Fair tax advocates claim that it would get rid of the IRS but it would likely be replaced with another agency by a different name. The proposal promises that individuals under a certain income threshold would get some money back at the end of the year. Who would administer this? Unlike the flat tax, the fair tax as a replacement for the income tax has never been implemented in any country. We have no real world examples of what a fair tax would look like in action. Perhaps the fair tax isn’t as politically feasible as the flat tax. It’s important to remember that repealing a constitutional amendment requires the approval of 290 House members, 67 Senators and a majority of the legislatures in three-fourths of the states.
Fair Tax, hands down, no question. Taxes consumption; not income. Any other choice leaves way too much un-Constitutional power in the hands of Washington politicians.
our current tax code started as a FLAT tax...
nuff said.
Fair will put power into the hands of the people... don’t like the government... don’t buy new goods...
less revenue for mischief.
teeman
If the flat tax you are talking about is a flat income tax then leave me out please! Under and income tax - ANY form of income tax - the government would still be the one who gets to decide what does or does not constitute income and would thus still have the power to use the tax code to reward their friends and punish their enemies. Like most of our founders I would prefer a tax on articles of consumption which is EXACTLY what the fairtax is!
bump
Any tax, which violates the rights of man is an immoral tax.
Our rights come from Nature and Nature’s God. They are not given by men or constitutions. Constitutions and the statues from which they come, are either in harmony with natural law or are in rebellion to the Creator and nature.
Two such rights, as codified in our constitution are the rights to be free in our persons, papers and effects. The other is the right to not be forced to provide evidence against ourselves.
A tax on income, be it flat, wavy or full of loop holes, requires us by force, to surrender those inalienable rights, and thus is defacto, immoral.
Only a tax on trade is a moral tax which does not violate the natural rights of freemen.
The FairTax debate on rates, margins, rebates, prebates is interesting from an academic point of view, but it is the only serious proposal which is moral in its foundation.
Trade and commerce are the only legitimate, if there are to be any at all, means of taxation, to which freemen should consent.
All others, and especially a tax on income, are an abomination.
The 16th amendment is the first order of business. It must be repealed ASAP. This is a herculean task and must be pursued with utmost vigor.
The Income Tax was simple once too.
Replacing it with a Flat Tax or Fair Tax for reasons of simplicity will suffer the same eventual fate of extreme complexity.
“we could end up with both an income tax and a national sales tax. The politicians in Washington would love to have both sources of money.”
There is nothing preventing us from getting both right now.
“We have no real world examples of what a fair tax would look like in action.”
How about TN or I think Florida has no income tax.
I like the national sales tax over the income or corporate tax simply because it smacks every citizen in the face with every purchase that they make. They are reminded every day of the burden of the federal government. This alone would become the single most useful tool to advocate shrinking the fed gov’t.
How do you propose that the flat tax bring the total cost of the federal gov’t into light? I think it still maintains corporate taxes at a different level, so that tax is going to remain buried in the cost of goods.