Americans for Fair Taxation - FairTax.org

[dblack]

Think about it for a bit before you discard the idea.

A simple flat tax on all income would me much more prone to allowing special interest groups to take advantage of it. And if that happens, other groups will be forced to pay more to compensate.

The can't do that with a consumption tax. And since you get to see and feel the Fair Tax every time you make a purchase, any time the government would propose raising it, everyone would voice their disapproval.

Besides, I'm not a fan of taxing income. I'd rather get taxed on my purchases. Just my 2 cents anyways.

I can see some benefits with the idea. But I'd be concerned with the difficulties of enforcing a nationwide sales tax. It would have to be much higher than the state sales taxes we're used to in order to replace income tax, and that would create a strong incentive for a black market - and a strong incentive for an enforcement regime we might regret.

I think I'd rather see broad based property taxes before sales taxes.

So you would favor having property owners foot the bills?

Yeah. It's not ideal, to be sure, but it's the most straightforward. I'm opposed to coercive taxation as a general concept, and we should strive to eliminate it if possible. But as long as it exists, I want it to be as simply and free from political shenanigans as possible. Property tax would be far from perfect in this regard, but compared with shell game of income taxes, and the cat-and-mouse of chasing black markets, I think property tax is somewhat better.

 

[dblack]

I see an across the board major problem with every bit of tax reform talk, from the White House all the way down to the rightwing extremists on message boards.

The population is looked upon as classes, not individuals.

Exactly! That's the premise at the heart and soul of corporatism and it's poison to liberal democracy. And it's infecting far more than just the tax code. Nearly every new law we have treats people unequally, depending on what particular interest group they belong to - or, more to the point, depending on how much lobbying clout their group wields.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I can see some benefits with the idea. But I'd be concerned with the difficulties of enforcing a nationwide sales tax. It would have to be much higher than the state sales taxes we're used to in order to replace income tax, and that would create a strong incentive for a black market - and a strong incentive for an enforcement regime we might regret.

I think I'd rather see broad based property taxes before sales taxes.

So you would favor having property owners foot the bills?

Yeah. It's not ideal, to be sure, but it's the most straightforward. I'm opposed to coercive taxation as a general concept, and we should strive to eliminate it if possible. But as long as it exists, I want it to be as simply and free from political shenanigans as possible. Property tax would be far from perfect in this regard, but compared with shell game of income taxes, and the cat-and-mouse of chasing black markets, I think property tax is somewhat better.

Just real property, certain tangible assets, or all property, i.e vehicles, RVs, jewelry, coins and collectibles, animals of value, etc?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Unless you repealed the 16th amendment, which is not about to happen, imposing the fair tax would just put a new additional method of taxation on the books.

 

[tooAlive]

I see an across the board major problem with every bit of tax reform talk, from the White House all the way down to the rightwing extremists on message boards.

The population is looked upon as classes, not individuals.

Look at some of the deductions we currently have. Is it fair for two families making $55,000/year to pay the same tax rate? If they're identical families, sure. But what if there are 7 kids in Family A and two kids in Family B? What if Mom & Dad A have to buy work uniforms and drive 20 miles (in opposite directions) to work, while Dad B can wear street clothes and walk 20 yards to his job? Mom & Dad A have to pay someone to watch their kids, Mom B stays at home with hers. Mom & Dad A want to send their kids to college to better themselves, Mom & Dad B think college is just a place to find a suitable spouse, and therefore their kids won't be there 4 years.

What about Businessman A whose firm netted him $2M last year, which he divided between the savings, checking, and retirement accounts, charity donations, and buying nice things for himself and his family, and Trust Fund Baby B whose stock dividends paid him $2M last year, $1.5M of which he sent to an offshore account in the Cayman Islands?

One size does not fit all.

And Life isn't fair. Individuals make choices, why should anyone else be forced to compensate for another's choices.

Also, all those families you mentioned would get the same benefit out of paying taxes. The same police department, fire department, roads, ect..

And besides, welfare programs like unemployment and social security would remain intact.

So it would be fair that everyone contribute to these services equally.

 

[tooAlive]

FLAT TAX makes perfect sense in a COMMUNIST nation.

In a capitalist nation it's dumber than dust.

Actually, no. Quite the opposite actually.

A true communist nation wouldn't have a monetary system at all. Trading would basically come down to mutual exchanges. So there couldn't be a flat tax, or any tax at all for that matter.

And socialism wouldn't be accurate either, as one of the pillars of socialism is a highly-progressive income tax system.

 

[bornright]

It's time we had a Fair Taxation system in this country.

Americans For Fair Taxation

FairTax: Fire Up Our Economic Engine (Official HD) - YouTube

And for those thinking that this system is regressive as it would affect poor people the most:

Under the FairTax, all Americans consume what they see as their necessities of life free of tax. While permitting no exemptions, the FairTax (HR25/S122) provides a monthly universal prebate to ensure that each family unit can consume tax free at or beyond the poverty level, with the overall effect of making the FairTax progressive in application. There is no marriage penalty as the couple gets twice the amount that a single adult receives.

While everyone pays the same tax rate at the cash register, the prebate results in effective tax rates (annual taxes paid divided by annual spending) that increase as the level of spending increases a progressive tax rate structure. For example, a person spending at the poverty level has a 0% effective tax rate, whereas someone spending at twice the poverty level has an effective tax rate of 11.5%, and so on.

I think it would be great. Think of the reduction of paper and IRS agents that would no longer be needed. This would be a major savings.

It would also relieve stress that we have from keeping up with all of our deductions throughout the year. There is no telling how many divorces have been caused from the strain of tax day.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It's time we had a Fair Taxation system in this country.

It'd probably make more sense to consult those folks who....

....KNOW what they're doing!

​

 

[tooAlive]

It's time we had a Fair Taxation system in this country.

It'd probably make more sense to consult those folks who....

....KNOW what they're doing!

​

They're talking nonsense.

I see they referenced the '50s when tax rates were in the 90% range, but they failed to mention this:

Hauser?s Law | Hoover Institution

 

[nitroz]

People don't want a sales tax because we're a consumer economy.

You can't have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility. The right needs to get on the ball with social policy if it expects fiscal policy to change.

Sales tax is for the state.

 

[nitroz]

I support fair taxation.

End tax breaks.
Penalize tax evasion.
Make EVERYONE cough up their share. (Business and Corps included)

 

[bripat9643]

People don't want a sales tax because we're a consumer economy.

That claim is economically meaningless. Every economy is composed of consumers and producers. In most cases, both functions are performed by the same people. You can't have consumption without production.

You can't have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility.

The term "social responsibility" is meaningless propaganda, so your claim is absurd on its face.

The right needs to get on the ball with social policy if it expects fiscal policy to change.

ROFL! In other words, Democrats will continue to spend like there's no tomorrow unless republicans do what?

 

[ClosedCaption]

This guy just said being socially responsible is propaganda. RLMAO! Propaganda for what? Civilization? LMAO. This is the mindstate folks.

 

[bripat9643]

Unless you repealed the 16th amendment, which is not about to happen, imposing the fair tax would just put a new additional method of taxation on the books.

That's true enough. Repealing the 16th Amendment is a prerequisite for adopting the FAIR tax.

 

[pjnlsn]

People don't want a sales tax because we're a consumer economy.

That claim is economically meaningless. Every economy is composed of consumers and producers. In most cases, both functions are performed by the same people. You can't have consumption without production.

You can't have fiscal responsibility without social responsibility.

The term "social responsibility" is meaningless propaganda, so your claim is absurd on its face.

The right needs to get on the ball with social policy if it expects fiscal policy to change.

ROFL! In other words, Democrats will continue to spend like there's no tomorrow unless republicans do what?

People don't want an increased sales tax.

 

[Grandma]

I see an across the board major problem with every bit of tax reform talk, from the White House all the way down to the rightwing extremists on message boards.

The population is looked upon as classes, not individuals.

Look at some of the deductions we currently have. Is it fair for two families making $55,000/year to pay the same tax rate? If they're identical families, sure. But what if there are 7 kids in Family A and two kids in Family B? What if Mom & Dad A have to buy work uniforms and drive 20 miles (in opposite directions) to work, while Dad B can wear street clothes and walk 20 yards to his job? Mom & Dad A have to pay someone to watch their kids, Mom B stays at home with hers. Mom & Dad A want to send their kids to college to better themselves, Mom & Dad B think college is just a place to find a suitable spouse, and therefore their kids won't be there 4 years.

What about Businessman A whose firm netted him $2M last year, which he divided between the savings, checking, and retirement accounts, charity donations, and buying nice things for himself and his family, and Trust Fund Baby B whose stock dividends paid him $2M last year, $1.5M of which he sent to an offshore account in the Cayman Islands?

One size does not fit all.

And Life isn't fair. Individuals make choices, why should anyone else be forced to compensate for another's choices.

Also, all those families you mentioned would get the same benefit out of paying taxes. The same police department, fire department, roads, ect..

And besides, welfare programs like unemployment and social security would remain intact.

So it would be fair that everyone contribute to these services equally.

On the contrary, Family C had their house catch fire, and Businessman D had his store robbed. The others haven't used the services equally. Unemployment and social security have nothing to do with the federal income taxes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
Well for starters it'd be the same rate for everybody. That's much "fairer" than the progressive system we have today.

.

So if it's less progressive than the current system, that means that the fair tax must shift the tax burden away from higher income Americans towards lower income Americans.

Is that really the problem in this country? ....that lower income Americans are undertaxed, and higher income Americans are overtaxed?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The fair tax would just create a new industry of special interests looking to get certain goods and services exempted, or getting their tax rate reduced.

There is no magic bullet, people.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The fair tax would just create a new industry of special interests looking to get certain goods and services exempted, or getting their tax rate reduced.

There is no magic bullet, people.

Then's there's absolutely no solution and even though we know what we have does not work, we just keep on because "that's the way we've always done this"?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It's time we had a Fair Taxation system in this country.

It'd probably make more sense to consult those folks who....

....KNOW what they're doing!

​

They're talking nonsense.

I see they referenced the '50s when tax rates were in the 90% range, but they failed to mention this:

You really want to talk-about tax-rates, huh??

How 'bout we get a little-more current.....

.....like 1993??!!!

​