Posted on 11/19/2005 11:06:05 AM PST by Eaglewatcher
That look at history suggests that things are going to get a lot worse, and eventually a lot bloodier, before the get better.
" A person using or consuming a taxable property or service in the United States is not liable for the tax imposed by this section if the person pays the tax to a person selling the taxable property or service and receives from such person a purchaser's receipt within the meaning of section 510."
... both here and later throughout the bill it is the seller who has the onus of proving his correct handling of the tax ... not the buyer. The buyer only has to reveive a receipt, not produce it; that would be a seller's problem.
Complete and utter nonsense. Do some research on the FairTax.
Maybe it is time to throw some tea in the harbor.
Abolish the IRS? Wheeee. What a party. Let's wish for the abolition of Liberalism, too! Both institutions are pervasive, counter-productive and suck the life force out of everything good and natural.
Your logic seems intact but you could use a little work on your confidence and optimism.
The secret is for us to continue the ground swell so that there are more who see the key to maintaining their power, staying in office, is to support and pass the FairTax. We don't need to change human nature, we just need to apply the proper incentives.
Right now the lobbyists apply the incentives through campaign contributions, etc., but they want something in return. The purpose of the contributions is so that they can persuade us to vote for them. In other words, it us they are after, the money is just a way to get to us. We can cut out the middle man and let them know ourselves what will be required to get our votes. Just pass the FairTax on leave us alone. We don't need or want any loopholes.
We need to stay together and work, not say, "Yeah, great idea but good luck!" The grassroots is finally having some effect on the border issue as well as this one. Be a supporter, not a naysayer.
Are you aware that the FairTax as presented by HR25 has a provision wherein every family gets a "prebate" of $180-$700 a MONTH (depending on family size)? If so, how do you see it as still being "regressive," Jay?
SEC. 506. BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PRODUCTION.
` `In all disputes concerning taxes imposed by this subtitle, the person engaged in a dispute with the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall have the burden of production of documents and records but the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary shall have the burden of persuasion. In all disputes concerning an exemption claimed by a purchaser, if the seller has on file an intermediate sale or export sale certificate from the purchaser and did not have reasonable cause to believe that the certificate was improperly provided by the purchaser with respect to such purchase (within the meaning of section 103), then the burden of production of documents and records relating to that exemption shall rest with the purchaser and not with the seller.
YES!
Let's replace the Marxist progressive income tax with the FairTax and abolish the IRS!
I'd prefer 1%.
Replacing one tax for another isn't going to abolish the IRS. Different tax, same old crap.
You have to read all of the bill, not just parts you like.
You intentionally neglected to account for SEC. 103 that underpins SEC. 506, or will you claim that you didn't read SEC 103?
In all disputes concerning an exemption claimed by a purchaser, if the seller has on file an intermediate sale or export sale certificate from the purchaser and did not have reasonable cause to believe that the certificate was improperly provided by the purchaser with respect to such purchase (within the meaning of section 103),
You already know what the underpinning section 103 says. It says the seller is accountable to the government for the sales tax.
SEC. 103. RULES RELATING TO COLLECTION AND REMITTANCE OF TAX.
`(a) Liability for Collection and Remittance of the Tax- Except as provided otherwise by this section, any tax imposed by this subtitle shall be collected and remitted by the seller of taxable property or services (including financial intermediation services).
You need to acknowledge your error and correct it.
In all disputes concerning an exemption claimedDoes the law also say that all disputes concern exemptions? NO! nor does the half of the paragraph you posted preclude the "taxing authority" from making you (as in anyone) produce a receipt showing a tax was paid....
The first sentence (you left out) in #506 is in regard to any dispute regarding the tax the last sentence is regarding any exemptions...NOT THE TAX.
Nice try though.
Your bogus assertion that the government is going to hound typical buyers of consumables for not paying the sales tax is just that, a bogus assertion.
I post the following sections in full: SEC 103 and SEC 506. You'll never, not ever acknowledge your intent to misconstrue the meaning of SEC 103 and SEC 506 IMO, thus I post the following for the benefit of people that chose an honest reading and comprehension of the meanings. The complete bill, HR25 can be read here.
`SEC. 103. RULES RELATING TO COLLECTION AND REMITTANCE OF TAX.
`(a) Liability for Collection and Remittance of the Tax- Except as provided otherwise by this section, any tax imposed by this subtitle shall be collected and remitted by the seller of taxable property or services (including financial intermediation services).
`(b) Tax to Be Remitted by Purchaser in Certain Circumstances-
`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of taxable property or services purchased outside of the United States and imported into the United States for use or consumption in the United States, the purchaser shall remit the tax imposed by section 101.
`(2) CERTAIN WAGES OR SALARY- In the case of wages or salary paid by a taxable employer which are taxable services, the employer shall remit the tax imposed by section 101.
`(c) Conversion of Business or Export Property or Services- Property or services purchased for a business purpose in a trade or business or for export (sold untaxed pursuant to section 102(a)) that is subsequently converted to personal use shall be deemed purchased at the time of conversion and shall be subject to the tax imposed by section 101 at the fair market value of the converted property as of the date of conversion. The tax shall be due as if the property had been sold at the fair market value during the month of conversion. The person using or consuming the converted property is liable for and shall remit the tax.
`(d) Seller Relieved of Liability in Certain Cases- In the case of any taxable property or service which is sold untaxed pursuant to section 102(a), the seller shall be relieved of the duty to collect and remit the tax imposed under section 101 on such purchase if the seller--
`(1) received in good faith, and retains on file for the period set forth in section 509, a copy of a registration certificate from the purchaser, and
`(2) did not, at the time of sale, have reasonable cause to believe that the buyer was not registered pursuant to section 502.
`(e) Purchaser Liable to Collect and Remit in Certain Cases- In the case of any taxable property or service which is sold untaxed pursuant to section 102, if the seller is relieved by reason of subsection (d) of the duty to collect and remit the tax imposed by section 101, then the duty to pay any tax due shall rest with the purchaser.
`(f) Barter Transactions- If gross payment for taxable property or services is made in other than money, then the person responsible for collecting and remitting the tax shall remit the tax to the sales tax administering authority in money as if gross payment had been made in money at the tax inclusive fair market value of the taxable property or services purchased.
`(g) Intercompany Sales- Firms that make purchases from affiliated firms that are untaxed pursuant to section 102, or make sales to affiliated firms that are untaxed pursuant to section 102, shall not need to comply with the requirements of subsection (d) (relating to certificates) for said purchases or sales to remain untaxed.
SEC. 506. BURDEN OF PERSUASION AND BURDEN OF PRODUCTION.
`In all disputes concerning taxes imposed by this subtitle, the person engaged in a dispute with the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary, as the case may be, shall have the burden of production of documents and records but the sales tax administering authority or the Secretary shall have the burden of persuasion. In all disputes concerning an exemption claimed by a purchaser, if the seller has on file an intermediate sale or export sale certificate from the purchaser and did not have reasonable cause to believe that the certificate was improperly provided by the purchaser with respect to such purchase (within the meaning of section 103), then the burden of production of documents and records relating to that exemption shall rest with the purchaser and not with the seller.
LLL - stands for Looey Loves to Lie. And he'll never admit to it or evemn to any errors he makes.
He's so far out in left field on this that he stepped in a cow pattie.
The FairTax will obtain a lot of tax revenue from the illegal economy - far more than the income tax now does.
Actually every flat tax scheme that has been presented also retains the payroll tax system so you need to add 15.3% onto the 17% to get the actual rate.
This has been discussed often. These people are paying taxes to the Federal Govt right now when they buy those chains, jackets, and shoes. They are paying them in the form of embedded taxes in the range of about 22% est. that is included in the prices of those goods. Under the FairTax, they will pay about the same amount, according to the FairTaxers. In both the current system, and the FairTax system there would be ZERO revenue created on illegal black market purchases.
The FairTax will obtain ZERO revenue from the illegal economy.
That (17%) figure is the one proposed by Steve Forbes. ....and I disagree with it, obviously.
If they spend their ill gotten gains they would, for once, be paying taxes to the FEDERAL government.
Not if they spend their money in the black market (and of course they would), which would be huge in a "fair tax" system.
Talk of tax reform is almost useless unless we have massive cuts in spending. :-\
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.