I like that idea.
I am actually in favor of the Federal government only flat taxing state Revenue and then states figure out how to tax inside the state
Yes the Fair Tax plan remains one of the better options for funding the limited functions of the federal government. That and tariffs would actually be a Constitutional tax, where the income tax being a direct tax is not since it is not evenly apportioned among the States as required by the US Constitution.
I would be in favor of repealing both the 16th and 17th Ammendment
It is estimated that production costs of domestic goods and services could decrease by approximately 22% on average after embedded tax costs are removed, leaving the sale nearly the same after taxes.
It is also estimated that real wages would increase by 11.5%.
Any public not currently paying Federal Income Tax would also receive a monthly rebate under the FairTax up to the poverty level. Thus, a person spending at the poverty level would have an effective tax rate of 0%, whereas someone spending at four times the poverty level would have an effective tax rate of 17.2%.
A study by Kotlikoff and Sabine Jokisch concluded that the long-term effects of the FairTax would reward low-income households with 26.3% more purchasing power, middle-income households with 12.4% more purchasing power, and high-income households with 5% more purchasing power.
With us not being on the gold standard and things like social security and other social spending, I donât think it would be possible to fund our government on tariffs alone.
People earning more tend to spend more on more expensive items. One of the problems with the system now is it treats people differently, it shouldnât. Same tax for same goods.
I see youâve bought into the âfixed income argument.â Itâs a known fallacy created by politicians for votes. Older people in general have far more buying power than younger ones. Why? Because theyâve already purchased (and some paid off) the big ticket items.
The governmentâs job is not to provide a cushy retirement for people who made poor life choices. Their job is to maintain a level playing field for all. The empathy your showing is a good quality to have, but has no place in fair and equal governance.
@Tax3728 - I recommend going to fairtax.org and reading it. The BIG thing about the Fairtax is that everyone gets a credit for the amount of tax they would pay up to a certain âpovertyâ threshold. So, letâs say poverty is $50k (for round numbers). Each citizen(!) would get $11,500 (23% of $50k), distributed monthly, to a debit card or bank account.
That solves the major issue PLUS it makes the Fair Tax inherently progressive.
How have the elderly already paid an income tax into the future?
Side note, the elderly grew up in a country with more freedoms and opportunities than the rest of us will ever realize. Also, by plurality they are still leading our country down the same road to ruin as the politicians who wonât vacate their seats.
I care more about fixing the future than pandering to those who contributed to the mistakes of the past.
Iâve already said, food items and labor should be exempt from sales tax like it already is in many states.
Thatâs your state, not your federal government.
No sales tax on food or labor like most states. No graduated scales. No special interest and no carve-outs. One true % for everyone equally.
The context was illegal gambling. More importantly illegal gambling houses, bookies, and loan sharks
Reread my proposal.
Equal and fair.
I worry about a National Sales Tax System that picks the industries that are excluded. It creates a cumbersome and bloated incentive similar to our current system that incentivises lobbying to pick the industry winners and losers, or whatâs necessary and unnecessary.
I prefer the incentives built into the FairTax version, where all industries participate in the tax and exemptions are given to business-to-business transactions, and every citizen receives a monthly rebate.
No carve-outs. Only sales tax exemptions are food and labor (like most states) in my plan.
That is incorrect. The courts have ruled the 16th amendment did not grant congress ant new powers of taxation. It merely settled what congress already had power to tax. That means whatever congress had no power tax before the 16th amendment, they still have no power to tax. A manâs personal labor is one of the things congress never had power to tax as any amount a man receives as payment for his labor is not âincome.â The courts also repeatedly ruled income means âgain of profitâ and there is no gain or profit (income) derived from any payment received in exchange for oneâs personal labor.
This! This would be so much more fair! How many times can I vote for this!