madkins1868[at]gmail.com wrote:
- quote -

They aren't honest about it when they're touting their plan
to shift tax burden from the wealthy around the Internet.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

If you're a legislator, because the tax bite is felt much
less than is the bite of an income tax (do you really feel
the total burden of the various state and local sales taxes
you pay now - do you complain about them as much as you do
about the federal taxes?). If I just take a tiny nibble out
of your pocket each time you engage in a transaction, and I
do it repeatedly, you will not feel each individual pinch,
but the aggregate effect will give me quite a bit of
revenue. That's one reason why so-called indirect taxes
were historically favored over income taxes.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Sheila wrote:
- quote -

They also quote it that way because it is then an apples to
apples comparison (i.e. I am replacing my 28% income tax
rate with something that amounts to a 23% income tax rate.
They are pretty open and honest about the 30% rate. Check
their website...www.fairtax.org

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

William Brown wrote:
- quote -

You have it totally right! Many people are quite fooled by
this tax, but it really is only good for the high income
earners who do not spend but a small portion of their income
each year.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Scott F." wrote:

- quote -

Actually it's a 30% exclusive tax which all sales taxes
today are. They just quote 23% tax inclusive because it
sounds better.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

"Dick Adams" <rdadams[at]smart.net> wrote:
- quote -

and thus further the problem of representation without
taxation.

I think the thought behind a sales tax or VAT is that it
would be simpler, and if more people are paying SOME tax,
perhaps, just perhaps, they would hold the government
spending to be more accountable.

I vote we raise Dick's taxes. But not mine. It is not the
way I was raised, but it seems to be the popular approach
these days.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

- quote -

Taxes are the price SOME of us pay to live in this great
country. Others make use of our tax money. I thought
muggings were the price we pay to live in this great
country. So, don't solve the problem, just accept it.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -

If one were very wealthy, the misnamed "Fair Tax" would
reduce one's total tax bill. If one were only fairly well
off (or worse) one's total tax bill would increase.

Therefore, in my opinion, supporters of the misnamed "Fair
Tax" are either very wealthy or misguided.

Regards,
Bill

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -

The only benefits are to the very wealthy. A VAT (Value
Added Tax) or a sales tax (which are somewhat the same)
are regressive taxes, i.e., they are taxes that ignore
the ability to pay. On the other hand, the US income
tax is a progressive tax (or it's supposed to be a
progressive tax), i.e., it is based on your ability to
pay.

If you give each wage earner a $25,000 deduction before
they get to Schedule A, you would eliminate the working
poor for the tax rolls, I suspect you would increase
tax revenues. All you would need then would be ZERO
TOLERANCE for tax cheats and protestors e.g. heavy
civil fines and jail time in real prisons.

Dick

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -


Have to admit I have not read that bill , but wasn't it to eliminate
all income taxes, both individual and corporate?

Anyway, a person running for senator over in Georgia is making a
mountain out of this mole hill, by saying her opponent is advocating
a 23% sales tax on everything and everybody.
And she does NOT say that he proposes it to replace the income tax,
nor anything about any minimum rebates in the act for low income
earners.

Just sounds like an additional tax and she asks, "Is that fair"?

ChEAr$,
Harlan Lunsford
Fri, 22 Oct 2004 14:43:18

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

- quote -

They are opposed to income taxes as a general rule. They
support consumption taxes, because the wealthy typically
don't consume all their income. And they believe the rest
of the poplulation would also limit consumption if they
could (and if they can't it's their own fault anyway - the
Puritan work ethic.).

I agree with your assessment. I believe taxes are the price
we pay to live in this great country. And income taxes, I
think, are the least regressive way to collect them.

--
Thomas E Healy, CPA, PC
1650 38th St., Ste 202W
Boulder, CO 80301
Please send email to: tom[at]tomhealycpa.com, since I block all email at my
newsgroup address.
phone (303) 443-1804
fax (720) 489-3772

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -

I take it back. 23% apparently is the rate discussed.
Here is a description that offers what you ask for:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=34039

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -

1. Your source apparently made up the 23% number. You
somehow believe your source, so there is no chance you will
believe that your source makes up numbers.

2. Increase exports vs imports-- translates into jobs.

3. Everybody pays-- even prostitutes and drug dealers-- as
opposed to the off-the books underground.

There are downsides too. The money you already paid income
tax on would thereby be double taxed.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Scott F. wrote:

- quote -

Because it makes for good election-year fodder. It also
appeals to people who are rich, or who ~think~ they are
rich, because they assume that they will be able to avoid
most of the tax by not spending money on consumables (and,
for example, by vacationing outside of the country). Etc.

Speaking of "fodder," there is also the "grass is always
greener" factor. A national sales tax has a certain appeal
because it is new, different and people assume (without
actual experience) that it will be "simple" and/or that they
will pay less tax overall.

MTW

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->

Can someone tell me why anyone would support a bill that
would eliminate corporate income and payroll taxes and
impose a 23% federal tax on ALL consumables (including care
and home purchases!) Sounds a bit insane. If anyone here can
speak to the benefits of such a move I'm all ears.

<< -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << ------------------------------------------------->