Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lol, the profit does not get passed to the consumer, doofus, but to the stock holders, at least in theory.
You know what else companies pass on to consumers? Their profit.
BS....................I looked at the tax policy analysis on it...............It is taxed in stages until it is at the final product stage.........each paying a portion of the tax on the ladder...............and EACH PASSING ON THE COST UP THE LADDER.............which is EXACTLY why it is a HIDDEN TAX..............So you can't back it up with content.aka a VAT........................no deal.........The Flat Tax follows this principle.
The establishment doesn't want it simple..............they can't get their way and kick backs if we simplify the system...............End the 158 Billion a year in subsidies.........and the Earmarks for campaign cash......................and OMG the BRIBING for personal gain and favored status wouldn't work anymore.
Not as simple as the fair tax. The fair tax is collected at POS. With the flat tax, you still have to define what you're taxing and measure it and you still have tax cheats who evade taxes, particularly in cash businesses.
I'll add an R to your KISS, Keep It REALLY Simple, Stupid
And BTW, the Fair Tax is completely different than a VAT. A VAT taxes at every level. That like the current income tax code provides disincentives to efficiency. The Fair Tax is a single tax on the end product. Those are fundamentally different things
It is liked because business will keep it honest because they will refuse to pay the taxes by the lower chain. Because they get a Credit for taxes already paid.
BUT IT IS ALL IN THE FINAL PRICE.
Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
It was in response to your stupid comment made at me earlier................because I don't like the VAT tax that you Mask as a business tax just as Cruz does.....................You don't think the lobbyist made the code 75,000 pages long without a reason....................
Um..yeah...I argued for 75,000 pages of income tax code because I don't realize that they had a reason to create that, that's why I'm for our current income based tax system.
Sometimes you seem aware of what I'm saying and other times you seem like you're debating the voices in your head
Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A PrimerTed Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
It was in response to your stupid comment made at me earlier................because I don't like the VAT tax that you Mask as a business tax just as Cruz does.....................You don't think the lobbyist made the code 75,000 pages long without a reason....................
Um..yeah...I argued for 75,000 pages of income tax code because I don't realize that they had a reason to create that, that's why I'm for our current income based tax system.
Sometimes you seem aware of what I'm saying and other times you seem like you're debating the voices in your head
Riddle me this................Why TARIFF bad CONSUMPTION TAX..........and VAT tax GOOD CONSUMPTION TAX.....................both are consumption taxes................one may save jobs the other would help create jobs but would tax everything eveyone buys..............
$30,000 auto............now costs $34,800..........but when you see the price it will not show up as a tax but the final Cost................Which is why it's a called a Hidden Tax.
Which goes back to companies passing on the cost of that tax...................You really think Netflix is just going to suck it up and pay the tax without passing that cost on..........Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A PrimerTed Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
In that sense, a subtraction-method value-added tax is actually just a simple combination of a sort of corporate income tax and an ordinary payroll tax. (Fittingly, Senator Cruz’s plan uses this VAT to eliminate the corporate income tax and the payroll tax.)
Send your complaints to the Tax Foundation people................who say differently................
BS..................Your just calling the VAT a different name......................It was in response to your stupid comment made at me earlier................because I don't like the VAT tax that you Mask as a business tax just as Cruz does.....................You don't think the lobbyist made the code 75,000 pages long without a reason....................
Um..yeah...I argued for 75,000 pages of income tax code because I don't realize that they had a reason to create that, that's why I'm for our current income based tax system.
Sometimes you seem aware of what I'm saying and other times you seem like you're debating the voices in your head
Riddle me this................Why TARIFF bad CONSUMPTION TAX..........and VAT tax GOOD CONSUMPTION TAX.....................both are consumption taxes................one may save jobs the other would help create jobs but would tax everything eveyone buys..............
$30,000 auto............now costs $34,800..........but when you see the price it will not show up as a tax but the final Cost................Which is why it's a called a Hidden Tax.
I keep telling you I'm against the VAT. What is wrong with you? The voices in your head shouting over me?
And here's Eagle math.
You take all the various current taxes embedded in products
Remove them
Put them back in under a single tax
And the price of the product goes ... up!
So can you drink a glass of water while your ventriloquist dummy talks too?
Which goes back to companies passing on the cost of that tax...................You really think Netflix is just going to suck it up and pay the tax without passing that cost on..........Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
Earlier you were arguing that companies pass that bill forward, and now you change course............
Netflix is gonna pass that tax forward to Disney......or they are going to pass it on to the CONSUMER.......or those paying for advertising....................They aren't gonna eat it.
BS..................Your just calling the VAT a different name......................It was in response to your stupid comment made at me earlier................because I don't like the VAT tax that you Mask as a business tax just as Cruz does.....................You don't think the lobbyist made the code 75,000 pages long without a reason....................
Um..yeah...I argued for 75,000 pages of income tax code because I don't realize that they had a reason to create that, that's why I'm for our current income based tax system.
Sometimes you seem aware of what I'm saying and other times you seem like you're debating the voices in your head
Riddle me this................Why TARIFF bad CONSUMPTION TAX..........and VAT tax GOOD CONSUMPTION TAX.....................both are consumption taxes................one may save jobs the other would help create jobs but would tax everything eveyone buys..............
$30,000 auto............now costs $34,800..........but when you see the price it will not show up as a tax but the final Cost................Which is why it's a called a Hidden Tax.
I keep telling you I'm against the VAT. What is wrong with you? The voices in your head shouting over me?
And here's Eagle math.
You take all the various current taxes embedded in products
Remove them
Put them back in under a single tax
And the price of the product goes ... up!
So can you drink a glass of water while your ventriloquist dummy talks too?
Do you favor Cruz's plan or not?
Link it then..............the exact plan you favor................specifics...............Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A PrimerTed Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
In that sense, a subtraction-method value-added tax is actually just a simple combination of a sort of corporate income tax and an ordinary payroll tax. (Fittingly, Senator Cruz’s plan uses this VAT to eliminate the corporate income tax and the payroll tax.)
Send your complaints to the Tax Foundation people................who say differently................
I'm arguing for the fair tax. If you and Cruz want to get a room together and work out your differences one way or another, that's cool. But here's an idea, what if with me you argue what I support instead of what Cruz does?
My god...........semantics...........Which goes back to companies passing on the cost of that tax...................You really think Netflix is just going to suck it up and pay the tax without passing that cost on..........Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
Earlier you were arguing that companies pass that bill forward, and now you change course............
Netflix is gonna pass that tax forward to Disney......or they are going to pass it on to the CONSUMER.......or those paying for advertising....................They aren't gonna eat it.
Yes, I think Netflix is going to suck up the tax that Disney ... wait for it ...
DIDN'T PAY
and not pass it along to the consumer.
Are you not actually reading my posts or were you dropped on your head too many times as a child.
I'm getting tired of a conversation where you keep arguing points that I didn't say
Link it then..............the exact plan you favor................specifics...............Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A PrimerTed Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
In that sense, a subtraction-method value-added tax is actually just a simple combination of a sort of corporate income tax and an ordinary payroll tax. (Fittingly, Senator Cruz’s plan uses this VAT to eliminate the corporate income tax and the payroll tax.)
Send your complaints to the Tax Foundation people................who say differently................
I'm arguing for the fair tax. If you and Cruz want to get a room together and work out your differences one way or another, that's cool. But here's an idea, what if with me you argue what I support instead of what Cruz does?
My god...........semantics...........Which goes back to companies passing on the cost of that tax...................You really think Netflix is just going to suck it up and pay the tax without passing that cost on..........Ted Cruz’s “Business Flat Tax:” A Primer
How Would It Apply To an Ordinary Business’s Income?
The starting point for a subtraction-method value-added tax is pretty simple, especially when it comes to everyday private businesses. You start with all of a business’s revenues. (Most likely, this tax would be filed on a quarterly basis.)
However, you don’t stop there: a problem with counting all business revenues is that it ends up being a double-counting. For example, suppose you love watching Disney movies on Netflix. Netflix gets revenues from your subscription, and then it uses some of that money to pay Disney for the rights to Disney content. If we counted that money both at the Disney level and the Netflix level, we’d end up taxing the same basic product twice, merely because it involves two different companies. This is not good tax policy; that’s why modern tax systems try to avoid this.
The way the subtraction-method VAT fixes this is by, well, subtraction. Under this kind of tax system, Netflix would count all of its revenue, but then subtract the amount that it pays to other businesses, like Disney. Disney would then have to account for its own revenue and also file taxes. The result is that everything gets neatly single-counted, and nothing gets double-counted.
In the fair tax, if Netflix provides Disney content to the consumer, Netflix charges the fair tax, Disney doesn't pay the fair tax on fees they get from Netflix. That is unambiguous in how the Fair Tax works, it's only the primary market.
Note this doesn't say it's talking about the Fair Tax, it's actually talking about a VAT. I agreed that I don't support that and for this exact reason. You got anything on what we disagree on rather than what we agree on?
Earlier you were arguing that companies pass that bill forward, and now you change course............
Netflix is gonna pass that tax forward to Disney......or they are going to pass it on to the CONSUMER.......or those paying for advertising....................They aren't gonna eat it.
Yes, I think Netflix is going to suck up the tax that Disney ... wait for it ...
DIDN'T PAY
and not pass it along to the consumer.
Are you not actually reading my posts or were you dropped on your head too many times as a child.
I'm getting tired of a conversation where you keep arguing points that I didn't say
I've said about 10 times that companies are going to pass that cost on...............
Republicans have broken voter turnout records in every state so far. I'm pretty sure that is the result of the Trump phenomenon. I'm also pretty sure a lot of his supporters will disappear with him if he loses the nomination. I know how much a lot of you dislike Trump, but at this point he is probably the best bet for a Republican win.
Republicans have broken voter turnout records in every state so far. I'm pretty sure that is the result of the Trump phenomenon. I'm also pretty sure a lot of his supporters will disappear with him if he loses the nomination. I know how much a lot of you dislike Trump, but at this point he is probably the best bet for a Republican win.
