That is very unfair to small states and will never pass.I read something similar where the Fed taxes the states, instead of individuals and it was based on a percentage of the state's GDP, instead of apportioned according to congressmen.
The state's would individually decide how to collect the revenue to pay their fed tax bill. It would render a market driven taxing environment. The states with the better tax scheme would see an influx of residents and business, whereas the states with an atrocious tax scheme would drive taxpayers away. The result would be that the states seeing an influx of taxpayers & business would realize a growth in GDP and the Fed's percentage would generate more revenue as well.
I don't know if that would generate enough revenue to fund the Fed - perhaps the Fed could learn to live within it's means (That's a joke, folks!). But I do like the idea of a market-driven approach to taxes. Let the states compete against each other --AND-- any taxing disagreements would be between the state and the Fed, which are far more equal terms than the Fed against joe citizen all by his lonesome.
Sounds fine to me — I’m moving to FL.