Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fair Tax, Flawed Tax
OpinionJournal.com ^ | August 26, 2007 | BRUCE BARTLETT

Posted on 08/25/2007 9:11:11 PM PDT by gpapa

Does adding 30% to the price of every house sold sound like a good idea to you?

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's unexpectedly strong second-place showing in the recent Iowa Republican straw poll is widely attributed to his support for the FairTax.

For those who never heard about it, the FairTax is a national retail sales tax that would replace the entire current federal tax system. It was originally devised by the Church of Scientology in the early 1990s as a way to get rid of the Internal Revenue Service, with which the church was then at war (at the time the IRS refused to recognize it as a legitimate religion). The Scientologists' idea was that since almost all states have sales taxes, replacing federal taxes with the same sort of tax would allow them to collect the federal government's revenue and thereby get rid of their hated enemy, the IRS.

Rep. John Linder (R., Ga.) and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R., Ga.) have introduced legislation (H.R. 25/S. 1025) to implement the FairTax. They assert that a rate of 23% would be sufficient to replace federal individual and corporate income taxes as well as payroll and estate taxes. Mr. Linder's Web site claims that U.S. gross domestic product will rise 10.5% the first year after enactment, exports will grow by 26%, and real investment spending will increase an astonishing 76%.

(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: fairness; fairtax; tax; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: lewislynn

For a business to be able to remit 23% of their gross income and not come out broke as a result, they’d have to add 30% to their prices to cover their new tax.
*************************************
NEGATIVE; the cost of goods would go down a like amount basically leaving prices unchanged , if you had read the book or bill you would have noticed the provisions for the cutover to the new system...


41 posted on 08/26/2007 3:51:05 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa
The FairTaxers make many assumptions about human behavior that are deeply flawed.

They're points of policy that need to be addressed - is this the desired end goal, not falling into the same mantra as the FairTaxers. I think we've come to the point where people are fed up enough with the existing system to be willing to talk not only about options, but hopefully, the profound changes in our entire economy those changes will bring.

Or we can continue on the FT is good vs the FT is bad debate, and end up in a circular argument.

42 posted on 08/26/2007 3:51:17 AM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kingu

the productive people who pay are fed up with the amount they have to pay, the majority is not fed up, they just want the productive to pay more so they can have more...


43 posted on 08/26/2007 3:54:28 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: navyguy

“Mr. Bartlett was deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy from 1988 to 1993.”

Thats why. When you carry water for the system, you tend to defend the system.

Once the imbedded taxes are wrung out of the goods and services, that 1 billion tank will cost the govt 777mil[or so] then the 23% is added for a cost of 1 bil.
[Don’t flog me for the math...its still dark here...]

Point is that this guy doesn’t have a clue and doesn’t want others to have one either.


44 posted on 08/26/2007 4:00:02 AM PDT by Adder (hialb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Well, I don’t have a big problem with the complexity of the current mess. My personal taxes take me a couple of hours a year on TurboTax, and my prep for annual business return is about a half day a year, and I pay the CPA less than $800 a year. Total time to do all quarterly federal and GA returns and remit taxes is about another half day total. So, my compliance costs are tops— less than $800 and less than 0.5% of my time.

But the biggest problem with the FairTax is that it won’t work at 30% due to improper calculatin’ on their part, and the fact that evasion will occur at rates greater than 30% sales tax requiring even higher rates causing more evasion...


45 posted on 08/26/2007 4:00:11 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
NEGATIVE; the cost of goods would go down a like amount basically leaving prices unchanged , if you had read the book or bill you would have noticed the provisions for the cutover to the new system..

Please apply the book's theories to twenty ounces of pure gold, purchased retail. Open up your newspaper, find out the present spot price of gold, call up your local gold investment broker, ask what it'd run you to buy that twenty ounces (physical) of gold.

There, you've now the exact amount of money built in to account for taxes, profits, salaries and cost of business. You know it to the penny. Please tell me how fair tax will squeeze that five percent over.

Stop reading a book, and apply the theories to your own business, or standard investments. Figure out how it will change life, then debate those issues, rather than using fatally flawed arguments that are simply written out. Sorry, there's only one book I believe word for word, and Fair Tax has another 1995 years to mature before it can even catch up to today.

46 posted on 08/26/2007 4:01:03 AM PDT by kingu (No, I don't use sarcasm tags - it confuses people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Adder

If people are keeping 100% of their paychecks (in other words the people keep their income and payroll taxes currently being removed from their paychecks), then their employers do NOT see a large reduction in their costs, and there is NO large reduction in prices before tax. Maybe 7-8% reduction for domestic items with a lot of labor in them.

When you have an 8% price reduction, it brings the $100 item to $92. But the 30% Fairtax brings the price up to about $120 (VS $100 now). I think the FairTax (for reasons stated above and in those threads) is too low and would really be at least 36% to start and likely quite a bit higher. I think it would start to approach mid-40% range before they added back in the emergency income tax on “rich” people making over $75k or so.


47 posted on 08/26/2007 4:06:54 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

Then you misunderstood my point. I was discussing why people want to keep the current code, not why some are against the “Fair Tax” itself.


48 posted on 08/26/2007 4:08:05 AM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: gpapa
Does adding 30% to the price of every house sold sound like a good idea to you?

If you add 40% to the take-home pay I'm using to pay for it, then, yeah.

Any other questions?

I was resistant to the notion of shifting our tax burden to the "fair tax," or a national sales tax, until I heard the notion of reimbursements. It was first floated by the Cato Institute, I think, and is now part of the Fair Tax proposals.

The idea is simple: figure out how much money someone at the poverty line paid in tax, and then refund that amount. The same amount to everyone. The assumption is that everyone at the poverty line spends every thin dime on necessities -- that's what the line is supposed to mean.

If you spend a lot more, you pay a lot more, and that's part of the idea. If you pay less, you might get back more than you paid, and that's part of the idea. Works for me. Bump up prices by a big percentage, and bump up my bank balance by a bigger percentage, and I can learn to live with that.

49 posted on 08/26/2007 4:08:28 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

What about people who already have saved after-tax money? What do you tell them now that their saved money is worth 20-30% less than it was the day before the FairTax was made the law of the land?


50 posted on 08/26/2007 4:11:41 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

As the other poster stated, in comes out of other goods, but it also comes out of the markup. Additonally, items may be sold at at or below cost to get customers in to buy the stuff that isn’t on sale or to get rid of inventory. Using “loss leaders” to increase sales is an established practice.

I’d also like to point out that complicated taxes cost alot more than the taxes themselves.


51 posted on 08/26/2007 4:15:19 AM PDT by visualops (artlife.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: gpapa
The government needs X-dollars of tax money to run. One way or another, they are going to get this.

The problem is, initially an increased sales tax will hit the retired and people on disability very hard. It will also have an effect on newer buyers on the purchase of automobiles, furniture, basic household items, etc.

The main benefit it will have is taxing individuals that hide income. However, who is going to enforce the payment of sales tax. Right off, you will end up with a huge black market of untaxed items.

Also, during the initial implementation of this program, there will be a problem of sticker shock due to the increased cost of the sales tax itself. I think people will quit buying high dollar items for at least a short period of time. I am not sure the economy could survive the transition period.

52 posted on 08/26/2007 4:20:21 AM PDT by U S Army EOD (Say Cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

That is a definite problem, and I’ll admit I don’t have a good answer. I’m one of those folks set to get screwed by the change-over. If I oaid income tax on a Roth IRA, and I take that money out to buy a can of beans with the fair tax attached, I’m paying tax twice on the same money.

Any change in the tax system will be subject to that problem. I don’t see any way to get around it; either you build a whole new bureaucracy to distinguish pre-tax from post-tax money, or you just suck it up. Any transition has short-term pain, and that shouldn’t blind us to the long-term benefit.

I repeat, for emphasis, that I’m one of the folks who will pay the double-tax. I still think it’s worth it in the long run.


53 posted on 08/26/2007 4:26:29 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

It’s one of many flaws in the FairTax plan. And not every tax reform plan will have the same problem. In this case, with the retail sales tax, you wouldn’t have the problem if people were expecting to get approximately their current take home pay (employees and business owners).

But the promise of 25% larger paychecks (the guy up higher in this thread is expecting a 40% higher paycheck) is where most of the problems with the FairTax stem from...


54 posted on 08/26/2007 4:35:53 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: taxcutisapayraise
Oops! Bartlett forgot to mention that the embedded income tax costs in the items he mentioned will be gone.

Gone where? Into price reductions or into the pockets of the workers and the business owners? I really don't see employees lining up to take pay cuts so that it may be passed to the consumer. Prices increase under the fair tax, period.

55 posted on 08/26/2007 4:43:40 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gpapa
It's foolish to believe sellers would lower prices of goods to reflect the elimination of "hidden" income taxes.

The world doesn't work that way.

Sellers would maintain prices and pocket the tax savings.

56 posted on 08/26/2007 4:50:16 AM PDT by NoControllingLegalAuthority
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
Sellers would maintain prices and pocket the tax savings.

Since sellers would be paying their employees 100% of their paychecks according to the FairTax mantras, there are very few tax savings to the business to begin with.

The business owner payroll is almost as much as before, he just cuts the whole check to the employee rather than giving the employee his after-withholding check, and writing checks to the FedGov in addition for the employee's FICA and income tax withholding...

57 posted on 08/26/2007 5:09:20 AM PDT by RobFromGa (FDT/TBD in 2008!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Always Right

It always amazes me to see how many of the FairTax supporters have bought into the Free Lunch— “100% paychecks, prices stay the same”. It’s kind of sad.

A little common sense is all that is needed...


58 posted on 08/26/2007 5:54:20 AM PDT by RobFromGa (It's the Spending, Stupid! (not the method of collection))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
The "Fair Tax" -- a river runs through it -- called De-nial
59 posted on 08/26/2007 5:59:20 AM PDT by xcamel (FDT/2008 -- talk about it >> irc://irc.freenode.net/fredthompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: television is just wrong
well, then there is no such thing as a fair tax.

Tax Rule # 1: The only fair tax is that tax that taxes you and and not me.

Tax Rule #2: When in doubt, deduct it.

Tax Rule #3: Who's gonna know?

Those are the only Tax Rules you need to memorize, because everything else about taxes changes all the time and you have to look it up.

And that is where this proposal will be weak, because the same politicians who refuse to accept term limits will tinker with the reimbursement portion of this tax code, just the way they practiced social engineering within the IRC.

60 posted on 08/26/2007 6:40:42 AM PDT by Bernard (The Fairness Doctrine should be applied to people who follow the rules to come to America legally)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson