The other night, I considered the merits of both a flat tax and a fair tax (which is what 999 turns into in phase 2).
In the end, I decided the fair tax was a superior alternative to the flat tax, since it keeps tax rates more salient—i.e., everyone is constantly reminded how much they’re paying in taxes every time they make a purchase. Whereas with a flat tax, you only see it on your paychecks and tax returns. I’d rather keep it constantly thrown up in people’s face how much they’re being extorted by the State.
Fair tax also encourages more savings and investment, since it’s only a tax on consumption.
Plus, it minimizes class warfare tactics by better assuring that everyone has “skin in the game” so to speak. An income tax is still a tax on success, whether it’s flat or progressive.
A flat tax plan would also keep the loathsome IRS in place. This is undesirable.
I have reached the same conclusion, for the same reasons, so far. But we’ll see if the actual Perry plan addresses these concerns in any way.
As we’ve gone through this process of analysis and debate, I’ve become more and more convinced that the primary reason we need massive tax reform is, first, to preserve our freedom and then, secondarily, because it will retore our economic prosperity.
The Perry plan, so far, does not appear to have any mechnism for *broadening the tax base.* Not only is this one of the animating principles of the Laffer Curve, making more takers into taxpayers MUST be accomplished before that 49% of the population goes over 50% — and we completely lose, forever, any residual political power we have to vote down their bottomless demands for more and more free stuff.
Yes, this is accomplished under 999 by the NRST (and to some extent by extending the income tax to everyone, though those at the poverty line would have an exemption), and this is contentious.
But we have no choice but to restructure the taxpayer base. If we don’t, simply scrapping the tax code won’t matter in the end.