Posted on 03/10/2004 3:01:26 PM PST by chance33_98
Op-Ed: Protect Social Security Now With a Federal Retail Sales Tax
3/10/2004 5:51:00 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: National Desk
Contact: Melissa McKay of the Office of Rep. Steve King, 202-225-2246; Genie Hayes of Americans for Fair Taxation, 800-324-7829 ext. 137
WASHINGTON, March 10 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following op-ed was released today by Steve King (R-IA), a co-sponsor of HR 25, the FairTax:
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan recently suggested cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits in order to keep these government programs solvent.
There is a better way to keep Social Security and Medicare solvent, yet still provide the funding for very necessary reform. First, abolish all federal income taxes and the regressive payroll tax, then replace these taxes with the FairTax (HR 25/S 1493), a federal retail sales tax on all new goods and services purchased for personal consumption.
When we shift Social Security funding from a narrow, regressive payroll tax to a broad, progressive sales tax, we are well on our way to resolving the Social Security problem once and for all. One of the biggest problems in fixing Social Security is funding the transition from the mess we have now to whatever the reformed system becomes. With every consumer contributing via the sales tax, rather than a crushing payroll tax on the few, funding that transition is much more palatable.
Who contributes to Social Security under the FairTax? Everyone spending money in America. Teenagers who spend money like water, often without having paid payroll taxes. Tourists visiting our shores. Illegal aliens, who pay few taxes today. The trillion- dollar underground/criminal/drug/porn economy, with participants who really love to flash that cash for expensive retail products. Oh yes, you and I will be contributing through our purchases as well.
How does the FairTax protect those on fixed incomes? In brief, retirees (and anyone else) living at or below the poverty level will receive a rebate that zeros out any sales tax they would otherwise pay. They just have to be residents with a legal Social Security number to qualify. In addition, taxes hidden in the cost of the goods and services are gone. Through these two mechanisms, these segments of American society are honestly and transparently detaxed up to the poverty level. Additionally, the FairTax does not tax used goods, so there is yet another way for retirees to control the amount of sales tax they pay well above the poverty level.
Can we pass the FairTax soon enough to fulfill our commitment to seniors? Do we, the people, the grassroots, make the laws in this country? Women marched in the streets and got the right to vote. Prohibitionists marched in the streets to pass it; Americans voted with their elbows 13 years later to repeal it. Civil rights was won in buses and at lunch counters, and then passed in Congress. Oppressed East Germans took down the Berlin wall brick by brick; they took out communism slab by slab. Need I remind you your congressman's and senators' offices are only a phone call away? Yes, we can pass the FairTax now. But only if you call your congressman's and senators' offices now, and often demanding specifically that they co-sponsor and work to pass the FairTax.
------
Steve King represents Iowa's 5th district and is a co-sponsor of HR 25, the FairTax. For more information on Congressman King, go to http://www.house.gov/steveking. For more information on the FairTax go to http://www.fairtax.org or call 1-800-FAIRTAX.
No, it will be passed (assuming it is passed someday) as an additional tax. An idea whose time has come.
I don't disagree with the substance of your point (about illegals), but as for the first group of people - people who "paid into" Social Security - they should have realized, and should realize, that what they were paying "into" was a pyramid scheme. The fact that they were paying into it all their lives just means that they were sending part of their income to strangers (senior-citizen strangers) all their lives. It was not a savings account or pension of any kind and they have no valid, legal moral or otherwise, claim to receive payments from yet other strangers.
No Damn Way. To not abolish the other taxes is to simply INCREASE Taxes, NOTHING MORE
Wrong. Why don't you read the bill? fairtax.org
OK, so it will be passed as written in this bill, amended in no way, and this is the bill that will be passed, and all taxes, from workers comp to social security to the phone tax will vanish instantly, and if it fails no other bill will ever be presented.
Sheesh, why don't you read my post, I predicted how the NRST will be passed, assuming that it is passed at all. I didn't comment on the bill at all. And the question I replied to was asking if all other taxes would vanish with it's passage. You really think that it will ever pass in a manner that just goes "POOF" and all other Federal taxes are now repealed? Get real. Neither Republicans or Democrats are willing to give up the control that those taxes allow, and it will take a significant amount of time to reestablish that control before the taxes could be repealed if they ever are (they won't want to give up the revenue either).
That's the whole point, isn't it? Socialism makes everybody equal - equally poor and equally stupid.
"Therefore, when the FairTax Act of 2001 abolishes the federal income tax system, prices will drop 20% to 30%. The proposed FairTax rate is 23%. So, instead of paying 15.3% of your paycheck in payroll taxes, plus an average of 28% of your paycheck in federal income tax, for a total of about 43% of your paycheck going to the federal government in Washington, you pay only a 23% consumption tax each time you purchase a new good or service for your own personal consumption above the federal poverty level."
"At this 23% rate, the FairTax will pay for all current government operations, including Social Security and Medicare. With a consumption tax like the FairTax, government revenues will be even more stable than they are now because consumption tends to be more constant than income."
"With the FairTax, if you choose to buy any new good or service for yourself, a consumption tax of 23%, will be added into the price. If you choose to buy used goods -- used car, used home, used clothing -- you do not pay the FairTax. If, as a business owner, you buy something for strictly business purposes (not for personal consumption), you pay no consumption tax. So, in deciding what to buy, you get to choose whether or not you will pay the federal consumption tax."
"Perhaps most importantly, to ensure that no American will pay tax on necessities, the FairTax plan provides a prepaid, monthly rebate for every registered household to cover the 23% consumption tax spent on necessities up to the federal poverty level. This is how the FairTax completely untaxes the poor, and lowers the tax burden on everyone else. Can you see how much freer life will be with the FairTax instead of the income tax?"
What about all the "excise taxes", like the ones on tires and gasoline? Are we going to see all of those little thefts removed? Pardon my skepticism, but I don't think the criminals in government want to give up all that extra money they have been stealing for so long. The total tax burden on the average working stiff (if you add up everything including all the state, local and regional taxes) runs about 65-70% of every dollar earned. There is no way the scum can balance they books by giving up 40-50% of current tax revenue.
While the so-called "fair tax" is lower than the total tax rate as it now stands, people are going to begin to see what a waste it is to give government any money at all. It won't be long before such a stink is raised, that Congress will find itself on the end of a rope. No, the bastards are never going to reform the tax system because they like the stealthy theft approach better.
Well, the revenue is supposed to remain neutral.
But the control is the real issue, isn't it? I helped to get my congressman on board (Bilirakis), and the bill now has 44 co-sponsors, including De Lay. It can be done.
ECM: but will all other taxes be abolished?
templar: No, it will be passed (assuming it is passed someday) as an additional tax
chainsaw: Another tax on the backs of the poor
TLI: To not abolish the other taxes is to simply INCREASE Taxes
Read the bill,
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, S.1493
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.
And will be pulled from consideration by sponsor, if amended to do anything other than stated. It is intended to repeal the all federal income, payroll and gift/estate taxes and proposes the express prohibition of all taxes on income by constitutional amendment.
It's sister bill is is written in amendment for to accomplish the language laid out in HR25
H.J.RES.61
Title: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to abolish the Federal income tax.
Sponsor: Rep Johnson, Sam [TX-3] (introduced 6/24/2003) Cosponsors: 5
Latest Major Action: 9/4/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution.
No, the bastards are never going to reform the tax system because they like the stealthy theft approach better.
I see, then it is not even worth your effort to try to make a change.
It's a good thing then that some folks see things in a different light, or no change could ever come about.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man - brave, hated, and scorned. When his cause succeeds however, the timid join him, For then it costs nothing to be a Patriot." -- Mark Twain
an ever-increasing number of members of Congress are actually trying to make it happen
Last session of Congress there was only the House bill HR2525 with 7 Cosponsors,
Today there is a House bill with (44) HR25 Co-Sponsors and bill introduced before the Senate, with
FairTax - Congressional Score Card;
40+ others favoring it passage
and many changing there preferences for the way to go:
'We know it's not perfect' (Shelby on the Stump in Alabama)
- His preference for a sales tax is even greater than the flat tax he has promoted for years,
As well as Primary races for Senate where NRST is part of platform
as well as House races where NRST is a substantive part of the debate and competitition for office:
Dennis Umphress, libertarian (California 16th District)
Ben Streusand, (Texas 10th District)
Michael McCaul, (Texas 10th District)
Dave Phillips, (Texas 10th District)
John Devine, (Texas 10th District)
The only way to get rid of the current system is a constitutional amendment, and that is unlikely with the coming financial chaos.
The only way to get rid of the current system is a constitutional amendment,
Of course, and which is why HR25 calls for such, and creates the environment where that can happen by placing a viable alternative to the current system in place.
and that is unlikely with the coming financial chaos.
LOL, I read that book too, back in the 50's. Lost me alot of money and wealth over the years until I finally wised up.
Gloom and doom always does a great job selling books, newspapers, and socialist/populist political campaigns.
The FairTax specifically eliminates income, payroll, gift, and estate taxes from USC 26. It does not affect import/export taxes or excise taxes.
First, abolish all federal income taxes and the regressive payroll tax, then replace these taxes with the FairTax (HR 25/S 1493), a federal retail sales tax on all new goods and services purchased for personal consumption.
It will end up as another revenue stream, and extended control of small business
What would they use a Retail Sales Tax to do that for?
They already have the business income tax for that purpose, and VATs coming down the pike to add on and that pander to the populist mentality that rich fat cat business owners gotta pay not the peoples. Those VATs are hundred times more efficient at controlling and bringing small businesses to heel compared to a retail sales tax.
S.112
Title: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a value added tax and to use the receipts from the tax to fund America's war effort.
Sponsor: Sen Hollings, Ernest F. [SC] (introduced 1/9/2003)
H.R.15
Title: To provide a program of national health insurance, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dingell, John D. [MI-15] (introduced 1/7/2003)CRS summary:
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a tax on each taxable transaction (the sale of property, performance of services, and importing of property by a taxable person in a commercial-type transaction). Sets the tax rate at zero for specified transactions.
Establishes the National Health Care Trust Fund. Appropriates to the Fund amounts received from the value added tax. Allows the Fund to be used only to carry out the program under this Act.
A broad Retail Sales tax does just the opposite, it exposes the individual voter to the full view of the tax burden imposed by large government, and impacts business operations very little as it relieves all businesses of income and payroll taxes and the burdens they impose.
A point of fact, sales taxes do not require fedgov intervention at all with the business. State sales tax administrative agencies already do that in 45 states and that is who are slated to administer and enforce the NRST in parallel with their own.
H.R.25, S.1493
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.
Not only does the HR25, empower the individual and provide freedom from the intrusive aspects of the income tax, it empowers the states as well, returning to them authorities the states should naturally have under the constitutition.
"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.-- a free people that pays slave taxes to its government is willingly training itself for bondage.
Alan Keyes 199
The NRST gets rid of those "slave" taxes for both business and the individual.
Sales tax rates based upon the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) may may need to be higher than stated since significant GDP spending is by the government.
Sales tax rates based upon the GDP may need to be higher than stated since prices of goods and services will likely decrease with the elimination of corporate taxes.
Retailers would be required to collect and manage additional taxes for each sale.
Only 45 our of 50 states currently have a retail sales tax.
Will require Federal oversight of retail sales tax collection techniques.
Exempted items (perhaps food products) may be taxed by the state, complicating the retail tax computations.
Support for churches and charitable organizations may decrease since contributions will not be tax deductible.
Will be regressive in nature without rebates.
Rates over 15% may encourage evasion and require enforcement actions.
Evasion might take the form of a growing black market
Many celebrate "Tax Freedom Day" each year--the day on which our wages so far for the year pay all our income taxes. With increases in the number and magnitude of taxes, Tax Freedom Day is pushed back later and later each year. In 1998 that day was May 8th, a day later than in 1997. We worked 45 days to pay personal income taxes, 18 days to pay sales and excise taxes, 12 days to pay property taxes, 13 days to pay corporate income taxes, and 3 days to pay other miscellaneous taxes.
On September 30, 1998 President Clinton announced a federal budget surplus of $70 billion and that he wanted to use a portion of it to save Social Security. One fact he neglected to mention was that during 1998 the Federal deficit ballooned by nearly $120 billion.
We must work to eliminate the problems with the current tax environment and implement a tax environment that is fair, simple, non-intrusive, and not counterproductive to economic growth. We must also control spending.
We must adopt a constitutional amendment to both repeal the 16th Amendment and Article I. Section 2's reference to direct taxes. This amendment could mandate a national sales tax as the sole means of taxing individuals specifying upper limits on the tax rate.
We must adopt a balanced budget constitutional amendment. Such an amendment could require the total spending of all Federal government agencies, departments, and government branches not exceed the average total revenues for the previous three fiscal years.
What are the chances that this will be implemented by the jerks in Congress, who benefit immensely by the current complex system?
Regards 37 & 39
Tell us something we don't know. Like the tactical plan to implement your strategic goals:
We must adopt a constitutional amendment to both repeal the 16th Amendment and Article I. Section 2's reference to direct taxes. This amendment could mandate a national sales tax as the sole means of taxing individuals specifying upper limits on the tax rate.
We must adopt a balanced budget constitutional amendment.
You offer no tactical plan of action to get there (smaller government) from here (income taxes); History has amply demonstrated it ain't gonna happen with income and payroll tax statutes in place.
As a consequence the answer to your question:
What are the chances that this will be implemented by the jerks in Congress, who benefit immensely by the current complex system?
Is none until the people of the United States have the income tax horseblinders removed from their eyes and all perceive the real cost of government largess personally.
- "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.
Politics operates on the basis of manipulating the perception of the burden of taxation:
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-George Bernard Shaw
Those who perceive little burden play the role of Poor little Paul:
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Lowest Quintile | -0.6 | -0.8 | -0.2 | -0.5 | -0.2 | -1.3 | -1.9 | -2.9 | -3.4 | -5.6 | -6.8 |
| Second Quintile | 3.6 | 3.9 | 4.6 | 3.5 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 0.9 |
| Middle Quintile | 7.1 | 7.5 | 8.3 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.1 | 6.5 | 6.3 | 5.9 | 6.1 | 5.4 |
Those that readily perceive some of the burden:
| Effective Individual Federal Income Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| Fourth Quintile | 9.7 | 10.4 | 11.3 | 9.5 | 9.3 | 8.7 | 8.9 | 8.7 | 8.5 | 8.7 | 8.4 |
| Highest Quintile | 15.8 | 16.3 | 17.1 | 14.5 | 14.3 | 15.1 | 15.1 | 14.8 | 15.5 | 16.2 | 16.1 |
To play the role of mean ole Rich Peter.
While Congress plays both ends against the middle; hiding the real burden in inflation, higher prices on all goods and services, lower takehome pay, lower return on investment, and higher interest rates. All keeping the poor right where they are and pushing for more freebees.
We really pay:
| Effective Total Federal Tax Rate (Percent of gross income) | |||||||||||
| Income Category | 1977 | 1979 | 1981 | 1983 | 1985 | 1987 | 1989 | 1991 | 1993 | 1995 | Projected 1999 |
| All Families | 22.8 | 23.4 | 23.5 | 21.4 | 21.8 | 22.6 | 22.5 | 22.6 | 23.5 | 24.7 | 24.2 |
Data from IRS collections statistics and The Bureau of Economic Analysis as compiled in tabular form by the Congressional Budget Office.
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=1545&from=4&sequence=0
To remove the perception of taxation of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Federal tax rates are high because a majority of the electorate do not share proportionately in the burden their demand for largesse imposes on the minority of citizens.
The siren call for representation without taxation is the formula that got us where we are at today. The ability to hide or disguise taxation from the view of large sectors of the electorate allows the Congress to get away with the creation of the evergrowing monster that it fosters.
Liberty and freedom have a price, responsibility. If that price is avoided there are no brakes on the growth of government, the ultimate result is the end of freedom through creeping socialism.
Right now the bottom 60% perceive little to no "Individual Income Tax" burden,(in many cases even a handout) and 70% of the voting public clamor for more from government looking for the top 40% of income earners/producers to foot the bill. That perception continues to grow ever stronger by eliminating even more participants from the Federal Individual Income Tax rolls as proposed in the tax reduction proposals through changes in personal exemption limits and other mechanisms such as the EITC.
The Intent of the individual income tax is for political and social control not revenue collection. The Individual Income tax is maintained to establish and hold every person in the country perpetual legal jeopardy. That is a situation that must end with the repeal of the income tax from the statutes, and the prohibition of its use by Constitutional amendment that future generations will not face the same manner of manipulation and interference in their lives.
Until you first remove the income/payroll tax statues and provide a viable alternative, you will never see any of the actions you propose come alive in reality. The will remain in the world of libertarian and utopian fantasy.
The NRST is the means to open VOTERS eyes to the reality and first step towards restoring a Constitutionally limited government. Without it, what you say you want will remain mearly a pipe dream.
Disadvantages of a National Sales Tax
Nothing that you have mentioned qualifies as such under H.R.25
Sales tax rates based upon the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) may may need to be higher than stated since significant GDP spending is by the government.
Under HR25, government is required to pay the same tax as everyone else for this reason.
It pays those taxes today through the the prices it pays for consumption products (embedded income & payroll taxes passed on in consumption pricing), the NRST thus requires government to pay that same tax, in its payments for that same consumption (NRST plus income payroll tax free price).
Sales tax rates based upon the GDP may need to be higher than stated since prices of goods and services will likely decrease with the elimination of corporate taxes.
Since the prices of goods and services will decrease approximately 20-25%, the total payment of products remains the same as it is today, all that is different is is Taxes are stated separately from price on retail receipts instead of being embedded in price.
Secondly due to more efficient business operations with income/payroll compliance removed, productivity increases will provide additional incetives to economic growth.
Retailers would be required to collect and manage additional taxes for each sale.
Only 45 our of 50 states currently have a retail sales tax.
Will require Federal oversight of retail sales tax collection techniques.
At no additional cost as the bill compensates states and businesses to collect and remit said tax.
Exempted items (perhaps food products) may be taxed by the state, complicating the retail tax computations.
One of the qualifications for a state to assume the administrative and enforcement of the NRST, will be for it to conform its own structure to be compatable with the NRST. This will enhance most states own tax collections in providing a broader tax base as well as simplification of their own tax laws.
Support for churches and charitable organizations may decrease since contributions will not be tax deductible.
LOL, charitible contribution are not retail purchases, and are not taxed under the NRST either. No difference, except you don't have to tell the government about it to get a deduction so it is even easier.
Will be regressive in nature without rebates.
HR 25, provides a fixed payment at beginning of each month, no rebate based on expenditure or income at all.
It is to every legal resident to compensate for the loss of personal exemption and standard deduction of the income tax.
That payment is taxrate times the povertyline for one person paid monthly. Since povertyline is a fixed base measure adjusted for inflation, so is the compensation as is the tax being a percentage of consumer price by definition of what it taxes.
Rates over 15% may encourage evasion and require enforcement actions.
Any rate requires enforcement, DUH, Including the income/payroll tax we have today.
However, the enforcement is upon the seller of hew goods & services, and falls to less than 10% of the persons and entities that must be subject to such enforcement under the current laws.
Evasion might take the form of a growing black market
How is that? Evasion generally occures in attempts to avoid the high marginal rates of the income tax, more than 30% generally and as high as 40% in some instances with the income/payroll tax scheme in place. Secondly the income/payroll tax can be easily evaded by merely the artifice of doing everything in cash and not telling the IRS what you make. Only takes one person involved, keep your mouth shut and you can do it for ever.
Thus cash markets abound sapping at least 20-30% of potential tax dollars.
80% of retail dollar volume goes through on 20% of business, those 20% being the largest have the most to loose if caught not collect a tax from their customers or not properly remitting such to the state tax authority who knows them all very well.
for that 20% of retail dollar volume with the little guy, The NRST, is a single broad base tax, the maximum marginal rate is 23%. It takes two persons in collusion to cheat, (thus high risk for less gain).
Actual evasion is much more likely to fall rather than rise under the NRST.
Anyone that thinks the problem with Social Security is lack of money
Lack of money is not the problem, lack of visibility of the cost of government for such largess is.
See the content of reply #41 above.
An NRST provides a solution to the lack of visibility. It is up to the electorate to act on knowledge instead of out of government mandated ignorance as it does to day.
They speak very loudly. Apparently steroids, cable TV, who's marrying who, educating the children of a few small towns in Iowa about the rain forests, putting up this or that statue commemorating some event or person that one out of a million might recognize, etc. are much more important than social security and national security.
I am absolutely in favor of a total reform of the tax system; I am even willing to try a national sales tax (although, I'd prefer a flat tax; there are still problems with that, namely, the need for the IRS) if it could be set up in such a way as to prevent later "reforms" from gutting it. I have been watching what happened in California for nearly 25 years after the passage of the Gann Initiative which set Constitutional limits on taxation/spending. Over the succeeding two decades, the RAT-dominated legislature (with the consent of several Repubo governors) completely destroyed the whole limitation-thing through a series of sneaky ballot initiatives and other legislation.
I have no tactical plan to assure a better tax system or a more honest government. I am a realist and, I assume, like yourself, I have been around long enough to understand that those in government will never give up their authority without some catastrophic event. The current tax code gives Congress exactly what it wants: unlimited power to divide, conquer and otherwise enrich itself at the expense of the nation. The RAT party exists solely because of the way in which each successive Congress since 1913 has "revised" it. Create a truly "fair tax" system, and the RAT party, as currently constituted, will sink into oblivion. Such a grand thought it is. However, you have correctly summed up the problem at its source: the ignorance of the average voter. Too many people think they have a vested interest in keeping the status quo. So, I agree that that must be where the emphasis must be placed. My cynical self, however, does not think it can ever be done in a peaceful manner.
A record of every transaction of the business and with everyone that the business does business with.
Don't know what book you are referring to, but a lot of people who went from looking at retirement as millionaires to looking at retirement eating dog food with the collapse of Enron, Global Crossing, etc. might have benefited from it. Financial chaos does not mean the total collapse of the economy, it means that there will be a whole lot of big time losers and a very few who will be incredibly rich at the end of it, and that this will result in massive political changes (away from conservative ideas, not toward them). Examine the coming SS crisis for a while and give it some thought, things are going to go through some amjor (and chaotic) changes in the next dozen years.
A record of every transaction of the business and with everyone that the business does business with.
Let me see 1040 hmmm! against the dreaded state retail sales tax receipt:
Business name, how much tax, how much price, and total payment.
Now the NRST http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.25:
`SEC. 510. TAX TO BE SEPARATELY STATED AND CHARGED.
- `(a) IN GENERAL- For each purchase of taxable property or services for which a tax is imposed by section 101, the seller shall charge the tax imposed by section 101 separately from the purchase. For purchase of taxable property or services for which a tax is imposed by section 101, the seller shall provide to the purchaser a receipt for each transaction that includes--
- `(1) the property or services price exclusive of tax;
- `(2) the amount of tax paid;
- `(3) the property or service price inclusive of tax;
- `(4) the tax rate (the amount of tax paid (per paragraph (2)) divided by the property or service price inclusive of tax (per paragraph (3));
- `(5) the date that the good or service was sold;
- `(6) the name of the vendor; and
- `(7) the vendor registration number.
dang'd no consumer name there.
ROTFLM( | )O
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.