Posted on 02/20/2004 11:05:52 AM PST by ancient_geezer
Edited on 05/07/2004 5:22:17 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
In an annual, less than pleasant ritual, the taxpayers will prepare their 2003 federal income tax returns. The 113,000 employees of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service will process about 200 million tax returns that will have been filed by April 15.
(Excerpt) Read more at azcentral.com ...
So, as we struggle with our tax forms to beat the midnight deadline at the post office on April 15, let us remember that it was We the People who made the decision to have a federal income tax and gave to Congress unlimited authority to change the conditions and the amount of the tax.
Seems to me it's time to quit bitch'n and start the effort in cleaning house.
If you would like to be added to this ping list let me know.
John Linder in the House & Saxby Chambliss Senate, offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and payroll taxes outright, and provide a IRS free replacement in the form of a pure consumption tax:
H.R.25
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 01/7/2003)
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.S.1493
Sponsor: Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] (introduced 7/30/2003)
Title: A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
So Ron Paul's amendment has a chance at enactment & ratification:
H.J.RES.15
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 1/28/2003)
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
(But lets modified it to prohibit all income, payroll, gift estate taxes as HR25 calls for, or we will see European VAT style hidden taxes along with payroll excises to take over in the place of the of the current individual income tax(i.e. personal income tax) that Ron Paul amendment prohibits.)
But the problem behind the joke is that it's not just the amount that is the problem. The code is hideously complex, and that serves well those who benefit from it, namely Congresscritters and IRS employees. (Not to mention an accountant or two here and there.) One of the many selling points of a retail sales tax as an income tax replacement is its simplicity.
I like the idea of having election day on April 14.
I get your point but why have any day be a "tax" day.
One problem with the income tax is, it is used to distort the perception of people as to the real burden and who pays. As a concequence, those who think the pay little "income" tax or are getting credits, are not going to vote any different just because election day is the day before.
- "There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government. And at that point, DeMint warns, we have reached a major crisis in our democracy."
Milton Friedman as quoted by Northwest Florida Daily News, 10-16-2000:
- "If we're to have an income tax, it's a good thing for everyone to pay at least a nominal amount," he said. "If non-taxpayers become a majority in society, what would restrain them from voting for ever higher taxes on others?"
Walter Williams, World Net Daily, 10-25-2000
- If you're among those who pay little or no federal income taxes, what do you care about tax cuts? ... So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?
Get the bugger's out of our family financial affairs, end the anal exams, end the perpetual legal jeopardy of income taxes.
The founders knew the problem:
[Montesquieu wrote in Spirit of the Laws, XIII,c.14:]
- "A capitation is more natural to slavery; a duty on merchandise is more natural to liberty, by reason it has not so direct a relation to the person."
--Thomas Jefferson: copied into his Commonplace Book.Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying Convention June 12, 1788:
- "the oppression arising from taxation, is not from the amount but, from the mode -- a thorough acquaintance with the condition of the people, is necessary to a just distribution of taxes. The whole wisdom of the science of Government, with respect to taxation, consists in selecting the mode of collection which will best accommodate to the convenience of the people."
And the solution:
- It is fairer to tax people on what they extract from the economy, as roughly measured by their consumption, than to tax them on what they produce for the economy, as roughly measured by their income.
So why insist on Income taxes, when we know of a proven better means to tax.
Don't try to lay this on ME, bud. I wasn't even born until about 50 years after the damn tax started. I can assure everyone that had I been a) born and b) male and thereby allowed to vote, I would have negged it.
Supporting the repeal of the income/payroll tax system? How many of your freinds, neighbors, aquaintenances, have you convinced to repeal the tax, or vote for those who do want it to end.
Are you out their running for office to see it done?
What are you offering as a substantive substitute that has a chance to be enacted?
Sitting and just griping about someone else caused it, does not relieve you of your responsibility to see change occur.
You have to get out and push the cart, and lead the parade abit for change to happen.
I agree and I stand corrected.
I'm rather fond of my own reform ideas - found through my FR homepage. Do you think those ideas are winners. Perhaps I could play up on the fact that I'm a decorated Gulf War Veteran...oops, the media only allows that to work for veteran candidates who believe in a larger federal government.
The IRS says the average Jane/Joe pays 15% more in taxes to cover for IBM
LOL, IBM, ect. don't pay the tax anyway. They just collect it from the customer (you) and pass it on to government at substantial expense while doing it.
Actually the amount is much closer to 22%(the amount prices would fall with an NRST only system) than 15%.
The following article covers the mechanism on how the current Federal tax system propagates and is embedded into consumption expenditure.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
The 24% in the article considers only those factors actually paid to government out of imposititions on business in complying with the income, payroll, excise & tariff tax laws.
I refer you to the section of the following article about the Income/Payroll tax system and its impact on our economy "A. Hidden Upstream Taxes. " paragraph 39.
"[39] Dr. Dale Jorgenson, Chairman of Harvard University's Economics Department, believes that the price of goods and services are inflated by about 20 percent or more by upstream taxes consumers ultimately bear. In a recent paper Dr. Jorgenson estimated the built-in taxes contained in the price of goods and services. /22/ In the chart above, he quantified the hidden component of tax, estimating that producer prices would fall on repeal of upstream taxes an average of about 22 percent."
Looking at the accompanying chart, the range of values from industry to industry appears to be about 12-25%.
Economists Gary and Aldonna Robbins of the Texas-based Institute for Public Policy examined the case of dry cleaning a shirt, with a particular eye toward uncovering the hidden costs of taxes in price.
The Robbin's attributed over 33.6% of "consumer prices" to be due to federal taxation passed on to the customer.
The Federal Tax System
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=2125&sequence=0&from=1#pt1
From the Table 1 we may extract the proportionate contributions of each sector of taxes as they contribute to consumer price for the year 2000.
Those tax components which will not change prices as a consequence of enactment of HR2525
============================
Adjust for the approximate reduction of interest & cost of tax compliance (
Adjust for a conservative $800 billion cost of tax compliance, (Payne '95 estimates 65cents for each dollar of revenue collected, $1264billion) reductions .
Estimated change in consumption prices as consequence of enactment of a National Retail Sales Tax, repealing all business income and payroll taxes:
33.6*(1386.5/1945) = 23.9% reduction in consumption prices
Which more than verifies the Jorgenson empirical study of 22% fall in producer prices.
The two sources are in reasonable agreement, and I see 20-25% a reasonable value to expect retail prices to fall, not only for customers here in the United States, but in our exports as well making them far more competitive on international markets.
It would be very difficult to run on a platform of a true tax reform because the Republican Party will allow you to wear its title as a U.S. Senate candidate - the senate, in my opinion, is where this reform needs to be hammered through. Difficult but not impossible; however one's electibilty as an Independent is completely up to popularity.
Here's some a lists of current Critter's doing it, and having success at it:
for both House & Senate, if your Critters are waffling or not supporting the NRST let them know that it matters.
And some not on those lists "yet".
Senate
Herman Cain, position regards tax reform, May 9 2002:
& website Herman Cain for United States Senate, state of Georgia 2004
House
Dennis Umphress, libertarian (California 16th District)
There are others out their just haven't managed to track them all down yet. Working on it though.
Careful, you might get the boot if you don't pledge to vote for those in power no matter how much you disagree with them for supporting the income tax.
Careful, you might get the boot if you don't pledge to vote for those in power
Phhhhttt! so much for that thought.
Vote for those willing to go for the NRST.
Would that be Bush or Kerry or some third party guy in the Presidential election?
BTW, I have a question about my situation in a new system where the NRST existed. Since I have had my money confiscated all my life while I earned it, how do I support a new system that will now tax me on what I have left when I spend it?
So we become Progressives for a moment, take (rig?) a poll, find out that the majority of Americans (based on the poll) think the tax code is unfair, then we choose to disobey it. That's the same reasoning the Mayor of San Francisco is using. Forget the laws, lets take a poll.
Baloney!
You support those representative and those running for office willing to do what is necessary. Change the law. No polls, other than the big one provided for in the Consititution called election day.
The run up to it is in process now if you haven't noticed.
We have the means:
John Linder in the House & Saxby Chambliss Senate, offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and payroll taxes outright, and provide a IRS free replacement in the form of a pure consumption tax:
H.R.25
SPONSOR: Rep Linder, John (introduced 01/7/2003)
A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national retail sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.S.1493
Sponsor: Sen Chambliss, Saxby [GA] (introduced 7/30/2003)
Title: A bill to promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the States.
So Ron Paul's amendment has a chance at enactment & ratification:
H.J.RES.15
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 1/28/2003)
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.
(But lets modified it to prohibit all income, payroll, gift estate taxes as HR25 calls for, or we will see European VAT style hidden taxes along with payroll excises to take over in the place of the of the current individual income tax(i.e. personal income tax) that Ron Paul amendment prohibits.)
And folks to do it with:
for both House & Senate, if your Critters are waffling or not supporting the NRST let them know that it matters.
And some not on those lists "yet".
Senate
Herman Cain, position regards tax reform, May 9 2002:
& website Herman Cain for United States Senate, state of Georgia 2004
House
Dennis Umphress, libertarian (California 16th District)
with more coming on line everyday.
Would that be Bush or Kerry or some third party guy in the Presidential election?
Presidents don't repeal or legislate law, Congress Critter's do.
Forget the third party guy, unless you like losing.
Bush will at the least sign an NRST into law long before any liberal will.
If you actually want to see the income tax out, in your life time, you figure out who you need to vote for.
BTW, I have a question about my situation in a new system where the NRST existed. Since I have had my money confiscated all my life while I earned it, how do I support a new system that will now tax me on what I have left when I spend it?
Same way I do, realize that under the current system you pay through both ends when you get it via individual income & individual portion of payroll taxes, Then again when you pay as a consumer.
The NRST is targeted for 23% of your current consumption expenditure and replaces all income & payroll taxes both business and individual.
As a consequence of the repeal of the business portion of those taxes & the consequent reduction associated with complying with those taxes, The base retail price of retail products will fall about 20-25% fo current level offsetting the 23% NRST.
To make it simple, your total payment for personal consumption (NRST + newprices) will be approximately the same as you pay today under the current system.
Effectively no impact on spending of previously held assets.
However, the conversion of those assets do not entail any taxes, and on spending only incurs a tax at the retail register, and then only on new products at a lowered price.
The advantage of the NRST
No tax on earning income,
Prices fall approximately the amount of the NRST, hence you can buy the same basket of goods as you did before the NRST and have some of your gross income left over for whatever else you would rather do.
Invest without tax, or spend on used items with out tax,or spend on new products at lower prices with the NRST.
Never cannot be before or after. Never is never. It will never see the light of day under any President conceivable right now and would be vetoed if it did. But it won't under current circumstances.
Your "explanation" of what would happen to me BTW, is pure conjecture.
It is pure conjecture that you have any grey matter to process these scenarios.
Who paid you to make that post anyway?
My take on Bush would be that he would sign it if Congress passed it. It fits in well with his general taxation philosophies. I do, however, doubt that he will make this his own issue and try to convince Congress to pass it.
His "general" taxation philosophy is to tinker with the rates. He has never advocated meaningful systemic change in the way taxes are collected.
Actually, I would characterize it as flatten and simplifiy. The NRST is about as flat and simple as you can get.
Never cannot be before or after. Never is never. It will never see the light of day under any President conceivable right now and would be vetoed if it did. But it won't under current circumstances.
Your "explanation" of what would happen to me BTW, is pure conjecture
Then ignore what I am advocating, and go on living under an income/paroll tax system possibly with VAT besides. For the rest of your and your decendants lives.
For unless the income and payroll tax laws are repealed and replaced soon, you will be seeing the institution of VATs and national sales taxes on top of what we have now instead of being replaced by the NRST proposed.
No problem. Your choice.
Your "explanation" of what would happen to me BTW, is pure conjecture
That's true, you could be anybody.
However, I answered for the scenario you proposed. A person using money received prior to the enactment of HR25 to spend.
My answer:
Prices fall approximately the amount of the NRST, hence you can buy the same basket of goods as you did before the NRST and have some of your gross income left over for whatever else you would rather do.
Invest without tax, or spend on used items with out tax,or spend on new products at lower prices with the NRST.
What happens to you specifically can not be determined if what you provided as a scenario is not full and accurate.
However for your amusement and verification of the stated potential of the NRST in the conditions laid by you:
The following article covers the mechanism on how the current Federal tax system propagates and is embedded into consumption expenditure.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
The 24% in the article considers only those factors actually paid to government out of imposititions on business in complying with the income, payroll, excise & tariff tax laws.
I refer you to the section of the following article about the Income/Payroll tax system and its impact on our economy "A. Hidden Upstream Taxes. " paragraph 39.
"[39] Dr. Dale Jorgenson, Chairman of Harvard University's Economics Department, believes that the price of goods and services are inflated by about 20 percent or more by upstream taxes consumers ultimately bear. In a recent paper Dr. Jorgenson estimated the built-in taxes contained in the price of goods and services. /22/ In the chart above, he quantified the hidden component of tax, estimating that producer prices would fall on repeal of upstream taxes an average of about 22 percent."
Looking at the accompanying chart, the range of values from industry to industry appears to be about 12-25%.
Economists Gary and Aldonna Robbins of the Texas-based Institute for Public Policy examined the case of dry cleaning a shirt, with a particular eye toward uncovering the hidden costs of taxes in price.
The Robbin's attributed over 33.6% of "consumer prices" to be due to federal taxation passed on to the customer.
The Federal Tax System
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=2125&sequence=0&from=1#pt1
From the Table 1 we may extract the proportionate contributions of each sector of taxes as they contribute to consumer price for the year 2000.
Those tax components which will not change prices as a consequence of enactment of HR2525
============================
Adjust for the approximate reduction of interest & cost of tax compliance (
Adjust for a conservative $800 billion cost of tax compliance, (Payne '95 estimates 65cents for each dollar of revenue collected, $1264billion) reductions .
Estimated change in consumption prices as consequence of enactment of a National Retail Sales Tax, repealing all business income and payroll taxes:
33.6*(1386.5/1945) = 23.9% reduction in consumption prices
Which more than verifies the Jorgenson empirical study of 22% fall in producer prices.
The two sources are in reasonable agreement, and I see 20-25% a reasonable value to expect retail prices to fall, not only for customers here in the United States, but in our exports as well making them far more competitive on international markets.
But then what happens to you personally or whether you personally benefit depends on factors you have obviously not supplied for inclusion into an evaluation.
For example if one were participating extensively in todays underground economy and avoid the taxes that the NRST repeals. Well, that person might not be as well off economically for lack of and increase in takehome pay (if you already get Gross, you ain't gett'n more) so that person would end up paying bout the same as today for consumption.
However, even the likes of such a ner-do-well would benefit for getting the IRS of his back or at least looking over his shoulder.
Unless However, he was somehow involved in under the counter retail sales, and would suddenly have the state tax authority trying to track him down. Well I guess that sort of individual might have a bit of a problem. With fewer collection points for taxes, those charged with enforcing taxes have an easier job tracking down non-compliance. Fewer places to look mean more efficient enforcement.
Since you surely do not fall into the above case, you actually should do fairly well or at least no worse with the NRST in place.
I'll bet the pols will just be falling all over themselves to vote for these.
Some are, you should take a look and ping on any you would like to:
Take a look at the score cards for both House & Senate, if your Critters are waffling or not supporting the NRST let them know that it matters to their career advancement plans.
Time to put that stake in the heart of the income/payroll tax system and the IRS, and the National Retail Sales Tax bill HR25 is the way to do it.
- It is fairer to tax people on what they extract from the economy, as roughly measured by their consumption, than to tax them on what they produce for the economy, as roughly measured by their income.
From what the founders had to say, the answer appears to be straight forword to me:
[Montesquieu wrote in Spirit of the Laws, XIII,c.14:]
- "A capitation is more natural to slavery; a duty on merchandise is more natural to liberty, by reason it has not so direct a relation to the person."
--Thomas Jefferson: copied into his Commonplace Book.Patrick Henry, Virginia Ratifying Convention June 12, 1788:
- "the oppression arising from taxation, is not from the amount but, from the mode -- a thorough acquaintance with the condition of the people, is necessary to a just distribution of taxes. The whole wisdom of the science of Government, with respect to taxation, consists in selecting the mode of collection which will best accommodate to the convenience of the people.
Federalist Papers #21
- "Imposts, excises, and, in general, all duties upon articles of consumption, may be compared to a fluid, which will, in time, find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be at his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions. "
- "It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption
that they contain in their own nature a security against excess.
They prescribe their own limit, which cannot be exceeded without
defeating the end proposed - that is, an extension of the revenue."- If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection
is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when
they are confined within proper and moderate bounds.
- This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the
citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of
the power of imposing them.
- Impositions of this kind usually fall under the denomination of indirect
taxes, and must for a long time constitute the chief part of the revenue
raised in this country."
why would OUR politicians not want to support it?
Hmmm! Noting your homepage indicates you are from California, tends to expain abit.
I would suggest you concentrate on replacing scumbags, or figure on moving where your vote and voice can accomplish something substantive.
California Critters supporting NRST out of 50 Congressional districts,
John DoLittle, R CA District 4 co-sponsponsor for HR25
Jerry Lewis, R CA District 41 co-sponsor for HR25
Gary Miller, R CA District 42 co-sponsor for HR25
Randy Cunningham, R CA District 50 leans toward NRST (needs abit of push ;O)
Hmm, 46 CA house districts with scumbags and fence sitters,
2 Senators, both genetically disposed scumbags,
Looks like you have a lot to work on.
Better get busy.
Believe it or not, at one time, Ca was a nice place to live.
I know, I have had alot of Aunts, Uncles, cousins ... out there, most of the former have passed on but the cousins are still around here and there.
I was stationed in the Bay area for several years as well as down in San Diego Naval Elect. Labs.
Liked the San Diego area alot. Had abit of a problem co-existing in the Bay area however.
It took the class warfare goons 126 years to enshrine class warfare in the U.S. Constitution via the 16th Amendment and the income tax.
In 1976, presidential candidate Jimmy Carter described the U.S. tax code as "a disgrace to the human race" - a trifle hyperbolic, perhaps, but only because he included the rest of the planet in America's unique humiliation.
The tax code was a disgrace then, and 25 years later it remains so, all 2.8 million words of it (the Holy Bible contains approximately 773,000 words). Even those who are charged with doing so can not adequately interpret what is contained within it. The income tax in general and the progressive income tax specifically is the vilest form of class warfare known to man (save war) and that is precisely why Karl Marx and Frederick Engels endorsed it in their Manifesto of the Communist Party.
America is not supposed to be about class warfare! It IS supposed to be about Freedom and opportunity for all, and thus if we are ever again to be a truly free people we MUST rid ourselves of this communist inspired monster called the progressive income tax!
The ABSOLUTE best plan currently on the table for doing that is H.R. 25, The FairTax bill!
Alan Keyes refers to the income tax as the slave tax that should be abolished as a moral imperative, and replaced with a National Sales Tax:
Keyes on Taxes & Government Spending:
Alan Keyes Interview with Des Moines Register:
The intent of the structure of the individual income tax is for political and social mainpulation not revenue collection. The Individual Income tax is maintained to establish and hold every person in the country in perpetual legal jeopardy and to create artificial divisions among the electorate (rich vs. poor; big business vs. the little guy; etc).
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.