Posted on 02/06/2023 1:27:31 PM PST by Taxman
The us tax code is a purely punitive instrument.
They have admitted it.
It why they will never pass such a tax reform. Ever.
Somebody HAS to!
Thank you!
Not to mention the concept of FReedom!
You are most welcome!
If enough of us get behind the FAIRtax, we can replace the income tax and abolish the IRS!
Let us come together and do that!
Please read and study the legislation, H.R. 25.
And then quote to me the part that says the government will be tracking where you buy your stuff!
The idea is to eliminate government intrusion into how you earn your living and spend, save and invest!
The Fairtax would be my second choice.
"THE LIES AND UNTRUTHS IN THE ATTACKS ON THE FAIRTAX"
Regarding the FAIRtax, beware of federal government “remedies” for crises created by the untrusted federal government.
To begin with, patriots are reminded that Thomas Jefferson had noted that all federal revenues of the constitutionally limited power federal government were (originally?) based only on tariffs that wealthy people paid for their imported, foreign-made goods (my wording).
“The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied [emphasis added]. … Our revenues liberated by the discharge of the public debt, and its surplus applied to canals, roads, schools, etc., the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings.” —Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Kosciusko, 1811.
Next, regardless what FDR's state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress's Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), not only had the 19th century Supreme Court emphasized the already reasonably clear meaning of that clause, that Congress does not have the express constitutional power to regulate INTRAstate commerce, but neither does Congress have the express constitutional power to regulate intrastate commerce by means of taxing intrastate commerce (my wording)!
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 3: To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous, (as for instance, for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles [emphases added].” — Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2 (1833).
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Regarding the Trojan Horse 16th Amendment (16A), proposed to the states by Congress which the states ratified in 1913, some people argue the following about that amendment. They say that when the states ratified that amendment they surrendered to the federal government most of the unique, 10th Amendment-protected powers to serve the people that Justice Joseph Story had clarified belong uniquely to the states. The congressional record also shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had basically said the same thing.
"They form a portion of that immense mass of legislation, which embrace every thing in the territory of a state not surrendered to the general government. Inspection laws, quarantine laws, and health laws, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state, and others, which respect roads, fences, &c. are component parts of state legislation, resulting from the residuary powers of state sovereignty. No direct power over these is given to congress, and consequently they remain subject to state legislation [emphasis added], though they may be controlled by congress, when they interfere with their acknowledged powers." —Justice Joseph Story, Article I, Section 10, Clause 2, 1833.
”Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government [emphases added]. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
"16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition.” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
H O W E V E R...
Compare Justice Joseph Story's mention of 10th Amendment healthcare in 1833 (above) with the excerpt form Supreme Court case of Linder v. United States, 1925 (below), Linder decided about 12 years after 16A was ratified. Those before and after 16A ratification clarifications of state power healthcare are clear indications that the states had not surrendered their unique healthcare powers, for example, to the feds, regardless of 16A imo.
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress [emphasis added].” –Linder v. United States, 1925.
As far as I'm concerned, rich people and corporations can not only pay for all unconstitutional, unaccountable spending of the big, bad federal government, but they can have the job of policing against unconstitutional federal spending.
The inevitable remedy for ongoing, corrupt post-17th Amendment ratification political party treason (imo)...
All MAGA patriots need to wake up their RINO federal and state lawmakers by making the following clear to them.
If they don’t publicly support either a resolution, or a Constitutional Convention, to effectively "secede" ALL the states from the unconstitutionally big federal government by amending the Constitution to repeal the 16th and 17th (popular voting for federal senators) Amendments (16&17A), doing so before the primary elections in 2024, that YOU will primary them.
If the proposed amendment was limited strictly to repealing 16&17A, relatively little or ideally no discussion would be needed before ratification of the amendment imo.
With 16&17A out of the way, my hope is that Trump 47 becomes the FIRST president of a truly constitutionally limited power federal government.
In the meanwhile, I'm not holding my breath for significant MAGA legislation to appear in the first 100 days of new term for what may still prove to be another RINO-controlled House.
Trump will hopefully do another round of primarying RINOs for 2024 elections.
Valpal1 posted a reply to me (#7)). If his reply is accurate then I stand corrected. Although even if Valpal1 is right, it means the sales tax is a weird combination of sales tax and income tax. Yeah, the tax might be applied only at point of sale, but the tax bracket is determined by income.
But if Valpal1's not correct on how the sales tax rate is determined, then look at the text I quoted from the article in post # 4 (the post you were replying to). How would the government know when my spending would be enough to put me into a higher tax bracket?
A national sales tax means if you can afford lobster, you pay a higher tax than the guy buying bologna. If you can buy a top-of-the-line vehicle, you’re going to be paying a higher tax than the guy picking himself up a cheap used Ford Focus.This kind of lunacy/stupidity is what hurts any chance of getting THE "Fairtax".
It is not "a higher tax" The tax rate is the same for lobster, bologna or Ford Focus.
I'm all too familiar with the Fairtax plan.
If you buy something for $77.00 the tax is $23.00. That's a 30% (not 23%) tax ON the purchase.
The fairtax is not written for the consumer. It's written for the business.
A business would be required to remit "23% of the gross payments" received.
A business would have to charge a 30% tax on a $77.00 sale.
The sales pitch is riddled with deception, lies and half truths.
Taxman knows this
Let the name calling begin.
Under the FairTax there are no tax brackets. The progressiveness is achieved through the prebate mechanism.
Every legal resident with a SSN is eligible to receive a rebate equal to the amount of taxes paid up to the poverty level of spending.
Check out this FAQ for an explanation of how it works.
A true fair tax I could support, particularly if it coincided with replacing the existing income tax. But this tax proposal looks like it's the same progressive tax rate system a lot of of FReepers hate. And instead of later paying the IRS what you we and making a case for why we owe them less (the existing tax system), this proposal says we have to make a case to the IRS for them to give us the money (the prebate). I'd rather me have the money and tell them why I'm keeping all but what's due them, instead of them have them having the money and me begging them to give me what's due. Possession is 9/10ths of the law.
“A true fair tax I could support, particularly if it coincided with replacing the existing income tax.”
Which is exactly what the FairTax does. Part of the legislation deals with repealing large chunks of the current tax code, getting rid of the personal income tax, the corporate income tax, payroll taxes, estate taxes, etc. It also gets rid of the IRS. In addition to that it starts the ball rolling for the repeal of the 16th amendment.
“Sounds to me like it’s tax brackets without calling them tax brackets.”
There are no tax brackets, there is one flat rate for everyone. The prebate refunds taxes paid up to the poverty level of spending, reducing your effective tax rate. The chart I linked simply shows examples of different effective tax rates at different spending levels.
“this proposal says we have to make a case to the IRS for them to give us the money (the prebate).”
There is no case to be made. Everyone, from the richest to the poorest, qualifies for the same amount as long as they are a legal resident with a valid SSN. All you have to do is register yourself and any dependents.
Scenario...
Three guys rent a house together. For purposes of the probate, is this three single member qualified families at the same address or one single member family? Will this raise red flags with the tax authorities for multiple families at a given address?
With the fair tax those questions never get asked...
“SEC. 302. Qualified family.
Yeah, thanks. I’ve read it.
“Three guys rent a house together. For purposes of the probate, is this three single member qualified families at the same address or one single member family? Will this raise red flags with the tax authorities for multiple families at a given address?”
The location/address doesn’t matter. Each SSN is eligible for the prebate. In this scenario, each would register separately and get their own check. If two were dependents of the other they would register that way and on check would be sent to the primary for all three.
“With the fair tax those questions never get asked...”
Those questions are asked and answered regularly.
Rd later.
not with the fair tax ... which is a national sales tax ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.