Yep, you'll have to imagine it because you won't get it from the NRST.
Posted on 08/26/2004 11:05:33 PM PDT by n-tres-ted
So?
"Why do they have to give a rebate to make it 'fair'???"
Because the research which went into the FairTax's development indicated that the American people were overwhelmingly opposed to a tax system that made it impossible or more difficult for those at the bottom of the economic ladder to afford basic essentials. The FairTax is a representation of what the American people wanted in a tax system. You are, of course, free to disagree with a majority of Americans. However, those of us who want to see something done on this issue and SOON consider that a fairly important attribute of a tax reform proposal.
Bump for later read!
That was the idea (tariffs) behind Smoot-Hawley in 1929-30 that led to a 68-69% drop in our exports-imports by 1933, and 25% unemployment in the U. S. The result would be the same today. And the "foreigners" don't pay our tariffs - we do - in the prices of the goods we buy.
Huge BUMP!!
I think this is where this idea falls apart. I just don't think there's any way in hell a company's going to start charging lower prices because their costs are less. I think retail products will still cost the same as they do now, and the companies who produce these retail products will simply pocket extra profits.
Take, for example, a compact disc. CDs cost, retail, pretty much the as they did 15 years ago, even though the cost to produce a CD has declined dramatically.
Why would you do that? Prices remain stable.
Thank you for correcting the article.
Yep, you'll have to imagine it because you won't get it from the NRST.
That's not right. THere already is existing taxes included in prices amounting to 22% inclusive or 28% "sales tax".
It's just that the included 22% (28% sales tax) has always been invisible. That's the only difference.
ping
THere are very clear reasons why the rebate exists. IIRC it increases the rate by 1.9%. It does, however, eliminate the divvying out of tax favors by pols. It eliminates lobbying the code. It prevents the tax from being regressive.
It's not confusing at all, IMO.
Thank you for the clarification. THe bill does NOT include repeal of an amendment. It simply "calls" for its repeal - whatever that means.
The repeal of the 16th amendment comes from HJR 45 IIRC.
But there are those that argue the 16th is not what gave feds power to tax income in any case.
For this reason, HR 25 makes the taxation of any kind of income illegal (not unconstitutional).
Of course, this is assuming the embedded taxes will be removed by businesses. Some economists believe so.
Even if prices do not drop the part that was used to pay corporate income taxes once those are gone, the rebate and option for freedom in what you pay tax on STILL makes the FairTax the best plan out there.
I am pretty darn sure that prices would drop to the 35 dollar range as Boortz predicts, however. Why? They would need to drop in order to keep customers from sticker shock. Perhaps they could get by with 38 bucks or so. They would get a couple bucks more profit than now (since again, that extra dough above 35 now is currently used for taxes anyway, so its removal would just make common sense). But, it would not be an outrageous amount, and consumers would be able to choose what to get their taxes paid on.
So you support making my dollars worth less? You support the isolation of American goods and services to the NA market only? You support trade wars? You support the restriction of goods available to American consumers?
BTW, the 16th made the income tax constitutional, so your "get back to the constitutional method of taxation" stance also implies that your supportive of income taxes as the revenue to fund the Fed. Gov't.
So am I. All the better. No self-employment taxes, no income taxes. Goods stripped of embedded taxes on labor (that's another 25% or so, right there. No costs to keep records, file returns, comply with audit demands, make quarterly installment payments, etc. Celebrate! and Support!
Why would AFFT allow this guy to jeopardize his credibility with an article full of lies like this?...
The lies and misunderstandings in this article says more about the lack of credibility of AFFT, their desperate attempt at any cost to push this fraud than it does about the actual tax plan...as phony as that is.
If he doesn't know he's lying, he should know he's being made a fool of.
That IS high!
Anyway, the price that you'd pay for a car today would be the same price you'd pay under the nrst. The reason is that you are already paying a tax of a nearly equivalent amount when you buy the car today.... you just don't see it.
The nrst repeals the invisible taxes and makes the replacement visible....that's why socialists hate it. We'll all KNOW our real tax burden!
BTW the rate is 23% inclusive, meaning if you have $100 to spend, $23 must go to tax leaving $77 to spend. Like the income tax...if you earn $100 and pay $23 in tax, you have $77 to spend.
Next year will begin to push to enactment. First we have to re-elect the President who will gladly sign it.
"Many will see this as an opportunity to increase their profit margin, fund capitol improvements, ramp up research that has been put off, etc."
Therefore an employment explosion would take place. Nothing wrong with that either! Think about it, these actions will increase the need for employees, therefore the leverage of the employee to demand higher wages is increased, potentially a greater benefit that will offset your theory of prices not going down.
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.