[hopespringseternal]

Only somebody trying to trick somebody would compare apples and oranges.

But when you describe a sales tax with the language of income tax, you are doing exactly that. People aren't going to relate inclusive to exclusive, they are going to relate exclusive to exclusive.

We've had this discussion before. Just imagine trying to explain this inclusive-exclusive thing to a Jay-walking type person who is about to go vote.

[kevkrom]

But when you describe a sales tax with the language of income tax, you are doing exactly that. People aren't going to relate inclusive to exclusive, they are going to relate exclusive to exclusive. We've had this discussion before. Just imagine trying to explain this inclusive-exclusive thing to a Jay-walking type person who is about to go vote.

It's very easy. If you make $100, and pay $20 in taxes, what is your tax rate? If you spend $100, $20 of which is taxes, what is your tax rate?

Any sane person is going to say 20% both times -- the tax-inclusive method is acually the simpler and more intutitive form. It is also a fair comparison -- if you took the above example, and said that the former is 20% whaile the latter is 25%, it makes it sound like the latter is more, even though it is the same amount of money ($20) in each case.

[Remember_Salamis]

fine, go exclusive-exclusive. a 30% sales tax is 30%. a 23% income tax is 30% exclusive. It's the same amount of money.