Skip to comments.Taxing Sales under the FairTax – What Rate Works?
Posted on 10/19/2006 5:11:50 PM PDT by pigdog
As specified in Congressional bill H.R. 25/S. 25, the FairTax is a proposal to replace the federal personal income tax, corporate income tax, payroll (FICA) tax, capital gains, alternative minimum, self-employment, and estate and gifts taxes with a single-rate federal retail sales tax. The FairTax also provides a prebate to each household based on its demographic composition. The prebate is set to ensure that households pay no taxes net on spending up to the poverty level.
Bill Gale (2005) and the Presidents Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform (2005) suggest that the effective (tax inclusive) tax rate needed to implement H.R. 25 is far higher than the proposed 23% rate. This study, which builds on Gales (2005) analysis, shows that a 23% rate is eminently feasible and suggests why Gale and the Tax Panel reached the opposite conclusion.
This paper begins by projecting the FairTaxs 2007 tax base net of its rebate. Next it calculates the tax rate needed to maintain the real levels of federal and state spending under the FairTax. It then determines if an effective rate of 23% would be sufficient to fund 2007 estimated spending or if not, the amount by which non-Social Security federal expenditures would need to be reduced. Finally, it shows that the FairTax imposes no additional real fiscal burdens on state and local government, notwithstanding the requirement that such governments pay the FairTax when they purchase goods and services.
(Excerpt) Read more at people.bu.edu ...
If you think HK is so red hot why don't you put a bill before Congress? Or are you all hat and no cattle???
I attacked the report. You persoanlly attacked the poster. You would think after you have been suspended so much recently, you might begin to get it.
Because when someone does make a point about the paper, you ignore the point and go straight for the personal attack.
"Because when someone does make a point about the paper, you ignore the point and go straight for the personal attack."
I'm afraid you've confused me with Always Right and some of the other FairTax opponents.
Kotlikoff before the ways and means commitee April 2000:
"Tax rates:OH boy! Where do I sign up for a temporaray rate reduction (40% instead of 43%) by paying a NEW tax on the (arbitrary) rental VALUE of my own home?
Simulation analysis and a variety of empirical calculations suggest that the retail sales tax rate needed for revenue neutrality under the Fair Tax, assuming no decline in the real value of government purchases, would be roughly 30 percent when measured on a tax-inclusive basis. This tax rate could be expected to decline by 3 or so percentage points over time as the economy expands. Moreover, if the Fair Tax were structured to include the consumption of existing housing services in its tax base, the initial Fair Tax rate would probably be about 3 percentage points lower. This could be accomplished by assessing the tax on the imputed rent on housing, where the calculation of imputed rent is based on a fair market valuation of housing real estate. This valuation could be done by local municipalities in the course of appraising houses for local property taxes.
A tax-inclusive consumption tax rate of 30 percent translates into a tax-exclusive consumption tax rate of 43 percent. While the 43 percent rate sounds very high, proper comparison of the Fair Tax tax rate with the current payroll and income tax rates requires evaluating the consumption tax rate on a tax-inclusive basis. Even a 30 percent tax rate may sound like a high rate. But one needs to bear in mind that middle and upper income households in America are typically in combined income tax and payroll tax marginal tax brackets of 40 percent or more and that low income Americans are typically in even higher tax brackets once one considers the phase out of the earned income tax credit. Hence, given the state of U.S. marginal taxation, 30 percent is a low number.
There is some serious math in this piece. I cannot comment on its accuracy, but I like moving from a tax that taxes achievement to one that taxes consumption.
Even if the tax take is EXACTLY the same, the American people will be more aware of the tax burden if their money comes into their personal hands first, and then is paid out later as a tax. Most American people, sadly, think in terms of their take-home pay, which takes the focus away from the tax burden they are paying.
Please see my most recent statement on running for Congress, here.
I'll show up and vote my conservative principals this November, but if the Republicans get tossed out I won't shed a tear.
Please explain. The gov't taxes itself now in that it taxes the wages it pays its own employees. How does the gov't currently raise money from its own employees? Please explain.
I don't know why politicians don't glom onto this.
I'm having a hard time believing this. The burden of rebates (or what ever you call them) will require each State to increase or build another form of bureaucracy. Checks just don't write themselves. Second, as families change, so does the status of the rebate. Out of work, new job with much higher pay, etc. Who monitors this? And I would assume that fraud will still happen. Don't kid yourself, it will happen. Everyone is assuming that there will be no black market
Also out of State purchases could be interesting. The bottom line is, there is no safe sane method of taxation. (Period)
The FairTax is that you will get all the money you earn and the cost of goods should be less because of the less taxes employers pay. No Way. Think this out. It's a wash. What you gain in the paycheck if withholding is not taken out will only be taken out at the time of purchase. Oh, I forgot, buy used goods - no tax. Good news for the poor. Whoopee, yard sales!!!!!!! Hey, flea markets, best goods straight from Mexico, China, etc.
"OH boy! Where do I sign up for a temporaray [sic] rate reduction (40% instead of 43%) by paying a NEW tax on the (arbitrary) rental VALUE of my own home?"
Glad you asked. Just go back to the year 2000 and live.
Isn't it interesting what 6 years can accomplish in the way of learning new information, refining formulas, and understanding costs and revenues. I've no doubt that even Kotlikoff would tell you he's learned a lot in those 6 years. But it appears you haven't since you still seem to not understand the presentations in the 2006 paper. Might help to read it?
The poster negative.
Those who stand to lose under the FairTax:
Tax shelter hucksters.
130,000 IRS employees, more than the total employment of the FBI.
The life insurance and annuity industry. They mistakenly think that without the tax-deferral their products will be harder to sell. If their products were any good they would NOT be harder to sell.
K-Street lawyers. If you have ever been to D.C. you have seen the multiple square miles of towering office buildings full of attorneys and lobbyists. Here's how it works: Some F. CAT invents a new hot water heater. He goes to his congresscrook and explains that the device will save energy AND, he will give the congresscrook SOMETHING (cash, a deal, a favor, another congresscrook's okay on something else, a block of votes, a pile of gold). The congresscrook introduces a bill that will allow everyone who buys the new water heater a tax credit. WOW!! Do you think that will help sales?
Municipal Bond Industry. These guys have a dubious past anyway.
Tax lawyers, CPA's, small time street corner instant tax jobbers who make hundreds of thousand of dollars getting people their "check".
I could go on and you can probably create a few of your own.
TAX ME WHEN I SPEND IT, NOT WHILE I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT. LET ME ACCUMULATE WEALTH. PLEASE!!!
The rate isn't the problem. The argument about the rate is bogus. You tell me, what should the rate be? The debate should be about the method.
"The government is never going to relinquish its taxing authority."
Of course it isn't ... nor should it since that's written into the Constitution. What can and will happen though is that the Congress will listen to we the people and, once they realize we want it, change their taxing authority to comply with the FairTax which has the very fine benefits of helping most taxpayers and the country as a whole by boosting the economy.
Congress will only do what the voters allow them to do. If we allow them to commit the sort of "atrocities" you mention it's our own fault. With the FairTax there's a good start since the income tax, the tax code, the tax workers (the IRS) are eliminated and the tax records are required to be destroyed. In addition the bill calls for the 16th amendment to be repealed. If that's not a kick in the teeth of the atrocities you mention, I don't know what might be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.