Why Breaking Up (the Tax Code) Is So Hard to Do

e21 ^ | 01/07/2015 | Caroline Baum

[ealgeone]

Why a tax credit for those with no earnings?

[coloradan]

There are proposals for a tax credit for everybody. It’s simpler that way - you don’t have to prove your income, which means for a consumption tax (with rebate) that you don’t have to keep any records of your income at all.

[coloradan]

Because some can’t abide a non-progressive tax.

[ealgeone]

And that’s the problem.

[ealgeone]

You sell me a wagon you don’t use anymore. Is that taxed? Who reports?

[SpeakerToAnimals]

Does that mean someone making $10/hour ( proposed minimum wage ), which means about $24,000 a year will pay nearly $2000 in taxes?

Yes. That gives them incentive to vote conservative instead of gibsmedat.

[lewislynn]

Reduced earnings leads to poverty and economic weakness while reduced consumption leads to savings and to economic strength.

When everyone stops buying the product/service you provide, how will that improve your economic conditions and NOT reduce YOUR earnings and lead YOU to poverty?

[coloradan]

Whether there should or should not be a regressive tax is a separate issue from the present complexity, compliance cost, intrusiveness and loophole-ridden tax code we have today.

My understanding of the National Retail Sales Tax is that whatever has sales tax today would have the added NRST added to it, such that if there was already a tax reporting requirement for any given transaction prior to the NRST, nothing changes.

[coloradan]

Not everyone would stop, and indeed everyone would have more “income” inasmuch as they would no longer have to pay taxes on the income. IOW everyone gets a “raise” upon enactment of the NRST, but goods cost more by a corresponding amount (since the NRST is being proposed as being revenue neutral). In any case, it sure beats having everyone have to pay taxes even if they are trying to save money simply for the fact of earning it, which is far less just.

[Vaduz]

D.C. isn’t in business for helping it’s in it for the money.

[right way right]

Tax revolt.
Defund the beast.

[Nip]

And we have a WINNER!!

There will no tax reform as long as politicians, of both parties, continue to use the tax code as a way to raise money.

Remember the two major lusts of any politician - personal power and money. Without any money there can be no re-elections hence the lust for personal power goes unquenched.

I doubt we will ever see an organization like AA for politicians to wean them off their uncontrollable lusts.

[lewislynn]

Nice try but you didn’t answer the question on how YOU would benefit from your pie in the sky plan for everyone else.

[coloradan]

Your question presumes something that is not likely to be true. But to answer your question, it means all the time I waste doing taxes I could instead use doing something productive. And so could everyone else.

[nh1]

What’s considered gross income?

It’s easy if you work for someone, what about self employed? Do they get to deduct expenses?

How about landlords? Are they taxed on gross receipts or do they get to deduct expenses?

[i_robot73]

1) Like...don’t forget the 17th (see #5)
2) IMHO, it’s already illegal, but unenforced by pretzel lawyer logic...the 13th (income taxes are just gradients of slavery)
3) Only if you uncouple the biz from the reams of regulations/etc. to make the U.S. more competitive
4) Like even better. Fair Tax, w/out that stupid pre-bate

5) I’d add, the Fed. bill is proportional to the States, let the State determine how best to pay its part of the bill

[i_robot73]

1) bingo, and I can see nothing unconstitutional.
...
3) As it stands, are we still not a nation of Laws, not of Men? In this instance, I see no authority to exempt themselves

4) All members of Congress are to be paid by their State respectively. There is no reason for the perks, $$, etc.

[central_va]

I can never decide which is more evil, the 16th or the 17th?

[skinkinthegrass]

I can never decide which is more
evil, the 16th or the 17th?that's easy, the 17th, one begets the other...

"less taxes, Walker Watch: Wisconsin ranked at top in tax cuts in 2014'

[Ghost of SVR4]

Here is one way we can start. States collect Federal withholdings like an escrow. When Fedzilla starts getting uppity (take amnesty for instance), the state does not release the funds. The states need to hold fedzilla at bay and protect their citizens, “escrow” would be a way to start starving the fed and get it back in line with doing only what it was Constitutionally created to do.