[barb-tex]

Certainly will be for me. If you look on the tax table for single, no dependents and making $99,999 will pay 21,000 (21%)income tax. Seems like even this person will pay a tax greater under the so called “fair tax. Seems a little unfair to me.
I know I wont be able to stand the price of cars or houses or food. I have made over 125,000 and have never paid over 18% income tax. Talk about the Clinton Tax cut killing the economy, a 23% sales tax will bury it
barbra ann.

[socialismisinsidious]

What you are not taking into consideration is the corporate taxes that you are already paying, but which you can not see. The costs of good and services would drop under the fair tax b/c employers will no longer be paying payroll taxes...no longer paying their half of Medicare, SS, Unemployment taxes etc..those costs are passed on to consumers now (corporations don’t pay taxes, people do)...so either the costs of goods would go down or salaries would increase....that is what free market competition does. They would no longer have that tax burden and they want to sell their cars so they pass that 'windfall' onto you, the consumer. Under the fair tax the cost of that car you want is no more than it is now.

[whd23]

Your comparison of tax rates is flawed. Take the $100k earner paying $21k in taxes (21%) under today's system. Since $21k of their money is gone, it's not available for spending (100k-21k=79k). If their wages and spending habits remain the same with the NRST implemented, they would pay 23% on 79k or 18.2k which is 18.2% of their income.

Additionally, you're assuming that the earner is spending everything they make on new items. Yes, lots of people live that, but many of us also save and buy used items (not subject to the proposed NRST).

With all that being said, I'm not a proponent of the NRST, but I am interested in alternatives to the current system.