CAVUTO REPORTS THAT BUSH CONSIDERING SCRAPPING THE IRS CODE!!!

Fox News Channel | November 6, 2002 | n/a

[Tree of Liberty]

Neil Cavuto just interviewed Mitchell E. Daniels, Jr., the director of the OMB, and Neil let it be known that he's hearing rumblings that Pres. Bush is considering a total re-write of the tax code and that SecTreas O'Neill is strongly pushing a national retail sales tax!

[William Terrell]

I've talked to a large range of people and business owners ove the course of three years. No one, without exception, has heard of an NRST. When I explained the structure of the NRST, all by one were horrified. I iinvite anyone here to try it.

The point is, if the NRST were publicized, and explained in a non-partisan manner (not using attempts to mislead and deceive, like calling it a "Fair Tax") it would be overwhelmingly rejected.

A complete cross section? How many people are registered to post on FR? What fraction is that of the adult population of workers? Double, or even triple it to include lurkers, what fraction of that of the adult population. People who post on FR have to own a computer, be literate in computer use, have the time and education to read, analyze and post. Who's profile is that?

Please point out the except from HR2525, the active bill, where poor people will not have to pay the NRST (except the provision that anyone can fill out an intrusive government forms asking personal information about household and occupants, much like the last census). If it's there it has been a recent change. If no recent change, then who're you trying to fool?

You've been stomping for this bonehead idea for years. How much do you make a year, Principled? If you eleminated your fed and FICA how much would that offset the purchases you normally make during that same period.

If you make high pay, then you're ok; if you make low pay then you're screwed, unless you fill out government forms monthly. Or if you're older and living on your retirement, you're screwed, unless you fill out the same forms as often.

After the NRST has been in effect for a couple years, how many people will end up filling that paperwork? Hummm? And what kind of watchdog organization will have to exeist to enforce honesty in those new returns? Would it be something like an organization that it is claimed to have been eliminated, the acronym for which started with an "I" and ended with an "S"? Hummmm?

So, post the new revision to HR2525. Maybe I'll change my tune.

[Protagoras]

If Bush got this done, he would go on Mount Rushmore.

He won't. And I don't say that in any way other than from a realistic assesment.

I am the first one to point out the hypocricy of the Republican party because I treasure freedom and constitutional government.

BUT, IF HE ACCOMPLISHES THIS. I WILL CARVE HIS IMAGE ON MT. RUSHMORE MYSELF WITH A POCKET KNIFE.

[Principled]

I've talked to a large range of people and business owners ove the course of three years. No one, without exception, has heard of an NRST.

I find that folks have heard of it and are curious.

When I explained the structure of the NRST, all by one were horrified.

That is likely due in large part to your ignorane of the bill and your love of the income tax.

I invite anyone here to try talking to others about the nrst.

As do I, but I also encourage anyone here to learn about the subject before making wild assertions.

The point is, if the NRST were publicized, and explained ... it would be overwhelmingly rejected.

So why are you so worried about it then?

A complete cross section?

Yes. A complete cross section. You have presented no data contrary. You don't have to own a computer to be on FR. I don't own this computer.

Please point out the except from HR2525, the active bill, where poor people will not have to pay the NRST.

Man you really know nothing about the bill. I'll let you look it up yourself on the thomas-loc site, or you'll blame me for posting links. All individuals, regardless of income level, will pay no tax on the necessities of life. If you don't believe me you just have to look it up by searhing hr2525 on the thomas-loc site that contains legislation.

No tax on necessities. Each family receives the tax due on necessites in advance each month (prebate). Hence no tax on necessites. The "onerous paperwork" you mention does not exist. "Onerous paperwork" is what the income tax gives us. If you want to get the prebate, you simply provide the number of adults and kids in your household to the SSA so they know how much to send you. Onerous? Sheesh

If you eleminated your fed and FICA how much would that offset the purchases you normally make during that same period.

This doens't make sense.

And you're wrong, you are not required ever to ask for a prebate. You are free to skip it. No problem. The SSA keeps up with SS#s of recipients today, they'll do it under the nrst too. No IRS needed because THERE'S NO DAMN REASON TO TRACK INCOME! Get it through your head!

[Zon]

As I said in my first post 348: "To all readers, a simple response is all that is needed. Read the Americans for Fair Tax at fairtax.org."

Only a tiny fraction of the people registered to post on FR have posted on this thread, so your statement is without merit.

You have such a small/narrow view. You limit yourself to this (FR) narrow slice of the world and this thread in particular. If not that, then you created a straw man just so you could kick it latter on in your post -- a narrow view bounded by irrationality. ...Well now, isn't that special -- NOT! Your self-limiting view is without merit.

But, even if the is a majority here, since when have a majority, if there is one in this case, ipso facto been right?

That straw man won't hunt. I never said or implied that the majority was right or wrong -- I never said one way or the other. Whether right or wrong is not the point.  The point is, as I said: "I have no need or desire to educate "heathens". That you don't want to educate yourself fine -- so be it." 678

 That seems to be what you are relying on, a "majority" is in favor of a NRST therefore it must be a good system.

You assume wrong. Probably the reason you assume wrong is because I won't cater to your desire for me to engage in "battle" with you. As I said, "I don't have a need or desire to educate heathens." That you're in the minority is that, to me, you're inconsequential and I have better use of my time. That was expressed in my first post. post 348 -- short and to the point.

Wait until the majority of retail businessmen, wage earners and people on fixed incomes weigh in. "Minority" indeed.

I see you're still arguing from a heathen perspective. The majority of people aren't like that and are quite open to an honest discussion as opposed to hyperbole such as you've put forth.

[Son of Rooster]

Beats the s&^% outta me.
I'm a firm believer in death and taxes.
I just don't see how it can be done.

SOR (crossing fingers)

[Bigun]

...you don't understand the arguments.

Absolutely! Only William Tell is authorized to understand arguments don't you know???

[Zon]

WT, netiquette flag.

William Terrell: When I explained the structure of the NRST, all by one were horrified. 721

That is likely due in large part to your ignorance of the bill and your love of the income tax.

He can't even get it right on this forum where there's a ton of supporting information so as to help him not get it wrong on this thread. He is either ignorant of important points or he chose to deceive the reader.  Knowing that to include a key point would refute one of his deceptions. You identified that in your last response as shown below:

William Terrell: ...have larger than average incomes, exactly the ones that can tolerate a sales tax and still be able to buy most of what they have in the past 717

Principled: Oops, Will. You forgot that poor folks have negative or zero tax rates under nrst. Who you tryin' to fool? 719

He didn't fool me. I was on to him from the get go. Thus the reason for my first post to him: "To all readers, a simple response is all that is needed. Read the Americans for Fair Tax at fairtax.org."

I hazard to guess his vested interest in the present tax system -- tax accountant? tax lawyer? bureaucrat? sells tax avoidance information? He claims to have talked to a lot of people about the NRST and "all by [sic] one were horrified". How many of them have yet to understand that the reason they were likely horrified was not because of the NRST but rather, because of William Terrell's ignorance or intent to deceive them. Oh well, it's not my or your credibility on the line.

[Bigun]

I've talked to a large range of people and business owners ove the course of three years. No one, without exception, has heard of an NRST.

Uh Mr. Terrell! perhaps you should read more:

ead>

AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION
                                  225 Touhy Avenue * Park Ridge * Illinois * 60068 * (847)685-8600 * FAX (847)685-8896
     600 MARYLAND AVENUE, S.W. * SUITE 800 * WASHINGTON, D.C. * 20024 * (202)484-3600 * FAX (202)484-3604
                                                                                                                                                                 Internet: http://www.fb.com

August 31, 2001

The Honorable John Linder
U.S. House of Representatives
1727 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Representative Linder:

American farmers and ranchers support fundamental tax reform. They have become increasingly frustrated with the current tax system and disheartned that attempts to improve it only make it more complex.

Your national sales tax plan, H.R. 2525, the Fair Tax Act of 2001, is supported by Farm Bureau. The plan addresses many problems of the current tax system by eliminating the individual and corporate income taxes, capital gains tax, estate tax and payroll taxes. These changes would have a positive impact on day-to-day farm and ranch management and the transfer of farms and ranches from one generation to the next.

The current tax system forces farmers and ranchers to consider the tax consequences of each input purchase, commodity sale, capital asset purchase or capital asset sale. Tax planning has become a part of everyday decision-making. Farmers and racnhers should be making business decisions based on economics, not on tax consequences.

After a lifetime of hard work and paying taxes, farmers and ranchers face double taxation through capital gains taxes at retirement and estate taxes at death. If they sell land, livestock or other assets at retirement, they find the federal government ready to take a share as capital gains taxes. These taxes often discourage retirees from reallocating assets to a more appropriate mix for their retirement years and younger producers lose the opportunity to purchase the assets that they need to start or expand farm and ranch businesses.

Planning for the transfer of assets at death has become a time consuming and costly activity. Many family farms are multi-generation family farms. Transferring farms and ranches from one generation to the next without huge estate taxes is critical to the financial success of these operations. Some farms are lost when death taxes force farmers and ranchers to sell part or all of their business to secure enough cash to pay death taxes.

These and other problems would be eliminated with passage of H.R. 2525, the Fair Tax Act of 2001. We stand ready to assist you in advancing this legislation.

Sincerely,

Bob Stallman
Bob Stallman
President

[Bigun]

I've talked to a large range of people and business owners ove the course of three years. No one, without exception, has heard of an NRST. When I explained the structure of the NRST, all by one were horrified. I iinvite anyone here to try it.

Perhaps you might find the endorsement of the National Taxpayers Union impressive!

[Principled]

From the NTU site:

On behalf of the 335,000-member National Taxpayers Union (NTU), I write to offer our endorsement of H.R. 2525, the FairTax...

[Leto]

What if your brillant logic about the repeal of t e 16th amendment is flawed.

Lest assume that the republicans do get a super majority and pass the repeal, but then it get's bogged down during ratification, Rat legislators in NY, CA, OR, WA, MA, CT, RI, NJ, MD, DE, IL, HI, VT and ME don't ratify. Then a rat president is elected in 2012. There is a budget crisis and the solution is to raise the sales tas OR...... Reinstste an Income tax for incomes of over $1,000,000, after all the rich need to pay their fair share...... you know the rest.

Besides, half the RINO in the senate wouldn't vote to get rid of the 16th amendment.

BTW Don't you think the rat co sponsor's of HR2525 KNOW that the repeal of the 16th amendment is a bait and switch??????
WHY ELSE WOULD THEY WANT TO DO THIS?????

Trust me Socialist have NO INTEREST in doing that will reduce the ower of the goverment or reduce it's size.

The NRST supporters on this board are extremely well intentioned but equally naive.

"The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions.


A 17% flat tax (Forbes version) while not as good as a NRST in the ideal world is much better than the current situation, After a couple of years with this system then Go With a Constitutional Amendment which repeals the 16th amendment and Replaces the Income Tax with a NRST.

[Deuce]

I have just gone to a quick look at the actual language of the proposed bill, itself, and I saw nothing that seemed to provide for the taxing of federal government "consumption" or "capital expenditures" as was included by Mastromarco and Burton. I did see provisions for taxing state government consumption but not capital spending. Am I correct that the actual bill does not include taxing these areas?

[Triple]

I am on record as reluctant and skeptical Bush voter. (I would have preferred Forbes.)

However, if Bush pulls this off, I'll come a callin' to the White House dressed in a thong, blue dress, and a black beret.

[CliffC]

You wrote: In one conversation on this topic, a bank officer asked me what made me think he would finance a new car for $20,000 plus an additional $5,000 for taxes. My first response was to ask him if he'd like to remain in business. In reality though, he is financing taxes today as the cost of taxation is throughout the value of the car. People just don't see it. Under an NRST, if I buy a new car for $20,000 plus $5,000 in taxes, drive it across the street, decide I don't want it and offer to sell it to an interested party for $24,000, that party will have two choices...go across the street and pay $25,000 or buy mine with less than a mile on it with a $1,000 savings. Prices adjust.

Bear in mind, the new car that sells for $20,000 today will sell for prox. $15,000 after enactment of the FairTax. The selling price including the FairTax would be prox. $15,000 x 1.2987 = $19,481. (Per Dale Jorgenson Study, Harvard School of Business Economics, which says that retail prices will drop prox. 25%-30%, depending on product.)

NRST (FairTax) above is 0.23/0.77 = 0.2987.
Price is $15,000 + (29.87% x 15,000 =) $4,481 Tax = $19,481

If the car were later sold (it would be a Used car), it would not be subject to further FairTax. IOW, under the FairTax, items are taxed ONCE and ONCE only.

Very good post, 4edm 4ever. We need more like you in support of the FairTax (HR 2525).

Cliff Cofer - State Director, AFFT Volunteer Iowa Team

---

* * Bye, bye... Income Tax (and IRS)! We won't miss ya' at all! * *

---

[Bigun]

I know and would bet that The American Farm Bureau represents several times that number!

Heck, Americans For Fair Taxation (AFFT) alone is well over 450,000! Citizens for and Alternative Tax (CATS) is probably near that. National Federation of Small Business (NFFB)...Well, you get the picture.

[ancient_geezer]

Am I correct that the actual bill does not include taxing these areas?

There is no provision to tax government for"capital" spending any more than it taxes business for such spending. Investments are not taxed ever.

It makes no provision for exempting the federal government from paying the tax on its consumption expenditure.

If there is no express exemption as is provided for business expenditure for business purpose (which is in the bill) the tax is levied with regard to the total payment tendered for consumption products. Even for business, final retail purchase that may be made for secondary purposes not related to conduct of their business, like picnic supplies for the company picnic, the NRST must be paid.

The only exemptions are those expressly provided for.

There is one situation where the Federal government is provide an exception and that is the collection of tax from itself in hiring contract labor for work with government agencies. But it must pay the tax to retail businesses for consumption products and misc services from outside vendors.

[Mike-o-Matic]

   IF Dubya gets this done, forget him going on Mt. Rushmore. He'll need his own Mt. Bushmore.

Did somebody say "Mt. Bushmore?" You'll get no argument from me!!

[rdb3]

If Dubya gets this tax crap scrapped on his watch, he'll need his own rock.

No mercy.
Coming soon: Tha SYNDICATE.
101 things that the Mozilla browser can do that Internet Explorer cannot.

[ancient_geezer]

I saw nothing that seemed to provide for the taxing of federal government "consumption" or "capital expenditures" as was included by Mastromarco.

No "capital expenditures" are included in the sales tax base my Mastromarco, business or government. Capital expenditure is considered investment, not consumption. The same is true of the bill.

Table 1
Tax Base for National Sales Tax (billions of dollars)

Description of Taxable Item	Tax Base (1995)
Personal consumption expenditures	$4,924.9
Purchases of new homes	156.4
Improvements to single-family homes	73.9
Imputed rent on housing	-534.3
Additional financial intermediation services	53.0
Foreign travel by U.S. residents (one-half)	-26.4
Expenditures abroad by U.S. residents	-2.7
Food produced and consumed on farms	-0.4
State and local government consumption	682.6
State and local government gross purchases	159.1
Federal government consumption	453.8
Federal government gross purchases	62.7
Less: Education expenditures	-97.5
Plus: Expenditures in U.S. by nonresidents	73.1
NST Base	$5,978.2
Source: National Income Product Accounts, Survey of Current Business, August 1996.

[CliffC]

You wrote: "How do you figure a 20% decrease in retail prices? The "hidden" padding companies charge to offset the cost of dealing with income taxes? What makes you think they will remove that from their base prices?

One word... COMPETITION! When Ford drops the price of their cars, GMC will follow (or sit by and watch their share-of-market shrink big-time).

When the car manufacturer (and dealer) can make the same amount of dollar profit after dropping their prices upon enactment of the FairTax, they will do it.

Dr. Jorgenson (Harvard Business School) determined that 20%-30% of the price of a product was the amount 'hidden' therein to cover the producer's Income Tax (and compliance costs).

When Ford drops their price, if GMC doesn't follow suit they will suffer a big drop in their share-of-market and Share-Of-Market is the ALTAR at which big-time, hard-goods sellers worship.

I spent 36 years in that game. Competition rules!

Cliff Cofer - State Director, AFFT Volunteer Iowa Team

---

* * Bye, bye... Income Tax (and IRS)! We won't miss ya' at all! * *

---