[Carry_Okie]

Why would the federal government care about anyone's expense patterns when people will have already complied by paying the tax at the point of sale?

Point of sale times the number of transactions equals the degree of intrusion. With the combined load of the Feds and the States adding half-again the purchase price, you can bet your bottom dollar that people will avoid paying it. Cash and barter transactions will become more common. In order to enforce their take, the Feds would have to engage in not only illegal searches and seizures, but massive sting operations to get their cut. If you think the IRS is intrusive now, just wait until your "FareTax" induces a police state with revenue collectors everywhere deeming what constitutes barter or not.

Your statement might be accurate if it weren't for the fact the tax rate will be 23%, not 50% and that the prebate will reimburse people monthly for taxes paid on necessities up to the poverty level in order to lessen the burden on low income earners.

Typical FAREtax duplicity. There isn't a single other sales tax anywhere that isn't calculated as a fraction of the base transaction. Not one. Yet your FAREtax advocates calculate its impact as the fraction of tax AFTER it is assessed, a duplicitous practice at best. The actual rate is 0.23/(1-0.23) = 0.30 or 30%, as I said. Your second failing is failure to read: I said "(as they would in California)," meaning that the total sales tax would consist of the FAREtax hit, PLUS California's existing sales tax of 8.5% of the base transaction, PLUS the amount California would need to ADD because the lack of a 1040 would make a State income tax untenable. Hence, California would need to bump its State 8.5% sales tax to make up for lost income tax revenue. Given that the average marginal State income tax rate in California is now 12.5%, I swagged that the sales tax rate would have to rise to nearly 20% to cover both the existing sales tax plus the rate needed to make up for the now defunct State income tax. Hence, 30% Federal NRST + 20% SRST = 50% total sales tax, which is what I said above. Even if it was 5% less, it's still too much to keep people from cheating.

If you think for one minute people won't do everything they can to avoid a 50% sales tax rate, I've got news for you. As I said, look at the market for bootleg cigarettes and booze.

People will be far less likely to bootleg any product considering their purchasing power will increase since federal income taxes will no longer be deducted from their paychecks or dividend checks.

You people are something else. Never in human history have people been so overjoyed to know what they're actually paying for government that they take their fattened paychecks and willingly go find a government agent to pay at a kid's lemonade stand. You seem to think that the entirety of retail is at electronic cash registers.

So, how are they doing collecting that existing Federal tax on marijuana?

So your alternative is to keep in place a tax code that...

So, not only are you dishonest, but putting words in my mouth as a straw-man will get you ignored from now on, that is, unless I feel like rubbing your sanctimonious nose in your BS numbers again. G_d's system was an income tax, but it was only a 10% flat tax. Nor am I totally opposed to tariffs. I think sales taxes are fine as long as one can keep the real rate, State and Federal included, below 15%. Beyond that and people will cheat, in droves, no matter how much cash they've got. Hence, the real problem is the scope and cost of government, not the tax system. My focus is cutting spending and regulation for those operations not specifically listed in the Constitution because that is where our focus must be.

[Defend Liberty]

Point of sale times the number of transactions equals the degree of intrusion.

What intrusion? There will not be any forms to fill out detailing every aspect of your personal life to the feds. The IRS will no longer be looking over your shoulder since the agency will no longer exist. You won't have to worry about fines, penalties or imprisonment since the tax will already have been paid.

With the combined load of the Feds and the States adding half-again the purchase price, you can bet your bottom dollar that people will avoid paying it.

Let's see. The Fair Tax rate will be 23% per the bill. States impose a sales tax rate of no more than 8.5%. You must be using some type of new math to reach 50% by adding those figures together. That ignores the fact people's purchasing power will increase as they will no longer have federal tax deductions from their paychecks or other sources of income.

If you think the IRS is intrusive now, just wait until your "FareTax" induces a police state with revenue collectors everywhere deeming what constitutes barter or not.

If you think there will be an IRS then you haven't read The Fair Tax Act(HR25). The IRS will not be intrusive at all since The Fair Tax abolishes the IRS by defunding the agency. Even if the IRS would still exist, they would not be policing consumers since they will have already paid the tax at the point of sale and will not have any forms for people to file for the IRS to extract any personal information. Businesses will be more inclined to remit the tax due to being paid 1/4 of one percent for the taxes they remit.

The actual rate is 0.23/(1-0.23) = 0.30 or 30%, as I said. Your second failing is failure to read:

Nothing like spreading misinformation with only a partial truth. There are already embedded corporate income taxes in all items people purchase today. They amount to almost 23% of the price. A $100 item actually costs $77 with $23 in tax. It is known as the tax inclusive rate. In this case it is 23%(23/100). The fair Tax removes the inclusive tax by eliminating corporate income taxes and applying that same rate separately at the point of sale. it is the tax exclusive rate. The same item will cost $77 with a $23 tax (23/77=30%). The dollar amount collected will be the same regardless of which rate is quoted.

California's existing sales tax of 8.5% of the base transaction, PLUS the amount California would need to ADD because the lack of a 1040 would make a State income tax untenable.

You really need to get past associating state sales taxes with The Fair Tax since the it only addresses federal sales tax. However The Fair Tax Act will permit states to replace their sales tax with The Fair Tax. States maybe inclined to do so as The Fair Tax will have a much broader tax base.

If you think for one minute people won't do everything they can to avoid a 50% sales tax rate, I've got news for you. As I said, look at the market for bootleg cigarettes and booze.

Don't look now but you are contradicting yourself. You keep quoting a 50% tax rate despite citing in your previous comment the Fair Tax rate will be a far lower rate of 30%, which in itself is erroneous and despite that fact the 23% rate is written the Fair Tax Act legislation!

You people are something else. Never in human history have people been so overjoyed to know what they're actually paying for government that they take their fattened paychecks and willingly go find a government agent to pay at a kid's lemonade stand. You seem to think that the entirety of retail is at electronic cash registers.

The growing number of grassroots Fair Tax supporters are supportive of a tax system that will fundamentally shift power away from the federal government and back to the people by giving people the power to decide when and how often they are taxed based on when they choose to make purchases thereby dovetailing with the limited government principles the founding fathers instilled in the Constitution.

So, how are they doing collecting that existing Federal tax on marijuana?

Try using a little common sense for once. It is a federal crime to possess marijuana. The Feds will arrest and confiscate any proceeds from the sale of marijuana in the future as they have in the past along with any physical property purchased with money obtained through those sales.

So, not only are you dishonest, but putting words in my mouth as a straw-man will get you ignored from now on

I'm assuming you can read. That statement you are referring to was in the form of a question, not a declaratory comment. Note the question mark at the end of that remark. You respond as if I made a claim even though there is clearly a question mark at the end of the comment and you call me dishonest? LOL!!!!!

G_d's system was an income tax, but it was only a 10% flat tax.

Oh really? If that is the case then God has already failed miserably. The current federal income tax code began as a flat income tax. People were taxed 1% on their first $20,000 of income and 7% on any income over $500,000 when the 16th Amendment was enacted in 1913. Less than 1% of the population earned more than $500,000 in 1913. That also means more than 99% were taxed just the 1%. We've all seen how that simple flat income tax has evolved into the increasingly intrusive, oppressive and convoluted mess we have today. Another flat income tax will only turn the clock back 98 years but will morph back into what we have today only faster thanks to the thousands of lobbyists that didn't exist in 1913 and it will maintain the IRS!

If your contention God intended for a flat income tax then he must also be a Communist since one of the planks in Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto is a heavy progressive tax on income. Marx understood by gradually increasing the tax burden on productivity would eventually discourage people from being productive and consequently depend on the state for their existence. I doubt that is God's intention given his experience with the Romans.

Hence, the real problem is the scope and cost of government, not the tax system. My focus is cutting spending and regulation for those operations not specifically listed in the Constitution because that is where our focus must be.

It that is your intention then why do you support a flat income tax that will maintain the single costliest agency in the federal government. The Fair Tax will abolish the IRS's 11 billion dollar price tag.