TAX REFORM COMMISSION? YEAH ... RIGHT.

Neal's Nuze ^ | Oct. 12, 2005 | Neal Boortz

[pigdog]

TAX REFORM COMMISSION? YEAH ... RIGHT.

The president's so-called tax reform commission telegraphed its intentions several months ago when members stated that they were not going to recommend a full reform of our federal tax system, rather they were going to recommend some incremental reforms. The The FairTax Book hit the book stores and debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times Bestseller's list. Politicians and other Beltway denizens told co-author Congressman John Linder that the success of The FairTax Book was a certain indication that the people of this country were in the mood for wholesale reform. Who knew?

Now we're starting to get an indication of what the tax reform commission is going to recommend. It's very simple. Tax increases, not tax reform.

[pigdog]

Very much worth reading the balance of the article ...

[pigdog]

Neal's just not going to go quietly - which is just fine.

We shouldn't either - how about hiting on you Reps and Sens no matter what their views are? Now's the time to do it.

[EternalVigilance]

Time to up the ante.

[sheana]

I keep reminding everyone I know.....it is YOUR money not the governments and we threw tea in the harbor over much less.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

We've been snookered again.

Time for a 2nd American Revolution.

[Finger Monkey]

I'm gathering up my pitchfork and torch . . .

[ancient_geezer]

A Taxreform bump for you all.

If anyone would like to be added to this ping list let me know.

 

Now we're starting to get an indication of what the tax reform commission is going to recommend. It's very simple. Tax increases, not tax reform.

 

As the old saw goes, "If you want it done right" , don't turn it over to a commission.

Time to roll out the grassroots.

And do it right:

John Linder in the House(HR25) & Saxby Chambliss Senate(S25) offer a comprehensive bill to kill all income and SS/Medicare payroll taxes outright and replace them with with a national retail sales tax administered by the states.

H.R.25,S.25
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.

Refer for additional information:

• search: "national sales tax" OR "national retail sales tax" OR "fairtax"

[SolidSupplySide]

Neal's arguments are incoherent. He bemoans that the commission recommends that home interest rate deduction caps are lowered. Ditto for medical insurance premium deductions for employers. He calls the reduction of these deductions a tax increase. (It is unclear as to whether these are tax increases without knowing if the marginal tax rate is lowered at the same time.)

But the so-called "Fair Tax" eliminated any preferential treatment for home loan interest and medical insurance premiums altogether.

If the reduction of preferential treatment is, in Boortz's words, a tax increase. What is the elimination of these preferential treatments? It must be a tax increase magnitudes of order greater than the commission recommends. But that is precisely what the so-called "Fair Tax" does. So Boortz is decrying the recommendations of the commission as a tax increase while simultaneously advocating even a higher tax increase.

When it comes to tax policy, though, Boortz is often incoherent.

[EternalVigilance]

From the Pacific clear to the Atlantic
Butchers, bakers and even mechanics
Are demanding reform
A political storm
While politicians move chairs on Titantic!

[WhiteGuy]

Time to up the ante.

What do you suggest?

As it applies to my "representatives".......

I've written and e-mailed. I have asked nicely, suggested strongly, and demanded angrly.

I've threatened to withhold contributions, to actively work against those in question, and to withhold my vote.

Finally I followed through on my threats.............

Still nothing

[Sprite518]

You have got to be kidding what you wrote? I guess you have not read the Fair Tax book, or you would have not written this?

[stevestras]

This is ridiculous. It will never make it to law.

I continue to believe the "Fairtax" momentum does a disservice to the intent of tax reform (simplification). Flat tax is the only way to go as it is incremental enough to actually make it.

[vrwc0915]

If the ballot box fails you can try the soap box, if that fails well the cartridge box is the last option.

[Dead Corpse]

This past weekend I re-packed my Bug Out Bag and re-loaded every empty cartridge I had on hand.

Ready when y'all are...

[EternalVigilance]

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Personally, I always figured this was a very long political war we were in to regain the liberties and prosperity that have been stripped away by the communist-inspired income tax. And quite frankly, while I kept hope alive, I never expected the current crop of Republican 'leaders' to actually act to implement fundamental tax reform.

So, we keep on keeping on. Make the FairTax a make-or-break-issue for politicians.

We have a strong core of elected leaders in the Congress who are with us, especially in the House.

It is up to us to send them strong reinforcements.

[EternalVigilance]

Sensible people don't want it to come to that.


Real change never comes from the politicians.

It comes from the people.

[balrog666]

Ditto for medical insurance premium deductions for employers.

I can tell you right now what will happen on the one: employers will increase employee costs and co-pays to reduce their costs to the deductible amount and let their employees go bitch to their elected "representatives". Thanks, Congress.

And, in spite of the commission's press release, the home mortgage reduction does nothing to help lower income people buy a home, so that one is just a straight tax increase and will utterly fail in Congress.

But I still suspect a (small [camel's nose in size]) VAT or federal sales tax will be included in the final recommendations.

[unixfox]

And everybody thought I was being too pessimistic by saying, the commission would DO NOTHING that mattered.

Too bad I was right.

[doggieboy]

I had much higher expectations from this commission. Now I'm going outside to see what color the sky is in the world that I'm been living in.

[vrwc0915]

I agree 100% no one wants it to come to that!

[EternalVigilance]

Flat tax is the only way to go as it is incremental enough to actually make it.

If you're not on the President's Tax Commission, you might as well be.

What you advocate amounts to exactly what they are advocating...rearranging deck chairs on the Titantic.

Income taxes in any form are anathema to American freedom.

The income tax is fundamentally flawed from its inception, and no American patriot should give those who support its continuance a scrap of aid or comfort.

[ancient_geezer]

Flat tax is the only way to go as it is incremental enough to actually make it.

We started with a flat tax, incremental is all it is about. Incremental dickering with the code right back to where we are.

"A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every man's business; the eye of the federal inspector will be in every man's counting house....The law will of necessity have inquisical features, it will provide penalties, it will create complicated machinery. Under it men will be hauled into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the tax payer. An army of federal inspectors, spies, and detectives will descend upon the state."
-- Virginian House Speaker Richard E. Byrd, 1910, predicting the consequences of an income tax.

The problem with a Flat Tax, is it is still an income tax, IRS into everyone's business from stem to stern. You may want to take a look at:

Flat Tax as Seen by a Tax Preparer
by Vern Hoven

It isn't the rate structure or size of the form you fill out that makes an income tax system a nightmare, it Congress' continual dinkering and redefining income to suit the politcal whims all the time and the bureaucracy behind it that is there to make sure what you put on that form is accurate in the IRS's eyes.

 

Source: CCH Inc. Number of pages in the CCH Standard Federal Tax Reporter, as found on Cato website.

The NRST will allow every voter (for the first time) an opportunity to actually see what their government costs them on every receipt. It is only out of knowledge, that one can expect an electorate to exercise it's most important function, that "Eternal Vigilence" that is so necessary to preserving liberty.

[Pylot]

The commission proposed reducing the caps in order to make up for the loss in revenue from the proposed elimination of the AMT.

It is absolutely an increase in taxes to someone!

There is nothing incoherent about Neal's recommendations.

Eliminating one of several deductions (or all of them) and replacing the current code with a program that has everyone pay taxes is a great way to get all Americans engaged in the system.

Your statement would be closer to coherent if you read the commissions recommendations and/or the Fair Tax book.

95% of all taxes are paid by the top 50% of the income earners in America. Why let half the nation sit on the sidelines and benefit from the money everyone else is forced to pay?

[stevestras]

Guys, I'm all for your goals. You will never get there from here, though.

We should simplify first, without eliminating witholding before taking a jump off the cliff. Romantically, I love the idea of eliminating witholding. Realistically, I see no way of getting there from the current status.

[stevestras]

Members of this group, from www.taxreformpanel.gov are as follows:

Panel Members
Connie Mack III (Chairman) Senior Advisor, King & Spalding LLP, and former U.S. Senator. Senator Mack served as Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee and was a member of the Finance and Banking committees.

John Breaux (Vice-Chairman), former U.S. Senator. Senator Breaux served on the Finance Committee and the sub-committee on Taxation and IRS Oversight.

William Eldridge Frenzel, former Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Mr. Frenzel served on the Budget Committee and the Ways and Means Committee. Mr. Frenzel is a Guest Scholar at the Brookings Institution.

Elizabeth Garrett, Sydney M. Irmas Professor of Public Interest Law, Legal Ethics and Political Science, University of Southern California. Ms. Garrett served as Legislative Director and Tax and Budget Counsel to former U.S. Senator David L. Boren.

Edward P. Lazear, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution and Professor of Human Resources, Management and Economics, Stanford University's Graduate School of Business. Mr. Lazear is the founding editor of the Journal of Labor Economics.

Timothy J. Muris, Foundation Professor, George Mason School of Law and Of Counsel, O'Melveny & Myers LLP. Mr. Muris served as Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission from 2001 to 2004.

James Michael Poterba, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Mr. Poterba serves as Associate Department Head. He has taught at MIT since 1982.

Charles O. Rossotti, Senior Advisor, The Carlyle Group. Mr. Rossotti served from 1997 to 2002 as Commissioner of Internal Revenue. He formerly served as the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of American Management Systems.

Liz Ann Sonders, Chief Investment Strategist, Charles Schwab. Ms. Sonders joined U.S. Trust, a division of Charles Schwab, in 1999 as a Managing Director and member of its Investment Policy Committees.

Panel Staff
Jeffrey F. Kupfer, Executive Director

[EternalVigilance]

Continued cynical tinkering with the income tax code interests me not in the least.

It gets us nowhere that matters.

Never has, never will.

It's a useless and cynical exercise in fooling the citizens of this country and continuing the wholesale looting of our liberty and our treasure.

It's a continually losing game for me, my children and my grandchildren.

So, I ain't playin'.

[ancient_geezer]

We should simplify first, without eliminating witholding before taking a jump off the cliff.

Been there done that with the Reagan reforms.

Didn't last long and nary a pause in the the climb of complexity of the actual tax code to be seen.

The base problem of any income tax system is that complexity, by it's very nature, is inherent to separating income from merely return of one's vested capital, and the regulatory environent that must exist to assure accuracy of returns.

Those that fail to learn from history are forever doomed to repeat it.

Realistically, I see no way of getting there from the current status.

You do it, by making sure that Congress Critter's are held accountable for the legislation they enact.

Bottomline, the responsibility lay with us, the electorate.

"The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men."
- Plato -

"The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
-John Philpot Curran: Speech upon the Right of Election, 1790.

[stevestras]

My point was that the "all or nothing" approach from sales tax advocates hurts tax reform efforts. If both sides got together, I believe they could work together and enact a postcard type system like Armey proposed. Primarily because the elimination of witholding could be postponed.

[groanup]

Go here and click on "comments" on the left. Let'm hear from you:

http://www.taxreformpanel.gov/

[pigdog]

Ah ... one of the Squirrels chimes in with his nonsense.

Since the Panel is supposed to come up with a revenue neutral, they must find some way to "pay" for these tax decreases they are going to suggest. That means RAISING tax rates somewhere or causing additional items to be brought into the tax base.

The FairTax is already revenue neutral and offers huge numbers of benefits to both the individual taxpayer and to the economy as well. It will also generate more tax revenue from the illegal economy since every time they buy taxable things at retail with their illegal income they will be paying for a part of their own tax burden that you and I now bear (or perhaps you don't).

The comments by Boortz are right on the money.

[Dead Corpse]

Boortz just mention the Tax Committees Comments page. Click here...

Do it later though. "Service Unavailable" since he mentioned it. They must be getting slammed right now.

[pigdog]

Just keep it up in the same vein. Congress needs to feel the heat that a stupid set of suggestions by the Panel will generate onto them (our elected reps).

It won't take them long to realize people want real reform even if the Nine Nincompoops do not. Keep the pressure on. This issue will be a huge one for reelection for many of them - and they know it.

[EternalVigilance]

Again, tweak away. But no matter how much mascera you paint on the income tax monster, it will still be a monster.

And a political note: Such tweaks will leave the electorate cold. In fact, the cynical gamesmanship will end up ticking off more voters than it ever attracts.

[pigdog]

What the Panel is doing is merely stirring up tax resentment so that we may be able to get REAL reform via the FairTax.

It is what Congress (the House, presently) does that matters, not the report of the Panel to Treasury.

[pigdog]

A VAT with an income tax would be the worst possible combination.

The FairTax, OTOH, eliminates the income (etc.) taxes and cannot be made into a VAT.

[swarthyguy]

>A VAT with an income tax

Yup.

Every time I hear the word reform I cringe.

Bend Over, Here It Comes Again.

[pigdog]

Then, REALISTICALLY, you need to become more informed on all aspects of the FairTax. It is the most studied, modelled, and analyzed tax plan ever to appear before congress.

[pigdog]

Any income-gbased tax system - whether flat or round - is bogged down with the same sort of baggage as the present system and will quickly become almost identical to it.

Don't you realize the K-Street crowd are just chomping at the bit that a Flat Tax is adopted to give them even more leeway (meaning higher fees) in "introducing" changes into any income-based tax system. That's what they do.

With the FairTax that sort of political mischief is done away with.

[Big Red Clay]

Check out the fairtax website. You misconceptions about how it works will be cleared up pretty quickly. The Fairtax has no deductions because you no one pays income taxes. Check out the site, or better yet, read the book. It is pretty interesting and you will find both Boortz and Linder's take on taxes both coherent and eye opening.
I just got done reading the WSJ article about the tax reform committee. They said that neither a VAT or an NRST would work because they are "too complex". Are you freakin' kidding me? Compared to the convoluted cluster f*%# of a tax code we have now, the fairtax is like Dick and Jane. I am more and more convinced that our "representatives", both Repub and 'rat, will never allow a real reform of the tax code that would divest them of some of their precious power over the taxpaying serfs that feed the big bloated beast of government. While I support the NRST, I certainly would not mind the flat tax (as long as withholding was eliminated). Someone needs to do something. Clearly those in the Congress don't think the folks who pay the bills should have any say in it, though.

[ancient_geezer]

I believe they could work together and enact a postcard type system like Armey proposed. Primarily because the elimination of witholding could be postponed.

My bottomline, elimination of the income tax, the primary reason I'm interested in tax reform at all.

Flat Tax keeps an income tax and does nothing to eliminate the SS/Medicare wage tax which is just another income tax albeit with a cap.

Both are an anethama to any concept of personal privacy or liberty. They've got to go and a Flat Tax is just a route to hanging on to them for another century. No thanks.

Control of one's income and first option on what is done with it is fundamental to the exercise of property right and empowerment of the citizen.

Tax reform is not an issue of economics, it is an issue of personal Freedom, and empowerment.

 

I discussed the importance of abolishing the income tax because of its tendency to form a habit of servility in the souls of a people that accepts it.

Servility of soul is bad not only in itself, it is also an open door through which will soon walk the abuses of ambitious government power.

Leaders who find themselves with governmental power over a servile people will be quick to conclude that such a people exist to serve them.

Alan Keyes 1999

[pigdog]

Hear, Hear!! I'll drink to that ... in fact I already have.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

We should also let the WH know of our views, The more of us the better.

[pigdog]

Yes, absolutely!

[Mind-numbed Robot]

He calls the reduction of these deductions a tax increase.(It is unclear as to whether these are tax increases without knowing if the marginal tax rate is lowered at the same time.)

I am assuming you mean by that that if there are offsetting decreases in the rate then there is no total increase.

But the so-called "Fair Tax" eliminated any preferential treatment for home loan interest and medical insurance premiums altogether.

If the reduction of preferential treatment is, in Boortz's words, a tax increase. What is the elimination of these preferential treatments? It must be a tax increase magnitudes of order greater than the commission recommends. But that is precisely what the so-called "Fair Tax" does. So Boortz is decrying the recommendations of the commission as a tax increase while simultaneously advocating even a higher tax increase.

Are you sure you want to stick with that statement? Are you sure you don't understand, as you seemed to in your first statement, that replacing those other taxes, the one's that are eliminated, with the new NRST is an offset monetarily? It is a complete change in government philosophy that is at stake, not the money. The money stays the same. How do you understand it in one case and not the other?

When it comes to tax policy, though, Boortz is often incoherent.

Be careful what you say to the Kettle, Mr. Pot.

[stevestras]

With the FairTax that sort of political mischief is done away with

You can't be serious. Perhaps you've had to much to drink if you think that a sales tax will eliminate political mischief and tinkering. We must walk before we run and conversion to a sales tax is sprinting.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

We should simplify first, without eliminating witholding before taking a jump off the cliff.

Eliminating withholding would be as difficult as passing the NRST. Withholding is the key to the scheme called the income tax.

[FreeKeys]

The Tax Reform Commission is rejecting an NRST based on the estimates of one carefully-chosen economist who is willing to stipulate that such a national sales tax would have to be in the 60-80% range. This is totally fraudulent, of course.

>>>>>>>>>>>

Find all 33 ways to listen to BOORtz over the web --
including evenings and weekends -- HERE:
http://FreedomKeys.com/boortzcast.htm

<<<<<<<<<<<

[pigdog]

I amVERY serious.

But ELIMINATE tinkering and political mischief??? No, not at all, but it will greatly minimize it and make tax laws much more difficult to manipulate since a rate incorease (or preferential exemptions) affects ALL FairTax payers and not in a hidden way as with the income tax (which can easily be hidden and directed at or for only a certain group).

[Conservative Goddess]

"Time for a 2nd American Revolution."

Damn straight.

[Principled]

THe tax base gets much bigger under the nrst HR 25, allowing a lower rate to collect the same revenue. THose guys have been in DC too long.