0
   

HUCKABEE'S FAIRTAX PROPOSAL

 
 
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 09:46 am
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,706 • Replies: 113
No top replies

 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 10:03 am
Of course the concept is "UNFAIR" to low and middle income wage earners and nothing is really mentioned about Corporations, manufacturers and re-sellers specifically.

This is just another scam by the elite, especially any suggestion of a repeal of the Estate Tax, to stick it to the middle and low income wage earners.

Beware of any politician who favors repeal of the Estate Tax. They are only suggesting it to satisfy the elite and themselves (got it Mitt Romney!)
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 10:26 am
The plan won't be simple and won't eliminate the IRS. Certainly, there will have to be someway to exempt,or rebate tax to, the poor. For this, income returns would have to be filed, and people would have to audit these. It would be a huge can of worms and a complete loser.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 10:47 am
ANOTHER LEFTIST FAIRTAX HATCHET JOB
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 11:01 am
Even if it wouldn't solve everything, I think a flat tax like this would be way closer to being "fair" than the mess we have now. If nothing else, it would be a good launching point for the future.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 11:15 am
McG, you provide a lot of generalizations and innuendo. A point-by-point rebuttal would be much more interesting and useful. I think that, if anything, Bookman understates the FairTax problems.

The graduated income tax system, which is based on ability-to-pay, is complex, and that is because our economy is complex. It is not a mess at all, and has worked well for over 70 years, helping to make this country as strong as it is. Moreover, due the flattening of the rates, and loopholes for the wealthy, we have become a growing plutocracy. This will only grow bigger were, god forbid, the FairTax enacted.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 01:55 pm
I think you should read more about what the Fair Tax really is.
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 02:22 pm
No tax system is ever fair for the simple fact that the government will always target the rich with taxes because the rich are the ones with the most money. The rich will always be made to pay more in taxes because the rich can afford to pay more in taxes.

As it stands now our tax system is likely as fair as it ever could be. The rich pay a higher percentage of their money in income taxes while the poor pay a higher percentage of their money in sales taxes (especially in states where necessities such as food and medicines are taxed).

At the same time both the poor and rich receive welfare in one form or another with the poor receiving more than the rich do as a proportion of the taxes they pay.
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 02:28 pm
Advocate wrote:
The graduated income tax system, which is based on ability-to-pay, is complex, and that is because our economy is complex. It is not a mess at all, and has worked well for over 70 years,[/quoe]

Actually the federal income tax as we now know it has only been around since World War II. From the time the 16th Amendment was ratified until 1942 you pretty much had to be something like a lawyer or doctor to have enough income for the federal government to want to tax it. Incomes less than $70,000 in today's money were not taxed. It was only after World War II started and the federal government needed large amounts of money on a regular basis that the idea of the income withholding tax was dreamed up and placed on most Americans.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 04:56 pm
flaja wrote:
Advocate wrote:
The graduated income tax system, which is based on ability-to-pay, is complex, and that is because our economy is complex. It is not a mess at all, and has worked well for over 70 years,[/quoe]

Actually the federal income tax as we now know it has only been around since World War II. From the time the 16th Amendment was ratified until 1942 you pretty much had to be something like a lawyer or doctor to have enough income for the federal government to want to tax it. Incomes less than $70,000 in today's money were not taxed. It was only after World War II started and the federal government needed large amounts of money on a regular basis that the idea of the income withholding tax was dreamed up and placed on most Americans.


The right is working very hard to kill the income tax, as well as the federal estate and gift taxes. This will be a great gift to the wealthy, whose income and wealth has been soaring. Regarding when the income tax began, see:

When was the U.S. income tax system established?
The U.S. government collected income taxes for the first time during the American Civil War (1861-65) and again in 1894, but the income tax system was not officially established until 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the document containing the country's laws. The law authorized the U.S. Congress (the country's law-making body) to set tax rates and to form the Bureau of Internal Revenue to oversee collection of taxes. Income taxes are graduated, that is, based on the level of a person's income. Tax rates have fluctuated since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, reaching their highest mark during World War II (1939-45) when the rate soared to 91 percent. The war effort also brought the innovation of automatic withholdings, whereby taxes are deducted directly from paychecks. In 1953 the Bureau of Internal Revenue was dramatically...
--enotes.com
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Dec, 2007 06:43 pm
Advocate wrote:
The right is working very hard to kill the income tax, as well as the federal estate and gift taxes. This will be a great gift to the wealthy, whose income and wealth has been soaring.


As well as anyone else who has ever been subjected to the income tax or the estate tax.

Since before I was born my mother worked a good 50-60 hours a week first as a cashier, then as a bookkeeper and finally as a comptroller for a private country club. Her highest yearly income was never much more than $60,000 and she had worked a good 30 years before she came close to earning this much on an annual basis.

My mother had to take medical retirement in 2001 due to lupus, and after fighting the Social Security Administration for SSI disability for 3 years she was awarded back benefits going back to the time she retired. However, the federal government retained 1/3 of the back benefits to pay for its cost of the court fight and then my mother had to pay her own lawyer $5000, which is the government mandated fee. Social Security disability has been her only source of income except for 2005 when she inherited some cash from her brother's estate. Her brother had been a local haul truck driver and he left an estate worth maybe $150,000 in cash (IRA and other pension accounts) and real estate (his home). And the only reason my uncle had so much money when he died was because he didn't have children, worked 40-60 hours a week and never lived an extravagant lifestyle. But my mother had to pay not only estate taxes on what her brother left to her, she had to file an income tax return for that year. The IRS counted her lump sum retroactive SSI as a single year's income instead of dividing it among the years it would have been paid out. That income, paid out in yearly amounts, was not enough to be taxable, but because of the way the IRS is considering it the IRS says it is taxable. It all likelihood this is a clerical or arithmetic error on the part of the IRS (as some of the IRS agents she has talked to says it is). But even after giving the IRS the worksheets that show how the income should be considered for tax purposes, my mother cannot get anyone with the IRS to officially correct the IRS error.

Furthermore, my mother is in very poor health and is facing surgery that could be bad. When she dies I will have pay estate taxes on what she is able to leave me.

The estate tax is the most unfair tax imaginable and the income tax isn't much different. Both should be abolished.

Quote:
The U.S. government collected income taxes for the first time during the American Civil War (1861-65) and again in 1894,


Unconstitutional both times since the taxes weren't apportioned among the states based on population as the Constitution originally required.

Quote:
Tax rates have fluctuated since the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment, reaching their highest mark during World War II (1939-45) when the rate soared to 91 percent.


Certain people were paying taxes at this rate as late as the 1970s. I've heard that Elvis Presley donated his entire income from his Hawaii concert to charity rather than pay taxes on it.

Quote:
The war effort also brought the innovation of automatic withholdings, whereby taxes are deducted directly from paychecks.


Like I said, most Americans didn't pay any federal income taxes until World War II.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 07:08 am
"When she dies I will have pay estate taxes on what she is able to leave me.

The estate tax is the most unfair tax imaginable and the income tax isn't much different. Both should be abolished"

Nothing in your post indicates that your Mom's net worth exceeds $2,000,000. You will NOT be subject to Federl Estate Tax upon her death unless she exceeds that threshold.

Apparently, you do not understand the Federal Estate and Gift Tax system.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 07:10 am
McGentrix wrote:
I think you should read more about what the Fair Tax really is.


It is a "scam" by the elite to further seperate the "classes" and further secure the concentration of wealth in the hands of the few.

I have a feeling you already know that.
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 07:59 am
woiyo wrote:
"When she dies I will have pay estate taxes on what she is able to leave me.

The estate tax is the most unfair tax imaginable and the income tax isn't much different. Both should be abolished"

Nothing in your post indicates that your Mom's net worth exceeds $2,000,000. You will NOT be subject to Federl Estate Tax upon her death unless she exceeds that threshold.

Apparently, you do not understand the Federal Estate and Gift Tax system.


Then why did my mother have to pay estate taxes on her brother's estate? She had to fill out a tax return form for the estate and she had to send the IRS a check for taxes due. If it wasn't an estate tax what was it?
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 09:48 am
flaja, the estate tax was probably something imposed by state law, not by federal law.

You say that the IRS did various things. You must know that the IRS has to enforce the law passed by congress.

The tax code use to have an income tax averaging provision, which would allow a taxpayer to average over a number of years a particularly large income amount received in a single year. For some reason, congress repealed this in '80's, probably before your mother received her large payout.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 12:19 pm
A FairTaxSM White Paper

The FairTax: Fundamentals and facts

These points address common questions regarding the FairTax plan:
- The FairTax is revenue neutral at $0.23 out of every retail dollar spent.
- The FairTax lowers the lifetime tax burden for most Americans.
- The FairTax benefits retirees who depend mostly on Social Security.
- The FairTax preserves the overall progressivity of the federal tax burden.
- The FairTax dramatically improves the U.S. economy.
- The FairTax improves the international competitiveness of American producers.
- The FairTax promotes home ownership better than the current system.
- The FairTax simplifies tax compliance, thereby reducing tax evasion.

read the rest by following the link above (pdf).
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 01:03 pm
I read the White Paper, and was totally underwhelmed. It is pie in the sky with huge and really obvious flaws. It would be exceedingly reckless to implement this, even more reckless than the right's supply-side economics, which continues to damage this country.

Please see http://www.brookings.edu/views/testimony/gale/20041006.pdf
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 01:58 pm
Advocate wrote:
flaja, the estate tax was probably something imposed by state law, not by federal law.


It was a federal tax form that my mother filled out. To my knowledge Florida does not have an estate tax since the state constitution prohibits a state income tax.

Quote:
You say that the IRS did various things. You must know that the IRS has to enforce the law passed by congress.


The IRS is a bureaucracy that assumes all taxpayers are guilty until the taxpayers prove their innocence to the satisfaction of the IRS.

Quote:
The tax code use to have an income tax averaging provision, which would allow a taxpayer to average over a number of years a particularly large income amount received in a single year.


My mother didn't receive a large income in a single year. She received back SSI benefits that the government had illegally withheld from her.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 02:37 pm
Advocate wrote:
flaja, the estate tax was probably something imposed by state law, not by federal law.


It was a federal tax form that my mother filled out. To my knowledge Florida does not have an estate tax since the state constitution prohibits a state income tax. AN ESTATE TAX IS NOT AN INCOME TAX. IT TAXES WEALTH, NOT INCOME.

Quote:
You say that the IRS did various things. You must know that the IRS has to enforce the law passed by congress.


The IRS is a bureaucracy that assumes all taxpayers are guilty until the taxpayers prove their innocence to the satisfaction of the IRS. YOU ARE BASICALLY CORRECT. WE HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO ESTABLISH OUR INCOME, CREDITS, AND DEDUCTIONS.

Quote:
The tax code use to have an income tax averaging provision, which would allow a taxpayer to average over a number of years a particularly large income amount received in a single year.


My mother didn't receive a large income in a single year. She received back SSI benefits that the government had illegally withheld from her.
FOR WHATEVER REASON, SHE EFFECTIVELY RECEIVED A LOT OF TAXABLE INCOME IN A SINGLE YEAR. SHE HAD NO GROUNDS TO EXCLUDE IT FROM TAXABLE INCOME.
0 Replies
 
flaja
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Dec, 2007 05:30 pm
Advocate wrote:
AN ESTATE TAX IS NOT AN INCOME TAX. IT TAXES WEALTH, NOT INCOME.


What is an estate if not the accumulation of a lifetime's income? The government taxed my uncle's income before he could spend it or invest it to generate more income, and then the government taxed that income again as part of his estate.

And don't forget that be it income or be it an estate it's still not the government's money to begin with. How much we pay in taxes is just as much an issue as what we pay taxes on is.

Quote:
YOU ARE BASICALLY CORRECT. WE HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO ESTABLISH OUR INCOME, CREDITS, AND DEDUCTIONS.


And if the IRS makes a clerical error that makes a taxpayer appear to be guilty of not paying his taxes the IRS can seize the taxpayer's assets in a heartbeat without indictment, trial or jury deliberations. I have absolutely no doubt that the IRS intentionally makes errors and sends taxpayers a bill knowing that many taxpayers either won't know any difference or will simply pay the bill because they are too afraid of the IRS to protest or question the bill.

Quote:
FOR WHATEVER REASON, SHE EFFECTIVELY RECEIVED A LOT OF TAXABLE INCOME IN A SINGLE YEAR. SHE HAD NO GROUNDS TO EXCLUDE IT FROM TAXABLE INCOME.


The income wasn't attributable to her in a single year. It was not a single year's income. It was paid out for a multiple year period and the yearly amount was not enough to be taxable according to what the IRS has told her. By all right the federal government should have to pay my mother interest for having the use of her money.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » HUCKABEE'S FAIRTAX PROPOSAL
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2024 at 07:32:41