVE tax as you are mistakenly posting in your example here. that item will still be $1000 under the FairTax.

you have completely mischaracterized the FairTax. i urge you to read the FairTax book and to visit www.fairtax.org (http://www.fairtax.org) and this concept will be explained to you.
Let's se some invoices showing these imbedded taxes.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:18 AM

But you didn't answer the main question. Why pay this 23% sales tax on these essentials in the first place? If the government is going to give us "all" this money back, why pay it in the first place at all?you're not getting "all" this money back, because once again, spending is not constant. there may be months where you spend beyond your prebate check on the covered essentials. get it?

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:19 AM

Let's se some invoices showing these imbedded taxes.holy ****. are you serious?

http://boortz.com/nuze/200509/09152005.html

As explained in The FairTax Book, there are taxes embedded in everything we buy. Every entity which provides a product or service in the design, production, marketing, distribution and sale of every consumer good or service will incur some tax liability as they perform their particular function. This tax liability will be incorporated into whatever these individuals or business entitles charge for their services, and will all passed through to become a part of the final cost of the product or service.

Now here's what we didn't explain well in the book. Every employee of any company involved in American commerce is also a provider of a service, and, as such, the employee incurs a tax liability as a result of his or her work. This tax liability is incorporated into what the employee charges the employer for their services, and is eventually incorporated into the final retail cost of the employer's product or service. Each employee is essentially a separate business entity providing a product, be it physical or mental labor, to the employer.

The extensive research behind HR 25, The FairTax Bill, shows that the average embedded taxes in every consumer product or service is about 22%. In some industries, such as leather goods, the embedded tax is smaller. In other industries, such as homebuilding and construction, the embedded tax is higher, but it averages out to somewhere between 22 and 23%. With the passage of The FairTax Bill, those embedded taxes disappear. These embedded taxes include the combined tax burdens of all entities involved in bringing those goods or services to market, and that includes you, the employee, and the taxes you incur as a result of your employment.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:20 AM

you're not getting "all" this money back, because once again, spending is not constant. there may be months where you spend beyond your prebate check on the covered essentials. get it?
Ok, look. If I pay, let's say $100 in taxes on essentials, and the government turns around and gives it back to me, why should I pay it in the first place?

keith_v

12-08-2007, 12:22 AM

I think the prebate situation could just be handled by having items listed as tax exempt, so when you pay for them at the register, the tax is not added into the total.

I would be very interested in seeing this put into play in at least an isolated community somewhere. Of course the Fair Tax system incorporates a "pay for performance" philosophy. The problem in this country is that the people that want money for nothing, and while doing things like robbery and selling drugs worked out for them before, now if they want to use that money they made illegally, they'll still get taxed. I think Fair Tax sounds great, but it will have a whole of crime symapthizers protesting it.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:22 AM

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:23 AM

holy ****. are you serious?
Um, yeah. See, until this whole "Fair Tax" discussion, I'd never heard of the embedded taxes. I know there are gas taxes in the price I pay per gallon, and I know there are cigarette taxes in the price per pack. But, I'd never heard of and embedded tax in everything I buy.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:30 AM

But you have to factor in taxes. Going with a simple 10% witholding, she now takes home $185.00 (rounded). But, there's also Medicare Tax (approx $3.00) and SS Tax (approx $12.00). Now she's taking home $170. So, assuming the same cost of expenses, she now has $65 for everything else.

Now, for fun, let's take your expenses and multiply them by the Fair Tax rate of 23%, assuming these expenses do not go down in price. $105 * 1.23 = $129.15 in weekly expenses.

Here's a month's worth of money for her. Ready for this?

Before the FairTax, she has $65 * 4 = $260 a month

Now, with the FairTax, she will take home $824 a month (no taxes withheld, remember?). Less expenses of $517 (129.40 * 4 and rounded), she'll have $307 ($76 a week, which is more than she would have before the FairTax) left over.

BUT . . . that's not all! She gets a $262 prebate at the beginning of the month under the FairTax, which brings her monthly leftover money to $569. So, she now has $142 a week left over.

$142 - $101 = $31 more per week under the FairTax than under the system you laid out. Or, $77 more a week when income/SSN/MCare taxes are factored in (my example).

Check the math--the FairTax works.

First post! :)

EDIT: And, if she put the difference ($31) alone toward the Wii, she could buy it in 10 weeks, or approximately 2.5 months--roughly 2 months sooner than she could have, before.
Thank you very much, you seem to have a very good understanding of the Fairtax. I am honored that this is your first post, did you sign up for the Hype just because of the Fairtax? If so, I am humbled.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:33 AM

I think the prebate situation could just be handled by having items listed as tax exempt, so when you pay for them at the register, the tax is not added into the total.i disagree. again, people can spend beyond the prebate on these items. say you get a $200 check to offset your estimated taxes for that month, but you wind up spending $250 that month instead. i don't think everyone is going to match the check dollar for dollar every month.

keith_v

12-08-2007, 12:33 AM

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:34 AM

Um, yeah. See, until this whole "Fair Tax" discussion, I'd never heard of the embedded taxes. I know there are gas taxes in the price I pay per gallon, and I know there are cigarette taxes in the price per pack. But, I'd never heard of and embedded tax in everything I buy.honest question then: how are you able to judge the FairTax then? how can you call dismissively call it BS when you don't even know what embedded taxes are?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:38 AM

What I don't understand is how the Fairtax will help the poor. If you are already in the poverty level how is paying 30% sales tax helping you? Food stamps only pay for food. How will a single mother of 2 who makes $20000 a year benefit from a 30% increase on diapers or even a toy?

EDIT: Reading the post from above...nevermind for the moment! :)
There are a lot of detail when thinking about the Fairtax that dont come through if you dont understand every angle of it.

1. You receive 100% of your paycheck, minus State Income taxes (the Fairtax does not solve State Income Tax), unless you work in a without a State Income Tax like Florida. But Most States Income tax is based off of a formula of S=F*.0I, but if F=0, S=0. It is simple math, if the Federal Income equals zero, the State Income would equal zero, then they would move to a system of Sales Tax, which still, you only pay tax when you purchase goods, not when before you ever see your money.

2. A fair understandin of the Prebate. You would be untaxed of Food and Necessities up to the Poverty level. People making below that are Untaxed since they would be getting the Taxes back that they paid on Foog and Necessities. Not TVs, Cell Phones Etc. Only Food and Necessities.

3. It is a 23% Inclusive Tax, not a 30% Exclusive Tax. If a price tage said $1.00 you would pay $1.00. $.77 would go to the Retailer, $0.23 would go the the Government.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:40 AM

you're not getting "all" this money back, because once again, spending is not constant. there may be months where you spend beyond your prebate check on the covered essentials. get it?
But you didn't answer the question. Why bother with this system at all when it comes to essentials? If your only going to give back taxes paid on essentials, why charge it? And as for not getting "all" this money back, that would mean the government is pocketing the rest. And the simple fact they would charge taxes on the essentials and then give you your money back, leads me to believe that they are banking on you paying out more than your prebate check. So, the question still stands...
If you are getting reimbursed for the Fair Tax you pay on essentials, why bother charging it?

keith_v

12-08-2007, 12:40 AM

i disagree. again, people can spend beyond the prebate on these items. say you get a $200 check to offset your estimated taxes for that month, but you wind up spending $250 that month instead. i don't think everyone is going to match the check dollar for dollar every month.

But having a system of predicting how much you'll spend on necesities for a month seems cumborsome and unnecesary. There should be products listed as "bare-minimum" that are tax exempt. These would be basic eggs, basic milk, the most simplest of housing or apartments, etc. Should Belgian dark chocolate be considered prebatable just because you can eat it? No, it's a luxury item. By not having Belgian chocolate (and other luxury items) marked as tax exempt, and necessary items as tax exempt, will iron out a lot of the problems that could occur when someone is think about whether or not the products they plan on buying that month are prebatable.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:41 AM

So, under this system, the feds would send me a check for $525/month? What if I don't spend that much in sales tax for my essentials that month, or if I spend more than that? Who keeps track of this?
That is the Beauty of it, no one keeps track of it. They Govenment is out of your life. They do not need to know your personal business. They send you a check, basically for the average of taxes a family your size pays on food for a month. Thats it, no questions asked. You live your life knowing that you did your American duty paying your taxes when you bought something. :yay:

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:42 AM

Hmm, under this plan, she's actually making money from the prebate. It's giving her back about $65/week, yet under your example, she's only paying out about $24/week. Now the Fair Tax would have my vote. Of course the government can't really run by spending more than it's bringing in.
Yes, it would be possible under the Fairtax to be in a Negative Tax Burden. But it would be extremely rare. But Fair since you now have a choice when you pay taxes, not the the money is seized from you well before you ever see it.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:44 AM

lol, no.

Steve, i don't know what the hell you're talking about, but i do know you aren't talking about the FairTax. currently, every item you purchase contains roughly 23% of embedded taxes. when you pay $100 for a tv, $22 dollars of taxes are already built into that price. under the FairTax, those embedded taxes are replaced by a 23% sales tax. you'll still be paying $100 for the television. there aren't "too many variables"; you're just making stuff up because you don't understand it. if you want to discuss the FairTax, we're more than willing. if you want to make up fictions about the FairTax because you don't understand it and then attack those fictions, that's another matter.
Mysterio, I appreciate the Help. I am very glad to have you here.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:44 AM

2. A fair understandin of the Prebate. You would be untaxed of Food and Necessities up to the Poverty level. People making below that are Untaxed since they would be getting the Taxes back that they paid on Foog and Necessities. Not TVs, Cell Phones Etc. Only Food and Necessities.
So the prebate only applies up to the poverty level? Interesting. See, I still have a hard time believing that this system would leave prices the same, and just make paying your taxes transparent.

keith_v

12-08-2007, 12:46 AM

Yes, it would be possible under the Fairtax to be in a Negative Tax Burden. But it would be extremely rare. But Fair since you now have a choice when you pay taxes, not the the money is seized from you well before you ever see it.

Who would police the people that claim that will will be spending $3000 on necesities that month when they're only going to spend maybe $300? Would that be considered tax fraud? And where would the line be drawn between tax fraud and honestly predicting the wrong amount.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:46 AM

That is the Beauty of it, no one keeps track of it. They Govenment is out of your life. They do not need to know your personal business. They send you a check, basically for the average of taxes a family your size pays on food for a month. Thats it, no questions asked. You live your life knowing that you did your American duty paying your taxes when you bought something. :yay:
Hmm, a taxation system with no oversight. Good plan. You must realize this would open the door for lots of people to milk the system, and more importantly, a lot of room for the system to milk us.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:47 AM

Let's se some invoices showing these imbedded taxes.
Mal'Akai, I can't show you actual invoices to show you 100% without a doubt, you'll have to trust me on this one, read my below example:

Everyone imagine a loaf of bread at the Super Market, where did that Loaf come from? The Retailer bought from a Distributor. That Distributor has to pay Corporate Taxes, Payroll taxes, etc. He tacks on a couple percent to his price to the Supermarket. Where did the Distributor get the Loaf of Bread? He got it from the Bakery, who has Corporate Taxes, payroll taxes, etc. He has to pass that on in his price he charges the Distributor. Where did he get the supplies for the Bread? He has to buy the Wheat/Flour from the Supplier, He has Payroll and Corporate Taxes. So on and So one. Even the Farmer has Payroll Taxes and the Seeds for his Farm, they have taxes too, and the Machinery. Everything is taxed, Even the Plastick twisty tie. The Taxes from each level get passed down until it reaches the Consumer, you. And you pay all the taxes.

I work a career where I see the margins of the products we manufacture. I can see how this actually is true.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 12:48 AM

So the prebate only applies up to the poverty level? Interesting. See, I still have a hard time believing that this system would leave prices the same, and just make paying your taxes transparent.
NO. EVERYONE gets a prebate check regardless of your income level.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:48 AM

Yes, it would be possible under the Fairtax to be in a Negative Tax Burden. But it would be extremely rare. But Fair since you now have a choice when you pay taxes, not the the money is seized from you well before you ever see it.
This is like saying as long as it's rare, it's perfectly acceptable to opperate your budget with your checking account in the red every so often. Not smart.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 12:51 AM

NO. EVERYONE gets a prebate check regardless of your income level.
I wonder how much Bill Gate's check would be for? And perhaps you should read SupermanBeyond's post that I quoted...
2. A fair understandin of the Prebate. You would be untaxed of Food and Necessities up to the Poverty level. People making below that are Untaxed since they would be getting the Taxes back that they paid on Foog and Necessities. Not TVs, Cell Phones Etc. Only Food and Necessities.

And why is no one answering my question...
But you didn't answer the question. Why bother with this system at all when it comes to essentials? If your only going to give back taxes paid on essentials, why charge it? And as for not getting "all" this money back, that would mean the government is pocketing the rest. And the simple fact they would charge taxes on the essentials and then give you your money back, leads me to believe that they are banking on you paying out more than your prebate check. So, the question still stands...
If you are getting reimbursed for the Fair Tax you pay on essentials, why bother charging it?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 12:56 AM

Ok, look. If I pay, let's say $100 in taxes on essentials, and the government turns around and gives it back to me, why should I pay it in the first place?
Tax Exemption Status:

This is the Lesson:

Under current taxiation: I Make Widgets. My Widgets sell very well, actually my Widget Co. was owned by my dad 50 years ago. My Widget do so well everyone has them and needs to keep buying them. I've had a very good last quarter, but I hear that Congress is going to pass a tax on all new Widgets after the new year. This is going to hurt everyone in the Widget Industry. My company has been around for a long time. I've employeed a lot of people. I'm going to use my influence to convice Congress to make an exemption for me so all other Widget making Companies who haven't been here for 50 years have to sell there product for more, and I get to keep my market share.

Does that seem fair? No, under the Fairtax, you would pass no exemptions. But the Prebate would give you the taxes you paid on Goods and Necessities. There for, no one scapes under the radar, no favors for big corporations.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 01:01 AM

I wonder how much Bill Gate's check would be for?the prebate is based on family size, not income.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:01 AM

I think that it would be interesting to see how much tax money is brought in areas where there are large amounts of illegal immigrants. The only way to avoid taxes under Fair Tax is only to buy necesities, and how many people will commit to that.

In the end, the government may just walk away from this with more money than they are now.
That is true, but then the people can rangle in Congress for better spending. This is the reason some politician would rather you not know about this Fairtax plan. It gives back a lot of power to the people. A Politician is only as good if they keep their job, if you don't depend on them anymore, they start to get worried. Also, under the Fairtax, the Government is more likely to make policies that would promote a better Economy. Because if they make a decision that would affect the econony, they make less revenue that year. Everyone is a winner.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:02 AM

Tax Exemption Status:

This is the Lesson:

Under current taxiation: I Make Widgets. My Widgets sell very well, actually my Widget Co. was owned by my dad 50 years ago. My Widget do so well everyone has them and needs to keep buying them. I've had a very good last quarter, but I hear that Congress is going to pass a tax on all new Widgets after the new year. This is going to hurt everyone in the Widget Industry. My company has been around for a long time. I've employeed a lot of people. I'm going to use my influence to convice Congress to make an exemption for me so all other Widget making Companies who haven't been here for 50 years have to sell there product for more, and I get to keep my market share.

Does that seem fair? No, under the Fairtax, you would pass no exemptions. But the Prebate would give you the taxes you paid on Goods and Necessities. There for, no one scapes under the radar, no favors for big corporations.
You're avoiding the question. If the government is going to reimburse me the taxes I pay on essentials, why pay them in the first place?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:07 AM

But having a system of predicting how much you'll spend on necesities for a month seems cumborsome and unnecesary. There should be products listed as "bare-minimum" that are tax exempt. These would be basic eggs, basic milk, the most simplest of housing or apartments, etc. Should Belgian dark chocolate be considered prebatable just because you can eat it? No, it's a luxury item. By not having Belgian chocolate (and other luxury items) marked as tax exempt, and necessary items as tax exempt, will iron out a lot of the problems that could occur when someone is think about whether or not the products they plan on buying that month are prebatable.
This is where we go into my arguement about Lobbyists. We don't need them and they complicate the tax code.

The Dept of Health and Human Services has been taking Statisitics for since 1953. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Human_Servi ces
They know, and continue to evaluate how much we pay in taxes on food and necessities. We would just borrow their yearly report in refiguring the Prebate.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 01:08 AM

You're avoiding the question. If the government is going to reimburse me the taxes I pay on essentials, why pay them in the first place?well for one, because you aren't being reimbursed. if you qualify for $200, and if you spend $300, you're not going to get that $100 back.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:11 AM

Who would police the people that claim that will will be spending $3000 on necesities that month when they're only going to spend maybe $300? Would that be considered tax fraud? And where would the line be drawn between tax fraud and honestly predicting the wrong amount.
The Department of Health and Human Services yearly puts out a report that tells Congress how much someone in the United States needs to earn, before they start to pay for thing over the poverty level. Basic Foods, Shelter, Basic Clothing etc. All this is already being done, and will be done by this dept under the Fairtax.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:12 AM

well for one, because you aren't being reimbursed. if you qualify for $200, and if you spend $300, you're not going to get that $100 back.
But the point is why charge them at all. If the plan calls for a prebate to give you back the taxes you pay on essentials, why charge the tax on essentials in the first place? Simply make essentials tax exempt all together and scrap the prebate idea.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:15 AM

Hmm, a taxation system with no oversight. Good plan. You must realize this would open the door for lots of people to milk the system, and more importantly, a lot of room for the system to milk us.
Again, the Retailers could be audited. But the Individual is not. There would be minor paper work to file just to receive the Prebate. But for day to day transactions, no government involvement is necessary. The Government would check the SS# you submit when you apply for the Prebate. If all things match up, thats it. Why would they government care if you PAID the 23% tax, when they can check if the Retailer COLLECTED the 23$ tax? Which sounds easier?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:17 AM

This is like saying as long as it's rare, it's perfectly acceptable to opperate your budget with your checking account in the red every so often. Not smart.
No it is, because it would be 100% legal under that Fairtax. People already utilize loopholes for their own personal benefit, but how difficult is it to avoid paying $1? Especially every day? You would have to try very hard not paying the Fairtax.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:20 AM

Again, the Retailers could be audited. But the Individual is not. There would be minor paper work to file just to receive the Prebate. But for day to day transactions, no government involvement is necessary. The Government would check the SS# you submit when you apply for the Prebate. If all things match up, thats it. Why would they government care if you PAID the 23% tax, when they can check if the Retailer COLLECTED the 23$ tax? Which sounds easier?
So, in theory, I could get my prebate check for $525 each month and make sure I never spend more than that in taxes, thus making money off the government and never paying any taxes.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:22 AM

No it is, because it would be 100% legal under that Fairtax. People already utilize loopholes for their own personal benefit, but how difficult is it to avoid paying $1? Especially every day? You would have to try very hard not paying the Fairtax.
That was not my point. I was saying that if the feds allow for the ocassional negative tax burden, it would be rather unwise.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:23 AM

You're avoiding the question. If the government is going to reimburse me the taxes I pay on essentials, why pay them in the first place?
It would make it fair. If you owned a Gigant Corparation, Manufacturing Coca-Cola. And me being an upstart, came along with a new brand of Cola. You could use your capital, to hire lobbyists to form an exclusion in the tax code. That would give you an unfair advantage. It wouldn't be a fair playing field for someone like me just trying to gain a little market share. Do you see? Tax everything, and refund what a separete Government Agency is reporting a the poverty level tax burden.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:26 AM

So, in theory, I could get my prebate check for $525 each month and make sure I never spend more than that in taxes, thus making money off the government and never paying any taxes.
Yes, but their would be hundred of millions of other Americans not doing that, including the tens of millions illegal aliens, and the tens of millions Tourists every year. You would be one of the few exceptions.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 01:27 AM

So, in theory, I could get my prebate check for $525 each month and make sure I never spend more than that in taxes, thus making money off the government and never paying any taxes.yes and no. if you eliminate the word "never", then i would fully say yes.

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:28 AM

It would make it fair. If you owned a Gigant Corparation, Manufacturing Coca-Cola. And me being an upstart, came along with a new brand of Cola. You could use your capital, to hire lobbyists to form an exclusion in the tax code. That would give you an unfair advantage. It wouldn't be a fair playing field for someone like me just trying to gain a little market share. Do you see?(No, I don't see, because this has abaolutly nothing to do with my question.) Tax everything, and refund what a separete Government Agency is reporting a the poverty level tax burden.
I'm talking about going to the store, paying $525 /month in tax on my food, then getting a check from the government for that same amount. This has nothing to do with any corporation, nothing at all. So, stop changing the subject and dodging the question.

If the Fair Tax plan is going to give us back the taxes we pay on essentianls, why pay them on essentials in the first place?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:29 AM

That was not my point. I was saying that if the feds allow for the ocassional negative tax burden, it would be rather unwise.
Unwise, but fair. How would this be worse than the tax code we already have? People with billions in the bank that don't have a job, spend money. They don't earn income, therefore don't pay income tax. Would you rather he get the relieved tax burden or you?

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 01:30 AM

Yes, but their would be hundred of millions of other Americans not doing that, including the tens of millions illegal aliens, and the tens of millions Tourists every year. You would be one of the few exceptions.
Nice to know that tax evasion is now available to the masses, not just the rich.

Lackey

12-08-2007, 01:30 AM

Unwise, but fair. How would this be worse than the tax code we already have? People with billions in the bank that don't have a job, spend money. They don't earn income, therefore don't pay income tax. Would you rather he get the relieved tax burden or you?

So in other words, you think a wealth distribution welfare scheme is a good thing.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:33 AM

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:35 AM

Nice to know that tax evasion is now available to the masses, not just the rich.
Not Tax evasion, there is a difference. Tax evasion you purposefully went around the tax code, Growing your own food, that is utilizing the tax code to save money. What would you do with all that money you saved anyway? You would have to eventually spend it right? And when you do spend it, you will pay the Fairtax. :yay:

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 01:38 AM

Nice to know that tax evasion is now available to the masses, not just the rich.that isn't tax evasion. :whatever:

and since you keep saying we're avoiding your question, why do you keep avoiding mine?

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=13460792&postcount=145

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:39 AM

So in other words, you think a wealth distribution welfare scheme is a good thing.
No, I would always prefer to earn my money. I just don't want it confiscated from my before I have a chance to see it. I would prefer to pay my taxes as often as I bout something, not while being decieved into thinking that some coparation is paying the bill, not me. I would have pay taxes in at 21st centuary way other than a system that was built in the past. I would rather know exactly what I was paying in taxes, other than not having a clue, or spending 6 years in college taking courses to even have a vague idea. I would rather have a picnic on April 15th than standing in line at the Post Office. :yay:

SuBe

12-08-2007, 01:43 AM

If anyone has any more questions, please post them. Invite your friends, as I would love to discuss this more. I would not be as passionate about the Fairtax, if I didn't believe in it. I Thank you all for giving me the time in explaining this. I Thank Mysterio for helping out. Goodnight. I will be back on tomorrow to answer any more questions.

keith_v

12-08-2007, 03:32 AM

I'm talking about going to the store, paying $525 /month in tax on my food, then getting a check from the government for that same amount. This has nothing to do with any corporation, nothing at all. So, stop changing the subject and dodging the question.

If the Fair Tax plan is going to give us back the taxes we pay on essentianls, why pay them on essentials in the first place?

I think what SupermanBeyond is saying is that is this: if a corporation produces tax exempt products, they will sell better because they are tax exempt. The problem is, who decides what products are essential and what are luxury? Example: Is organic milk essential? Or it is luxury? Who would decide? Of course the company would try to say that it's essential so that more people would buy it.

But if the prebates were not based on the products, and rather the basic principle of what people bought and are entitiled to, then the companies can't weasel theie way into getting their products tax exempt.
Example: A man living alone may be entitled to $200 of tax exempt food. Now, what foods he decides to buy with that tax exempt $200 dollars is his desicion. But he'll only get a tax exempt $200 for that month. If he has a family, the number will go up.

The prebate system is very rough right now because it's still seems to be based in the trusting of others to not exploit the system, but I think it could be polished and made very effective. Basically, as long as you take the time to do your paperwork, you'll get your money back. Most people probably won't, and some can't (illegal aliens). This is how there will always be a pool of money to get people there prebates back.

(The prebate system will also discourage illegal aliens, because with no tax exempt products, they'll have to pay a tax on everything, and won't be elligible to receive a prebate.)

Lackey

12-08-2007, 04:24 AM

No, I would always prefer to earn my money.

Yes, maybe you, but with this system, lower income families are getting more back than what they put in...hence it is just another form of welfare and wealth redistribution.

I would rather know exactly what I was paying in taxes, other than not having a clue

If that's the case, then why hide the tax within the price of items sold? How many people know exactly how much taxes they are paying on gasoline when they go to fill up their tank? Very few

I would rather have a picnic on April 15th than standing in line at the Post Office. :yay:

If the FairTax is passed, it will not and cannot repeal the 16th Amendment. It also will not really get rid of the IRS, just basically rename it and adjust it's purpose. Why trust government not to continue to tax income while they still have the power to? Also, why trust them not to raise the sales tax percentage?

Lackey

12-08-2007, 04:45 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118800635034508655.html

In reality, the FairTax rate is not 23%. Messrs. Linder and Chambliss get this figure by calculating the tax as if it were already incorporated into the price of goods and services. (This is known as the tax-inclusive rate.) Calculating it the conventional way that every other sales tax is calculated, with the tax on top of the price, yields a rate of 30%. (This is called the tax-exclusive rate.) The distinction is confusing, but think of it this way. If a product costs $1 at retail, the FairTax adds 30%, for a total of $1.30. Since the 30-cent tax is 23% of $1.30, FairTax supporters say the rate is 23% rather than 30%.

a national retail sales tax would have to be much, much higher than 23%. A 2000 estimate by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation found the tax-inclusive rate would have to be 36% and the tax-exclusive rate would be 57%. In 2005, the U.S. Treasury Department calculated that a tax-exclusive rate of 34% would be needed just to replace the income tax, leaving the payroll tax in place. But if evasion were high then the rate might have to rise to 49%. If the FairTax were only able to cover the limited sales tax base of a typical state, then a rate of 64% would be required (89% with high evasion).

Handsome Rob

12-08-2007, 07:16 AM

Thank you very much, you seem to have a very good understanding of the Fairtax. I am honored that this is your first post, did you sign up for the Hype just because of the Fairtax? If so, I am humbled.

You're welcome. I have "The FairTax Book" sitting on my bookshelf and am a huge fan of it. I've been lurking around these boards for a long time but finally decided to sign up when I saw this topic.

Handsome Rob

12-08-2007, 07:26 AM

Handsome Rob

12-08-2007, 07:51 AM

Yes, maybe you, but with this system, lower income families are getting more back than what they put in...hence it is just another form of welfare and wealth redistribution.

If that's the case, then why hide the tax within the price of items sold? How many people know exactly how much taxes they are paying on gasoline when they go to fill up their tank? Very few

If the FairTax is passed, it will not and cannot repeal the 16th Amendment. It also will not really get rid of the IRS, just basically rename it and adjust it's purpose. Why trust government not to continue to tax income while they still have the power to? Also, why trust them not to raise the sales tax percentage?

Good questions, Lackey. Here's my response:

1. It's true that the lower your income, the more likely you are to pay less in taxes or even get "paid" by the federal government. But, that already occurs with current tax system. With the Earned Income Tax Credit, it's already possible to pay nothing into the system (with your tax refund) and STILL get more money back. During college, I did volunteer work filing income taxes for low-income families. Many times, they did get back more money than they paid in, due to the EITC (and some other factors).

Under the FairTax, everyone would be treated equally by the federal government, from the wealthiest to the poorest. Because the FairTax prebate would be based on the number of people rather than a percentage of income, the poor would benefit. But, what's a $262 prebate to Bill Gates, assuming it's just he and his wife? Nothing. It's a drop in the bucket. It means a lot more to a poor person, though. The idea, though, is equality of treatment by the government, not equality of outcome.

2. Do you know how much of the price of a product you buy
contains taxes, already? ALL products have tax costs--the gas tax just so happens to be direct.

One of the principles behind the thinking of the FairTax is this: ALL taxes are ultimately paid by the consumer. Corporations consider taxes a cost of doing business. A corporation paying a 35% tax rate doesn't just eat that cost. They pass it along to you and I. We essentially pay the corporate tax. We also pay the employer's portion of the SST and MRT taxes for employees, since the corporation passes these along, as well. So, taxes are already "embedded" in the cost of the goods we buy, before the sales tax is ever applied to it.

3. Excellent question! It's been a while since I read "The FairTax Book," but I believe that the authors stressed that the repeal of the 16th amendment and the passing of the FairTax should go hand in hand. I would agree with them. I would not support a FairTax unless the government's authority to tax income were eliminated. As to your question about why they wouldn't raise the FairTax, I imagine that the rate could be fixed by law and not subject to change without a significant majority of Congress' approval. But, we know that under our current system, Congress can arbitrarily raise income taxes.

Danalys

12-08-2007, 08:13 AM

Handsome Rob

12-08-2007, 08:26 AM

the only problem i see at a cursory glance is compound taxation. the parts of a product are taxed when sold to a manufacturer. then esensually taxed again once the manufactured product is sold. so the part of the price that was taxed is taxed. 23% of 23%. so that part now is taxed 28% and this could happen multiple times. it's why in england VAT is only paid by the consumer not businesses.

Yes, but under the FairTax system, only individuals pay taxes. No compound taxation exists, because the 23% is only applied at the "end of the line." When Windex buys chemicals from DuPont to make their window cleaner, it's tax-free. When Target buys Windex for inventory, it's tax-free. When you and I buy Windex, however, the 23% rate applies.

Remember, individuals indirectly pay for the taxes imposed on businesses through increased prices--as the "end of the line," the consumer ultimately pays for all taxes. The FairTax incorporates this belief by only taxing goods and services at the point of sale to the individual consumer--not before.

Danalys

12-08-2007, 08:40 AM

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 09:07 AM

Yes, but under the FairTax system, only individuals pay taxes. No compound taxation exists, because the 23% is only applied at the "end of the line." When Windex buys chemicals from DuPont to make their window cleaner, it's tax-free. When Target buys Windex for inventory, it's tax-free. When you and I buy Windex, however, the 23% rate applies.

Remember, individuals indirectly pay for the taxes imposed on businesses through increased prices--as the "end of the line," the consumer ultimately pays for all taxes. The FairTax incorporates this belief by only taxing goods and services at the point of sale to the individual consumer--not before.
And there, my friends, is why this plan has fans. Big business would no longer be paying any taxes, and the burden would fall onto the general public. This of course allows the corporations to pocket more profits, which get passed straight to the top brass of said company. The rich get richer, and the poor, well, who really cares about them, right?

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 09:53 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118800635034508655.htmlthat's a common mistake, Lackey, and one we've already seen in this thread. they aren't comparing apples to oranges. the FairTax is inclusive, not exclusive. that is a deliberate misrepresentation, and it is 100% false. embedded taxes are about 23%; the FairTax replaces those embedded taxes with an inclusive sales tax of 23%. that is, the tax is included in the price. very false, and very deliberately so.

http://boortz.com/nuze/200708/08272007.html

There were many other inaccuracies in Bartlett's column. As you know Congressman Linder and I, with the help of a brilliant analyst named Rob Woodall, are busy writing another FairTax book that will address virtually every meaningful criticism you may have heard or read. In Reader's Digest form, here are some quick response to other charges by Bartlett:

Bartlett jumps right into the middle of this nonsense over what the real tax rate is; 23 percent or 30 percent. He correctly points out that we don't quote the FairTax rate the way conventional sales taxes are quoted. The reason is simple; the FairTax will replace the embedded taxes and already exist in every item or service we purchase; and secondly, the FairTax will replace the income tax. Both the embedded taxes in the prices of what we buy now and the income taxes we pay now are inclusive taxes. We're replacing inclusive taxes with inclusive taxes.

It's so very simple: When you see a lamp on the shelf marked $100, you will pay $100 for that lamp when you get to the checkout. You will receive a receipt which shows that $23 of the $100 you have paid represents the FairTax. You do the math for yourself, but every time I work it out it comes to 23%

Bartlett also joins other critics in another blatant falsehood about the FairTax. Here's a sentence from his column: "If a product costs $1 at retail, the FairTax adds 30%, for a total of $1.30. Since the 30-cent tax is 23% of $1.30, FairTax supporters say the rate is 23% rather than 30%." In another paragraph Bartlett also says "Imagine paying 30 percent to the federal government on top of the purchase price of your next house."

Wrong, wrong, wrong. If a product costs $1 at retail .... It costs $1, with the FairTax already included. This is so easy to understand, you almost get the idea that people are intentionally trying to confuse the facts here. That $1 item Bartlett is referring to costs $1 at retail today! But instead of including the FairTax in that price, all of the embedded taxes from every business and individual involved in bringing that item to the marketplace are included. You remove one, you add the other. And that bit about 30 percent to the federal government on top of the purchase price of your new home? Another lie. The embedded taxes are so high on the price of a new home today that when they are removed and the FairTax added, that home could be a percent or two cheaper! Come on, Bruce. This really isn't that hard. Let's try to spell this out plainly for everyone:

The 23 percent FairTax is not added to the price of everything you buy ... it is already included in the price of everything you will buy, just as the embedded taxes are included today. You remove one, you add the other.

In another astonishing falsehood Bartlett says that the cost of providing the prebate to every household in America is not factored into the FairTax rate. He says it would cost at least $600 billion the first year. Again, Bartlett is just flat wrong. The cost of the rebate most certainly was included in the 23 percent rate. Congressman Linder tells me that if the rebate had not been included the FairTax rate could have been lowered to 18 percent. The fact is that the rebate is projected to cost 5 percent, and that 5 percent is most certainly included in the rate.

Bartlett makes another huge mistake(?) regarding the prebate. He says that the FairTax sends monthly checks to every household based on income. Then he speaks of the "complexity and intrusiveness of tracking every American's monthly income .." Wrong ... completely and absolutely wrong. As anyone who has read the book knows, the prebate is not based on income, it's based on family size. There is no need to track anyone's monthly income. The only thing the government needs is a valid Social Security number and the number of people in the household.

Then, of course, Bartlett gets into the question of whether or not you can fund the federal government at present levels with a 23 percent inclusive sales tax rate. He cites numerous sources that say the tax rate would have to be much higher than 23 percent.

Know this ... in every case where some individual or organization has come forward to say that the tax rate would have to be higher than 23 percent, they have first changed the terms of the FairTax. That is, they have created exemptions. For instance, they assume that congress would never agree to tax food and medicines, therefore the tax would have to be XX percent, or that congress wouldn't tax transportation and housing, therefore the tax would have to be XX percent. Again .. the fact that the taxes are already there in the form of embedded taxes – embedded taxes to be replaced by the fair tax – is ignore.

Instead of me arguing about the sufficiency of the 23 percent rate, perhaps you would like to read it for yourself. Here's a link to a study by several economists titled "Taxing Sales under the FairTax: What Rate Works?" (http://people.bu.edu/kotlikof/Taxing%20Sales%20under%20the%20FairTax,%20What%20R ate%20Works,%20October%206,%202006.pdf)Don't take my word for it. I'm just a second-tier talk show host. See what several renowned economists have to say in a 34-page report.
Let's face it. The FairTax is a ripe target. It is easy to demagogue.

"Candidate Smith wants to add 30 percent to the price of everything you buy."
"Candidate Jones wants to add 23 percent to the price of your new home" Can you imagine some uninformed voter (remember, most voters are government educated) hearing something like that? You just know how they're going to vote, don't you?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:04 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118800635034508655.html

Both of those quotes are myths fromo people that do not understand the Fairtax. It is a 23% Inclusive Tax rate, not a 30% excluive Rate. If an Item has a price tag of $1.00. I hand the store clerk $1.00. The itemized reciept will tell me $.23 cents of that dollar went to pay the Fair Tax. If it were an Exclusive rate, that means that the Price tag would be a $1.00 and when I get to the register I will have to hand the Store Clerk $1.30. That is an Exclusive Rate.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=news_audiovideo_QA_videoclips
http://linderfairtax.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=FAQs.View&FAQ_id=7

I added two FAQ's. Please read then, they will dispell any myth.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:07 AM

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118800635034508655.html a national retail sales tax would have to be much, much higher than 23%. A 2000 estimate by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation found the tax-inclusive rate would have to be 36% and the tax-exclusive rate would be 57%. In 2005, the U.S. Treasury Department calculated that a tax-exclusive rate of 34% would be needed just to replace the income tax, leaving the payroll tax in place. But if evasion were high then the rate might have to rise to 49%. If the FairTax were only able to cover the limited sales tax base of a typical state, then a rate of 64% would be required (89% with high evasion).

Ok, so you trust the US Government to give you a proper report that would change the way they have power over every aspect of our lives? Or would you trust a Nonpartisan, Privatly funded Organization, that uses Harvard resources?

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 10:08 AM

And there, my friends, is why this plan has fans. Big business would no longer be paying any taxes, and the burden would fall onto the general public. This of course allows the corporations to pocket more profits, which get passed straight to the top brass of said company. The rich get richer, and the poor, well, who really cares about them, right?Big business (and business in general) don't pay taxes anyway. They are already passed on to the consumer and are built into the ticket price of everything you buy right now; they already fall on the general public. These are EMBEDDED TAXES. do you understood this concept yet? the reason that this plan has fans is because the progressive income tax is an affront to personal liberty and property; it is a cornerstone of the communist manifesto.

and why do bemoan companies making profits? who do think provides jobs? the homeless?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:12 AM

3. Excellent question! It's been a while since I read "The FairTax Book," but I believe that the authors stressed that the repeal of the 16th amendment and the passing of the FairTax should go hand in hand. I would agree with them. I would not support a FairTax unless the government's authority to tax income were eliminated. As to your question about why they wouldn't raise the FairTax, I imagine that the rate could be fixed by law and not subject to change without a significant majority of Congress' approval. But, we know that under our current system, Congress can arbitrarily raise income taxes.

I actually spoke to Neal Boortz last Tuesday, this is one question that come up. HR25 is currently written in that it would only go into effect on Jan 1 of the following year that the 16th Amenment is repealed. This way, you could never have an Income Tax and National Sales tax at the same time, it would be illegal! Yeah!

Mal'Akai

12-08-2007, 10:18 AM

and why do bemoan companies making profits?
Because when the oil companies turn record profits tow years in a row, yet I'm paying almost $3.00/gallon, there is something wrong. See, the problem with companies making record profits is they, for the most part, do not pass them along to the people. They don't give their employees large raises, they give those to their top brass. This is why trickle-down economics does not work. Greed.

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 10:31 AM

Because when the oil companies turn record profits tow years in a row, yet I'm paying almost $3.00/gallon, there is something wrong. See, the problem with companies making record profits is they, for the most part, do not pass them along to the people. They don't give their employees large raises, they give those to their top brass. This is why trickle-down economics does not work. Greed.
wow. this is a large bundle of ignorance here. not only do you not understand embedded taxes, you don't have a basic grasp of economics. learn the difference between profit and profit margin, learn the basics of supply and demand, learn what wealth redistribution and communism are, learn what trickle-down economics is.

See, the problem with companies making record profits is they, for the most part, do not pass them along to the people.

cheers, comrade. wow.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:49 AM

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:53 AM

ah right so it is just VAT then.
No, a VAT is Value Added Tax. In VAT enviroment, you tax products at each point of sale. A bakery would have a tax applied, the Bread Distributor would have a tax applied, the Super market would a apply a tax. With t e Fairtax, there is no taxation until the final point of sale, to the Consumer.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:55 AM

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:00 AM

Because when the oil companies turn record profits tow years in a row, yet I'm paying almost $3.00/gallon, there is something wrong. See, the problem with companies making record profits is they, for the most part, do not pass them along to the people. They don't give their employees large raises, they give those to their top brass. This is why trickle-down economics does not work. Greed.
Mal'Akai, that is a topic for a different thread. The Fairtax does not fix human greed (what is the defination of greed anyway?) but neither does our current tax code. Remember, the Cost of Gas would stay the same under the Fairtax as it is today, but you receive 100% of your Paycheck.

Danalys

12-08-2007, 11:00 AM

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:03 AM

did you just seriously try to teach an english man what VAT is. sheesh. and no it doesn't aply to businesses.
In your previous post, you seemed to identify that the Fairtax is a version of the VAT, it is not. There is a difference. http://easylink.playstream.com/fairtax/02-DifferFromVAT.wvx

I may have read you post wrong, if I did, I apologize. Please watch the video.

Danalys

12-08-2007, 11:10 AM

it is a version of VAT. it's VAT at the point of sale exactly the same as VAT works in the UK.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:20 AM

it is a version of VAT. it's VAT at the point of sale exactly the same as VAT works in the UK.
What about value-added taxes (VATs), like they have in Europe and Canada? Are they not consumption taxes?

While VATs are also consumption taxes, and better than income taxes, the FairTax is not a VAT. A VAT works very differently. It taxes every stage of production. It is much more complex and is typically hidden from the retail consumer. Second, in industrialized countries that have a VAT, it coexists with high-rate income tax, payroll, and many other taxes that, in some instances, have led to marginal tax rates as high as 70 percent. Third, all other industrialized countries, except Australia and Japan, have a much larger tax burden than the U.S., which requires higher rates and makes tax administration much more difficult. Lastly, a VAT is a lobbyist’s dream, allowing them to install their loopholes unbeknownst to the purchaser. A retail sales tax, in contrast, is a lobbyist’s nightmare, applied as it is under the bright lights of the retail counter.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers

CorpusBlack

12-08-2007, 11:22 AM

What about value-added taxes (VATs), like they have in Europe and Canada? Are they not consumption taxes?

While VATs are also consumption taxes, and better than income taxes, the FairTax is not a VAT. A VAT works very differently. It taxes every stage of production. It is much more complex and is typically hidden from the retail consumer. Second, in industrialized countries that have a VAT, it coexists with high-rate income tax, payroll, and many other taxes that, in some instances, have led to marginal tax rates as high as 70 percent. Third, all other industrialized countries, except Australia and Japan, have a much larger tax burden than the U.S., which requires higher rates and makes tax administration much more difficult. Lastly, a VAT is a lobbyist’s dream, allowing them to install their loopholes unbeknownst to the purchaser. A retail sales tax, in contrast, is a lobbyist’s nightmare, applied as it is under the bright lights of the retail counter.
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers

Man, homeboy's droppin' science!

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:29 AM

Man, homeboy's droppin' science!
It's not Science, Magic or Special Effects, my friend, it's the Fairtax!:grin:

Danalys

12-08-2007, 11:39 AM

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_Home

VAT is a tax on the final consumption of certain goods and services now this might not be the same the world over but this is what i was talking about.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:44 AM

http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageVAT_Home

now this might not be the same the world over but this is what i was talking about.
It is possible. I just know that the Common form of the VAT is different to the Fairtax. I will look into the UK VAT and we can discuss. From what I've read, VAT adds a tax to each step of the product's Manufacturing life. This is not how the Fairtax works, the Fairtax does not tax a single item, until the item is at the Retail counter. I will look into the UK VAT. If it's what you say it is, you are lucky.

Additional Note: From reading the site you posted I already see some differences. People can file exemptions, under the Fairtax, no exemption exsists as this would add an advantage over another party.

Danalys

12-08-2007, 11:49 AM

well we're not really lucky since we have income tax aswell.

Lackey

12-08-2007, 02:45 PM

I actually spoke to Neal Boortz last Tuesday, this is one question that come up. HR25 is currently written in that it would only go into effect on Jan 1 of the following year that the 16th Amenment is repealed. This way, you could never have an Income Tax and National Sales tax at the same time, it would be illegal! Yeah!

can you prove this?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 02:45 PM

^ That is the main reason the Fairtax is different. No other Federal Tax, just the Fairtax that is applied at the retail level.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 02:46 PM

can you prove this?
That I spoke to Neal, or that HR 25 was ammended to include the languag about that it would only go into affect after the repeal of the 16th amenment?

Lackey

12-08-2007, 02:47 PM

Ok, so you trust the US Government to give you a proper report that would change the way they have power over every aspect of our lives? Or would you trust a Nonpartisan, Privatly funded Organization, that uses Harvard resources?

You actually trust the government more because you're trusting them to repeal the 16th amendment and handing them a more efficient way to extract money from the people and trusting them not to abuse it.

Lackey

12-08-2007, 02:47 PM

That I spoke to Neal, or that HR 25 was ammended to include the languag about that it would only go into affect after the repeal of the 16th amenment?

Well, where is the proof of this because I've seen copies of HR 25 and that's not in there.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 03:14 PM

Well, where is the proof of this because I've seen copies of HR 25 and that's not in there.
Does the FairTax repeal the 16th Amendment?

A:

Yes, the FairTax plan does foresee the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, but, no, procedurally the repeal cannot be included in the text of H.R 25. Let me explain.

The Sixteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913, gave the Congress explicit authority to enact income taxes, because the Supreme Court ruled, in its 1895 Pollack v. Farmer’s Loan Company decision, that such direct income taxes were unconstitutional. While some legal scholars argue that an income tax could have been legal even in the absence of the Sixteenth Amendment, I certainly believe that the repeal of the Amendment is an important symbolic and functional step in returning power over taxation to the people.

The FairTax, H.R. 25, cannot include legislative text to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To become law, the FairTax simply needs a simple majority approval by both the House and Senate and the signature of the President. A repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment requires a House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res) and the approval by two-thirds of the U.S. House, two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, and three quarters of the 50 states--the standard that all constitutional amendments must meet for passage. Therefore, we must move legislation that repeals the Sixteenth Amendment separately from H.R. 25.

If the FairTax is enacted, I expect that the Congress and states would promptly begin consideration of legislation to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To make certain that occurs, however, I am in favor of adding language to H.R. 25 during the 111th Congress that includes a sunset provision, meaning that either we succeed in repealing the Sixteenth Amendment within 5 years after the implementation of the FairTax or the FairTax goes away. In my view, we simply cannot risk having both a national income tax and a national sales tax in place at the same time.

http://linderfairtax.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=FAQs.View&FAQ_id=20

SuBe

12-08-2007, 03:16 PM

Q: Once the FairTax is passed and becomes law, what protection is there against a reinstitution of the income tax at a later date?

A: The short answer is that you the voter are always the best defense against new taxes, old taxes, and any tax in between. Even so, the FairTax does envision even more protections being built into the language and the law of the FairTax itself.

The Sixteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913, gave the Congress explicit authority to enact income taxes, because the Supreme Court ruled, in its 1895 Pollack v. Farmer’s Loan Company decision, that such direct income taxes were unconstitutional. While some legal scholars argue that an income tax could have been legal even in the absence of the Sixteenth Amendment, I certainly believe that the repeal of the Amendment is an important symbolic and functional step in returning power over taxation to the people.

If the FairTax is enacted, I expect that the Congress and states would promptly begin consideration of legislation to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To make certain that occurs, however, I am in favor of adding language to H.R. 25 during the 110th Congress that includes a sunset provision, meaning that either we succeed in repealing the Sixteenth Amendment within 5 years after the implementation of the FairTax or the FairTax goes away. In my view, we simply cannot risk having both a national income tax and a national sales tax in place at the same time.

H.R. 25, however, cannot include legislative text that itself repeals the Sixteenth Amendment. To become law, the FairTax simply needs a simple majority approval by both the House and Senate and the signature of the President. A repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment requires a House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res) and the approval by two-thirds of the U.S. House, two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, and three quarters of the 50 states--the standard that all constitutional amendments must meet for passage. Therefore, we must move legislation that repeals the Sixteenth Amendment separately from H.R. 25.

http://linderfairtax.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=FAQs.View&FAQ_id=21

SuBe

12-08-2007, 03:19 PM

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-25

The link above is a copy of the Fairtax bill. HR 25. This is the 2005, version, I'm looking for the 2007 version.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 03:22 PM

You actually trust the government more because you're trusting them to repeal the 16th amendment and handing them a more efficient way to extract money from the people and trusting them not to abuse it.
You didn't answer the question. There has been more than 20 years of privately funded research on the Fairtax. Through hundreds of Individuals in many different facets of life. Economists, CPAs, Legislatures, common people. This is a sound system to fund our Federal Government. How is the Fairtax any worse that what we have currently?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 03:24 PM

http://www.fourmilab.ch/ustax/www/contents.html

Above is a link to just the Table of Contents of our Current Tax code. Which seems simpler? HR 25, the Fairtax, or this?

Superman4ever

12-08-2007, 03:46 PM

Lackey

12-08-2007, 04:00 PM

Does the FairTax repeal the 16th Amendment?

A:

Yes, the FairTax plan does foresee the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, but, no, procedurally the repeal cannot be included in the text of H.R 25. Let me explain.

The Sixteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913, gave the Congress explicit authority to enact income taxes, because the Supreme Court ruled, in its 1895 Pollack v. Farmer’s Loan Company decision, that such direct income taxes were unconstitutional. While some legal scholars argue that an income tax could have been legal even in the absence of the Sixteenth Amendment, I certainly believe that the repeal of the Amendment is an important symbolic and functional step in returning power over taxation to the people.

The FairTax, H.R. 25, cannot include legislative text to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To become law, the FairTax simply needs a simple majority approval by both the House and Senate and the signature of the President. A repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment requires a House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res) and the approval by two-thirds of the U.S. House, two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, and three quarters of the 50 states--the standard that all constitutional amendments must meet for passage. Therefore, we must move legislation that repeals the Sixteenth Amendment separately from H.R. 25.

If the FairTax is enacted, I expect that the Congress and states would promptly begin consideration of legislation to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To make certain that occurs, however, I am in favor of adding language to H.R. 25 during the 111th Congress that includes a sunset provision, meaning that either we succeed in repealing the Sixteenth Amendment within 5 years after the implementation of the FairTax or the FairTax goes away. In my view, we simply cannot risk having both a national income tax and a national sales tax in place at the same time.

http://linderfairtax.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=FAQs.View&FAQ_id=20

Q: Once the FairTax is passed and becomes law, what protection is there against a reinstitution of the income tax at a later date?

A: The short answer is that you the voter are always the best defense against new taxes, old taxes, and any tax in between. Even so, the FairTax does envision even more protections being built into the language and the law of the FairTax itself.

The Sixteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913, gave the Congress explicit authority to enact income taxes, because the Supreme Court ruled, in its 1895 Pollack v. Farmer’s Loan Company decision, that such direct income taxes were unconstitutional. While some legal scholars argue that an income tax could have been legal even in the absence of the Sixteenth Amendment, I certainly believe that the repeal of the Amendment is an important symbolic and functional step in returning power over taxation to the people.

If the FairTax is enacted, I expect that the Congress and states would promptly begin consideration of legislation to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment. To make certain that occurs, however, I am in favor of adding language to H.R. 25 during the 110th Congress that includes a sunset provision, meaning that either we succeed in repealing the Sixteenth Amendment within 5 years after the implementation of the FairTax or the FairTax goes away. In my view, we simply cannot risk having both a national income tax and a national sales tax in place at the same time.

H.R. 25, however, cannot include legislative text that itself repeals the Sixteenth Amendment. To become law, the FairTax simply needs a simple majority approval by both the House and Senate and the signature of the President. A repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment requires a House Joint Resolution (H.J. Res) and the approval by two-thirds of the U.S. House, two-thirds of the U.S. Senate, and three quarters of the 50 states--the standard that all constitutional amendments must meet for passage. Therefore, we must move legislation that repeals the Sixteenth Amendment separately from H.R. 25.

http://linderfairtax.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=FAQs.View&FAQ_id=21

See, none of this guarantees the repeal of the 16th Amendment.

Lackey

12-08-2007, 04:04 PM

Good questions, Lackey. Here's my response:

1. It's true that the lower your income, the more likely you are to pay less in taxes or even get "paid" by the federal government. But, that already occurs with current tax system. With the Earned Income Tax Credit, it's already possible to pay nothing into the system (with your tax refund) and STILL get more money back. During college, I did volunteer work filing income taxes for low-income families. Many times, they did get back more money than they paid in, due to the EITC (and some other factors).

Under the FairTax, everyone would be treated equally by the federal government, from the wealthiest to the poorest. Because the FairTax prebate would be based on the number of people rather than a percentage of income, the poor would benefit. But, what's a $262 prebate to Bill Gates, assuming it's just he and his wife? Nothing. It's a drop in the bucket. It means a lot more to a poor person, though. The idea, though, is equality of treatment by the government, not equality of outcome.

So, you're response to this concern is that wealth redistribution and welfare are already happening under the current system, so why not have more of it?

2. Do you know how much of the price of a product you buy
contains taxes, already? ALL products have tax costs--the gas tax just so happens to be direct.

One of the principles behind the thinking of the FairTax is this: ALL taxes are ultimately paid by the consumer. Corporations consider taxes a cost of doing business. A corporation paying a 35% tax rate doesn't just eat that cost. They pass it along to you and I. We essentially pay the corporate tax. We also pay the employer's portion of the SST and MRT taxes for employees, since the corporation passes these along, as well. So, taxes are already "embedded" in the cost of the goods we buy, before the sales tax is ever applied to it.

This doesn't answer the question one bit. Why hide the tax within the cost of goods if you want people to know exactly how much tax they are paying?

Lackey

12-08-2007, 04:08 PM

No, a VAT is Value Added Tax. In VAT enviroment, you tax products at each point of sale. A bakery would have a tax applied, the Bread Distributor would have a tax applied, the Super market would a apply a tax. With t e Fairtax, there is no taxation until the final point of sale, to the Consumer.

Because of the size of the sales tax, there certainly will be pressure to turn it into a VAT to further hide it from the consumer. Such a large sales tax will increase evasion (i.e. growth in the underground economy).

Also, as I mentioned before, the IRS will not be gone, just renamed and revamped.

"There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau."

There will also be a Problems Resolution Office with problem resolution officers and tax courts will still exists. This system eliminates no federal bureaucracy.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:07 PM

Because of the size of the sales tax, there certainly will be pressure to turn it into a VAT to further hide it from the consumer. Such a large sales tax will increase evasion (i.e. growth in the underground economy).

Also, as I mentioned before, the IRS will not be gone, just renamed and revamped.

"There shall be in the Department of the Treasury a Sales Tax Bureau to administer the national sales tax in those States where it is required pursuant to section 404, and to discharge other Federal duties and powers relating to the national sales tax (including those required by sections 402, 403, and 405). The Office of Revenue Allocation shall be within the Sales Tax Bureau."

There will also be a Problems Resolution Office with problem resolution officers and tax courts will still exists. This system eliminates no federal bureaucracy.

It is not meant to. The Fairtax does not make the Government spend less, or reduce the size of it. All the Fairtax is meant to do is make the Tax Code simple to understand. Under the Fairtax, everything is taxed equally at 23%. That is it. When I go buy something, 23% of what I spent will be in tax. I will receive 100% of my paycheck. I know that at the end of the day, I only have a 23% tax liability.

I said earilier that the IRS as we know it will be desolved. I didn't say that something else won't take it's place, but this "tax court" and Office of Revenue Allocation" wouldn't have any contact with Individual Americans. It would only have any transactions with Retailers. So you still have no risk of personal audits, like I said earlier.

If there is any pressure to "Turn it into a VAT tax" that would be something that would have to be addressed on a national level. The Fairtax Bill does not state that in its language and Voters would have to stand up for their rights to pressure the elected officials not to pass it. JUST LIKE TODAY. Nothing in Washington happens over night. The Fairtax would help make the Actions of Washington more transparent.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:10 PM

This doesn't answer the question one bit. Why hide the tax within the cost of goods if you want people to know exactly how much tax they are paying?

The Fairtax does not Hide anything. The Current tax code hides embedded taxes in the price of all goods. With the Fairtax, you know, when you spend a dollar, 23 cents goes to the Federal Government. That is it, you receive 100% of your paycheck. You don't have to file taxes by April 15 every year. No longer have to fill our complicated paperwork. It is easy to understand.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:11 PM

http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/HR25_2007.pdf

I found the copy of the 2007 version of the Fairtax bill. If you would like to read it.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:21 PM

‘‘(b) EXAMINATIONS AND AUDITS.—The sales tax administering authority has the authority to conduct at a reasonable time and place examinations and audits of persons who are or may be liable to collect and remit tax imposed by this subtitle and to examine the books, papers,
records, or other data of such persons which may be relevant or material to the determination of tax due."

Underlined is the portion of the Fairtax that would free individuals from personal audits by only auditing Collectors or Remiters of tax. Not a consumer, but retailer. :yay:

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:33 PM

Well, where is the proof of this because I've seen copies of HR 25 and that's not in there.
If you look at the PDF I provided of HR 25 2007, you will see that the words "repeal" apears 24 times. And after the word Repeal, theres words like "Income Tax", "Federal Taxes", "payroll taxes" etc.

I actually challenge you to find in HR 25 were it doesn't say the word "repeal".

Mysterio

12-08-2007, 05:33 PM

I'm still undecided on this, but it seems like this "fair"tax will make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

It kinda seems like they're trying to get rid of the middle class. Make the poor poorer so they can enlist in the armed forces.what makes you think that? no one is being taxed on income - rich or poor. it allows everyone to rightfully keep what's theirs and what they've earned. what part of the plan makes you think this?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:37 PM

I'm still undecided on this, but it seems like this "fair"tax will make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

It kinda seems like they're trying to get rid of the middle class. Make the poor poorer so they can enlist in the armed forces.
Have you not read the thread? Have you not watched the Videos I've linked? If you have read this thread we've saved you about $14.00 in buying the Fairtax book. But, you can still order it, an read it. This plan, while not 100% perfect, is better than the system we currently have.

If you have any SPECIFIC questions, we would be more than happy to answer them.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 05:47 PM

Mysterio, We've had over 1000 people view this thread! I'm excited at the prospect of influencing them to see how with the Fairtax, we would all be better off! Imagine, no more income tax! 100% of your paycheck! New business oppurtunities!

We haven't even begin to discuss how with the Fairtax, the United States would be a Tax Haven for Business to come here, bringing with them new jobs and more money into our economy! Its exciting to think that someday in our lifetimes, we could see this happen.

ActuallyRobin

12-08-2007, 05:55 PM

SuBe

12-08-2007, 06:12 PM

Not being an American I don't feel I can contribute much, but FairTax seems alot simpler and better for everyone. I mean think of the administration costs youll save be abolishing all those taxes. And getting 100% paycheck will make everyone feel better.
Actually that is true, and something I haven't mentioned yet. In this country, we spend as a whole about 250 billion dollars just figuring out how to pay our taxes (2005 estimates). That is 250 billion dollars not put to good use in our economy. That is a lot of money to pay, just to pay taxes. When I use Turbo tax, I personally spend nearly $100 every year, just to pay taxes. Imaging people that own their own homes, or business. Or even large corporations. How much money is spent JUST to pay taxes? The Fairtax would abolish this.

Plus, the Fairtax would make it incredibly hard to evade paying taxes. Current estimates say that 16% of taxes due every year are not paid. So, the Government still needs their money, who makes up the differince? We do, if the government can't get the money the need, they'll take from the people that will pay it. With a Fairtax, you cant avoid paying taxes.

Currently, if you want to not pay something on your taxes, you just skip it, and hope that you don't get audited. It only takes one person to cheat on taxes. Under the Fairtax, it would take a minium of two to cheat on paying taxes, making it twice as likely not to happen. Why would a retailer want to risk getting an audit, possibly losing a business license, if he didn't collect those taxes? So, tax evasion under the Fairtax is much much less likely to happen.

You can read more at http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#33

SuBe

12-08-2007, 06:18 PM

I found this Politcal Cartoon from 1933.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a6/CROSSNG.JPG

I gues the Idea of a National Sales Tax has been around for a long time.

CK1

12-08-2007, 07:56 PM

keith_v

12-08-2007, 10:13 PM

What do you mean the fair tax would bring more jobs and money here? Why would a tax on everything bring companys to set up business here?

Everything is taxed for the consumer, not the business. So if a clothing company wants to be 2000 square feet of nylon, they won't be taxed, but the consumer who buys the nylon jersey will pay the tax. This will appeal to many businesses, and they will want to set up branches in the US. This will lead to more jobs, and much stiffer competition for companies. Stiffer competition will lead to goods being sold at lower prices. (Think about the competition between PS3, XBox360 and the Wii. PS3 was the most expensive when it was released, but after only a few months, they lowered the price to match XBox 360's price. There are thousands of examples. Competition is always good for the consumers.)

I think my favorite aspect about about Fair Tax is that it will affect everyone. No more of the government leeching off only those who actually push themselves and strive for goals to make honest money through hardwork, while the criminals in this nation like drug dealers, gun runners and those who live here illegally enjoy all the benefits of our freedoms for free at the rest's expense.

The massive majority of people who would be hurt by Fair Tax system are the ones who don't pay taxes with the current system.

SuBe

12-08-2007, 10:37 PM

What do you mean the fair tax would bring more jobs and money here? Why would a tax on everything bring companys to set up business here?

Keith_v above had one aspect of it right, I'll give you another. Every Manufacturer will be able to run their business with zero tax liability. Lets say you are, I'll use Car Manufacturers. Currently Cheverolet has to pay payroll taxes, corporate taxes and matching SS, medicare taxes. If you remove that, you can lower your prices of their Automobiles while keeping the same margins. An Automobile Manufacture in Germany also has to pay these taxes along with a VAT tax, in his country. If you remove all those taxes, along with all the Embedded taxes inherintely in the car, Chevy can sell their vehicles overseas at a more competive rate than the German car manufacturer can sell their vehicles. This will inturn increase the sales of the American Car and this will lead to more jobs to cover the increase in production to meet higher demand.

The German Car Manufacturer will see this, knowing that the US doesn't Tax Manufacturers and moves it's headquarters and Manufacturing Plant to the US. More Jobs.

Now you as an Automobile line worker, becomes more valuable to the Corporation. Do you stay with Chevy or do you go to the new Factory? If there are more jobs than workers in that field, your value as an Employee goes up! The more money you make, the more you spend, the more Revenue the Government takes. Everyone is a winner.

The massive majority of people who would be hurt by Fair Tax system are the ones who don't pay taxes with the current system.

This is one of my favorite aspects of the Fairtax. Make it easier for people doing honest work!

CK1

12-08-2007, 10:48 PM

Now you as an Automobile line worker, becomes more valuable to the Corporation. Do you stay with Chevy or do you go to the new Factory? If there are more jobs than workers in that field, your value as an Employee goes up! The more money you make, the more you spend, the more Revenue the Government takes. Everyone is a winner.

Are you saying that there is basically no limit to what the goverment takes in taxes from the amerincan spender? right now they basically have a limit in that every year they can calculate how much the irs is going to get by checking how many tax payers they are a year and timesing that by how much in taxes they have. If this fairtax is so, then how can they dicate how much they are going to get? what if they increase the tax rate to higher than 23 percent?

SuBe

12-08-2007, 11:04 PM

Are you saying that there is basically no limit to what the goverment takes in taxes from the amerincan spender? right now they basically have a limit in that every year they can calculate how much the irs is going to get by checking how many tax payers they are a year and timesing that by how much in taxes they have. If this fairtax is so, then how can they dicate how much they are going to get? what if they increase the tax rate to higher than 23 percent?

Ok, you have some good questions here.

1.Are you saying that there is basically no limit to what the goverment takes in taxes from the amerincan spender? Essentially yes. But, what the Government is good and making reports. What this does do is make sure the Government makes good decision when it comes to the Economy. The higher the Economy, the higher their revenue. They will make decisions based on this.

2.what if they increase the tax rate to higher than 23 percent? The short answer is you. With your vote, and your voice, you can tell your representatives in Washington that you dont want any higher taxes. Under the Fairtax, if the Government tries to increase the tax burden, they will increase it on everybody. Every single American. Under the Current system, if the Government tries to increase a tax, usually it goes through with little to no flak. Let's say they want to increase taxes on Tobacco. Non smokers arent going to care. It doesn't affect them. Let's say they want to increase taxes on Boats, someone who doesn't have a boat doesn't care. This is one way Politicians get through so many taxes. If they were to raise taxes on every single American, Everyone will say something about it.

Also with that, if Government reports start to come out, saying that we've been having a really good economy, and Government revenues are up and they are in a surplus, guess what is going to happen? Politicians that want to get reelected are going to push for lowering your taxes. That would be a good way to get some votes. Right? Eventually, we could get a lower tax rate than the 23%! This is actually a reason Some people in Government don't want this to go through. It gives you more Poliical power than you had before. It makes it more clear than it is under our current system!