Flat Tax Anyone?

[Freemason9]

Flat tax is a great idea for the wealthy. A man who spends 3% of his income on housing, because he makes $500,000 per year, would pay the same tax percent as a guy who makes $50,000 per year, and spends 20% of his income on housing. I somehow see Republicans behind this....

With a $30,000 Standard Deduction a filer with $50,000 in earned income would pay tax on $20,000 (on 40% of his income) while one with $500,000 in earned income would pay tax on $470,000 (on 94% of his income). Make the SD $40,000 and the lower earner pays on only 20% of his earnings while the latter pays on 92%. Hell, we can even eliminate the SD for those making more than $500,000.
Does anyone believe that anyone making $500,000 per year is currently paying taxes on 96% of his income. Eliminating the complex tax perversions, none of which benefit lower income earners, the tax load will remain. What will change will be the need to slave over gov't mailings, forms and requirements ... a total waste of precious time.
Some peeps just see Republicans behind everything.

Basically, then, you're just fucking around with the marginal rates and substituting a "first $30 K" exemption for the progressive rates. I don't see what this accomplishes.

 

[Freemason9]

A flat tax is the best tax.

10% of every dollar earned via any means (Interest, capital gains etc) no deductions no exemptions and done.

Simple cheap to enforce and would increase revenues to the government while reducing the costs.

A simple plan for simple minds.

 

[Freemason9]

A flat tax is the best tax.

10% of every dollar earned via any means (Interest, capital gains etc) no deductions no exemptions and done.

Simple cheap to enforce and would increase revenues to the government while reducing the costs.

The Big Government types don't want simple and cheap to enforce. When even the overseers don't know how to interpret the law, they have a big club with which to beat the tax slaves into submission.

AGAIN, the "flat tax" you propose is actually a scheme to raise the lower-end tax rates and lower the upper-end tax rates. And you still haven't discussed how you define taxable income, which is the biggest problem with the current tax code.

 

[Freemason9]

i think a flat tax on top of all the other taxes americans pay is a good idea.

lol

 

[Skull Pilot]

A flat tax is the best tax.

10% of every dollar earned via any means (Interest, capital gains etc) no deductions no exemptions and done.

Simple cheap to enforce and would increase revenues to the government while reducing the costs.

A simple plan for simple minds.

Yeah because we all know arbitrarily complex plans are the best.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A flat tax is the best tax.

10% of every dollar earned via any means (Interest, capital gains etc) no deductions no exemptions and done.

Simple cheap to enforce and would increase revenues to the government while reducing the costs.

The Big Government types don't want simple and cheap to enforce. When even the overseers don't know how to interpret the law, they have a big club with which to beat the tax slaves into submission.

AGAIN, the "flat tax" you propose is actually a scheme to raise the lower-end tax rates and lower the upper-end tax rates. And you still haven't discussed how you define taxable income, which is the biggest problem with the current tax code.

I define taxable income as ALL income regardless of the source.

 

[RKMBrown]

Are there any flat tax proposals that do not lower the taxes paid by the wealthiest Americans?

Yeah the one that sets the rate at 39% for everyone.

lol Tell him skull!

The income/slave tax should be replaced with sales taxes and use taxes.

 

[Freemason9]

The Big Government types don't want simple and cheap to enforce. When even the overseers don't know how to interpret the law, they have a big club with which to beat the tax slaves into submission.

AGAIN, the "flat tax" you propose is actually a scheme to raise the lower-end tax rates and lower the upper-end tax rates. And you still haven't discussed how you define taxable income, which is the biggest problem with the current tax code.

I define taxable income as ALL income regardless of the source.

When you refer to "source," that tells me that you see revenue as defined income. That's not correct, though, because the total revenue of, say, a lawn care company is reduced by "expenses" as defined by the existing tax code. That's the issue, Porkchop--what can be included as "expenses" that reduces taxable income?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

With another exciting tax season nearly behind me it's time to drag out my solution to the time and expense required to pay the gov't their "fair" share of my earnings.
I understand the corporate side of my misery is unavoidable but we can do away with all the razzmatazz, including the attornies and accountants (necessary to keep me out of tax prison) as well as the time and stress connected to the personal filing.
We can do this in a way that is fair to all if we try and the only losers would be the aforementioned attornies and accountants and some IRS types.
A $30,000 standard deduction for all would protect those least able to pay taxes and all other deductions would be eliminated. Even the big dogs could do their own tax filing in under 15 minutes.
All we really need to agree on would be the uniform percentage all would pay on earned income above $30,000.
Waddaya say, kids?

No thanks. When I had no kids, no mortgage - the burden was shifted more onto me than others in my income group with kids, and a mortgage. In fact I made 30k and less and paid net taxes. Now that I have a kid you want to shift the burden from people without kids onto me. I'd rather not get the shit end of that deal both times around! I'm sure old folks who paid out the ass on income taxes when they were in their peak money earning years might not like having the burden shifted onto them, either.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The Big Government types don't want simple and cheap to enforce. When even the overseers don't know how to interpret the law, they have a big club with which to beat the tax slaves into submission.

AGAIN, the "flat tax" you propose is actually a scheme to raise the lower-end tax rates and lower the upper-end tax rates. And you still haven't discussed how you define taxable income, which is the biggest problem with the current tax code.

I define taxable income as ALL income regardless of the source.

Define "income".

 

[Toro]

20% is excessive.

The average household makes about $40k a year. Their effective rate would be 10%. Someone making $100k would pay 16%. I don't think that's excessive.

Just make the rate 10%. Period

Why should part of anyone's income be exempt from income tax?

Because the marginal rate of income spent on necessities is higher for each fewer dollar earned.

 

[RKMBrown]

With another exciting tax season nearly behind me it's time to drag out my solution to the time and expense required to pay the gov't their "fair" share of my earnings.
I understand the corporate side of my misery is unavoidable but we can do away with all the razzmatazz, including the attornies and accountants (necessary to keep me out of tax prison) as well as the time and stress connected to the personal filing.
We can do this in a way that is fair to all if we try and the only losers would be the aforementioned attornies and accountants and some IRS types.
A $30,000 standard deduction for all would protect those least able to pay taxes and all other deductions would be eliminated. Even the big dogs could do their own tax filing in under 15 minutes.
All we really need to agree on would be the uniform percentage all would pay on earned income above $30,000.
Waddaya say, kids?

No thanks. When I had no kids, no mortgage - the burden was shifted more onto me than others in my income group with kids, and a mortgage. In fact I made 30k and less and paid net taxes. Now that I have a kid you want to shift the burden from people without kids onto me. I'd rather not get the shit end of that deal both times around! I'm sure old folks who paid out the ass on income taxes when they were in their peak money earning years might not like having the burden shifted onto them, either.

ROFL... can you name me a retired person that does not collect income? lol 401k's, pensions, SS,... these pay out to retired people as INCOME.

ROFL

Further, the retired folks today did not pay even half what we have to pay for SS/Medicare. Not even half. No offense to the supposed best generation, but they PUNTED THEIR DEBT TO US.

 

[jwoodie]

Although I am neither for nor against a "flat tax" per se ( it is simply another way to compute graduated tax rates), I am concerned about the growing number of people who pay no income taxes at all and the lack of governmental fiscal responsibility that entails. To put it succinctly, I think everyone needs to have a little skin in the game.

 

[boedicca]

The average household makes about $40k a year. Their effective rate would be 10%. Someone making $100k would pay 16%. I don't think that's excessive.

Just make the rate 10%. Period

Why should part of anyone's income be exempt from income tax?

Because the marginal rate of income spent on necessities is higher for each fewer dollar earned.

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

 

[Freemason9]

Although I am neither for nor against a "flat tax" per se ( it is simply another way to compute graduated tax rates), I am concerned about the growing number of people who pay no income taxes at all and the lack of governmental fiscal responsibility that entails. To put it succinctly, I think everyone needs to have a little skin in the game.

Don't worry, jwoodie. EVERYONE pays taxes, and quite a lot of them. You might be truly surprised at how large of a percentage of their income that low-wage workers have to pay in total taxation. Payroll taxes, for example, are often higher than income taxes. Income taxes, for most people, are the least of taxation problems.

 

[Toro]

Just make the rate 10%. Period

Why should part of anyone's income be exempt from income tax?

Because the marginal rate of income spent on necessities is higher for each fewer dollar earned.

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

A conservative might say 10%. A liberal might say 30%. But that's not what concerns me here. Choose whatever number you want. My point was to say we should have a flat tax after some income threshold.

 

[boedicca]

Because the marginal rate of income spent on necessities is higher for each fewer dollar earned.

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

A conservative might say 10%. A liberal might say 30%. But that's not what concerns me here. Choose whatever number you want. My point was to say we should have a flat tax after some income threshold.

I agree with the caveat that all other federal fees, entitlement taxes, and excise taxes are eliminated...as well as tax on corporations (which is just double taxation and enables cronyism in order to get credits and special breaks).

 

[RKMBrown]

Because the marginal rate of income spent on necessities is higher for each fewer dollar earned.

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

A conservative might say 10%. A liberal might say 30%. But that's not what concerns me here. Choose whatever number you want. My point was to say we should have a flat tax after some income threshold.

The opposite of a "flat tax" is having an arbitrary income threshold before taxes are calculated. Thus, having a flat tax after your arbitrary income threshold is in fact, not a flat tax. It is not a flat tax. It is a progressive tax. Progressive taxes do not encourage less government, they encourage more government. Why? Because the progression is toward taxing the few to the benefit of the many. The opposite of freedom is slavery. Progressive taxes are a form of slavery.

 

[Toro]

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

A conservative might say 10%. A liberal might say 30%. But that's not what concerns me here. Choose whatever number you want. My point was to say we should have a flat tax after some income threshold.

The opposite of a "flat tax" is having an arbitrary income threshold before taxes are calculated. Thus, having a flat tax after your arbitrary income threshold is in fact, not a flat tax. It is not a flat tax. It is a progressive tax. Progressive taxes do not encourage less government, they encourage more government. Why? Because the progression is toward taxing the few to the benefit of the many. The opposite of freedom is slavery. Progressive taxes are a form of slavery.

Thanks Ayn.

 

[Toro]

Why should the government collect 20% of incomes (or even 16%)? As we see in such high relief these days, our government is too big and does to much. Give it less money and descope its activities (especially in the areas of arbitrary bureaucratic regulation which nullifies the rule of law).

A conservative might say 10%. A liberal might say 30%. But that's not what concerns me here. Choose whatever number you want. My point was to say we should have a flat tax after some income threshold.

I agree with the caveat that all other federal fees, entitlement taxes, and excise taxes are eliminated...as well as tax on corporations (which is just double taxation and enables cronyism in order to get credits and special breaks).

I would include all forms of income, including corporate profits, dividends, capital gains, etc.