Who of the Candidates Has the Fairest Tax Plan of Them All?

Townhall ^ | 2/6/2016 | Stephen Moore

[patlin]

It should not be ‘who has the fairest’ tax plan; it should be “who is the candidate proposing a CONSTITUTIONAL tax plan”.

I have studied them all and NOT one of them is Constitutional, NOT ONE. We already have a constitutional tax plan, it's called the 16th Amendment. Therefore, it should be about restoring the 16th Amendment by stopping the misapplication of it. Anyone who supports a broad sweeping tax plan that affects every household is voting for slavery.

The ‘income’ tax is an excise tax on privileged activity. It is NOT a tax on all that comes in as ruled by the SCOTUS and upheld every year when hundreds of thousands of educated Americans lawfully file & receive 100% of what was withheld back from the IRS, or those who lawfully do not file, well, the IRS has been more than happy to leave them alone. The 16th Amendment income ‘excise’ tax is limited in its scope and that is the beauty of it, is that by the choices we make we can choose to participate or choose NOT participate in it. That is why it is voluntary. Voluntary has NOTHING to do with the actual filing of the tax, it has everything to do with the source of ones receipts. Were those receipts a result of privileged activity? If yes, then those receipts are subject to taxation.

It's time Americans educate themselves, apply the tax laws as they are written. That is how we shrink the government beast, we simply do not over feed it that which it is NOT supposed to be feeding off of. It is high time Americans quit fearing the government and start standing up to the governments abuse of that which is God's.

http://losthorizons.com/Documents/The16th.htm

[patlin]

You are COMPLETELY WRONG in your assumption that the ‘income’ tax began to pay for WWI. UTTERLY WRONG!

And the fact is, from its inception in 1862, the vast majority of Americans have never been subject to the income ‘excise’ tax!

http://losthorizons.com/Documents/The16th.htm

[Georgia Girl 2]

I said that the income tax was supposedly to pay for WWI. That is how it was sold to the American public and it was only to last for 5 years. ITS FACTUAL INFORMATION!

[jjotto]

The income tax amendment went to the states for ratification in 1909. Remind me, when did we get involved in World War One?

[Pontiac]

So I'd go for Huckabee's national sales tax as the least regulatory as long as it's kept simple.

A consumption tax is a nice idea but it would need a constitutional amendment repealing the 16th amendment to get me to support its implementation. I also sort of suspect you need an amendment to permit the federal government to impose such a tax.

I also have a moral aversion to impressing retailers in to government service as tax collectors.

[Georgia Girl 2]

It went into effect in 1913 if I remember correctly.

[jjotto]

When did America get involved in World War One?

[visualops]

I also have a moral aversion to impressing retailers in to government service as tax collectors.

They already are on the state and local levels. I'm not saying that's a reason to have a national sales tax. My concern is that if income tax isn't 100% removed, that we will end up being double taxed, both a sales tax and an income tax. The government can NOT be trusted in any way shape or form.

[ncpatriot]

I heard today that: the GOP will HAVE to raise taxes until revenues are up. To do otherwise is irresponsible.

[combat_boots]

Someone supports a VAT, too.

[Georgia Girl 2]

That’s my main concern. If you do away with the Federal income tax it does not mean the states will not keep their income taxes and sales taxes.

[TBP]

That someone is NOT Cruz.

[conservativejoy]

The 16% flat tax for businesses is nothing like the European version of VAT. For one thing it replaces the much higher corporate and payroll taxes. It also allows businesses to deduct the full cost of business expenses in one year.

[Pontiac]

The government can NOT be trusted in any way shape or form.

Such wisdom!

You must be OLD

;)

[Pontiac]

They already are on the state and local levels.

True, but that does not make it morally right and it certainly does not make it right to impose further burden on these people.

Collecting taxes is also puts these people in legal jeopardy.

[combat_boots]

Disagree:

Rubio and Cruz Dueled Over the VAT Tax. And the Winner Was...

1/16/2016
By Richard Rubin

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/01/15/rubio-and-cruz-dueled-over-the-vat-tax-and-the-winner-was/

[TMSuchman]

The mechanisms are already in place to collect such monies. You already pay sales taxes on just about all your goods & services that you use, by the state & local gov.’t’s. It is nothing much more to add an additional layer of sales tax. And as far as repealing the 16th Amend. we could use public pressure to change that. What is required is an Administration committed to staying within the Constitutional Boundaries.

[TBP]

Cruz.

[TBP]

The Cruz plan does NOT include a VAT. Marco Rubio knows that. He makes the charge anyway.

[Pontiac]

The mechanisms are already in place to collect such monies. You already pay sales taxes on just about all your goods & services that you use, by the state & local gov.'t's. It is nothing much more to add an additional layer of sales tax.

No it is not.

When did the Federal Government do anything simply? Certainly not when collecting taxes.

It will be monthly detailed reports and quarterly payments. And then yearend reports again.

Late on a payment and you will be charged penalties and interest.

Get audited and you will pay a lawyer and your accountant to get you out of it with hopefully just a fine and restitution. But maybe you will go to jail.

Don't kid yourself that just because you get rid of the income tax that you will get rid of the IRS Goon Squads.

I have known retailers that missed a couple state sales tax payments when their business was in trouble. One went to jail another committed suicide after killing his family.