Tax Reform- How We Can Save Our Country

[Outraged Citizen]

Is it a shock to know that there is a proposal to start a FEDERAL sales tax?
Not to me. For years, I have extolled the virtues of this version of tax reform. Let's start off with some basic guidelines that should be established...

1. Taxes should vary from item to item. Bill Gates should not pay the same percentage of tax on a private yacht that I pay on a tomato. This seems reasonable, a "Luxury Tax" is a pretty common idea. If you disagree, you're probably wealthy.

2. The tax should be high, but replace, NOT SUPPLEMENT the federal income tax. Imagine a world where all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and other people who mooch off the system and don't pull their weight finally HAVE to give federal homage to the government? Maybe we could finally pay off the national Debt

3. Business taxes should be left alone. Their would be no difference as there is now, the money you spend doing business is a tax write-off at the end of the year.

What are the benefits? Well, obviously the taxes that all citizens must pay(Take that, you freaking crackheads. No more Bentleys without Taxation). Also, for saving your money, you earn on your entire income. Not what the government gives you, but everything. If you are responsible and invest your money wisely, you make more in the long run. Making more means spending more, ask any economist in the world.

You also eliminate "Tax Brackets". If I make $100,000 dollars a year, I pay the same percentage of tax that someone who makes three times that pays. And I know someone will be angry about the "Luxury Tax" proposal. But guess what? If I really want that private aircraft, yacht, mansion, etc., I will pay. No doubt.

I'm sure there are flaws in my reasoning, and that any number of people will berate my ideas here. Bring it on. I relish knowledge and new perspectives. Please reply.

And remember, I love my country. I do NOT speak out against any particular person or political group. I am only "Outraged Citizen" Because I miss the America we onde had, where you weren't afraid to walk down a street at 2 in the morning. (And I'm only 23....)

God Bless America

[Mr. P]

And the answer is....LINK (http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_main)

[darin]

Is it a shock to know that there is a proposal to start a FEDERAL sales tax?
Not to me. For years, I have extolled the virtues of this version of tax reform. Let's start off with some basic guidelines that should be established...

1. Taxes should vary from item to item. Bill Gates should not pay the same percentage of tax on a private yacht that I pay on a tomato. This seems reasonable, a "Luxury Tax" is a pretty common idea. If you disagree, you're probably wealthy.

Define wealthy. Must include cost of living in the particular place where the 'wealthy' person lives.

For instance...If I make $80k year am I wealthy? If I live in parts of California, i'd qualify for government housing (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/08/22/affordable_housing____for_affluent/) making TWICE that amount.


Frankly, you should probably save $ and grow your own tomatos if you're bothered by tax on it. :D



2. The tax should be high, but replace, NOT SUPPLEMENT the federal income tax. Imagine a world where all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and other people who mooch off the system and don't pull their weight finally HAVE to give federal homage to the government? Maybe we could finally pay off the national Debt

Taxes won't pay off our debts....Conservative ideals in the policy-setting levels of our governments will pay off debts.


3. Business taxes should be left alone. Their would be no difference as there is now, the money you spend doing business is a tax write-off at the end of the year.

Business taxes should be lowered by a large percent. One should have to pay NO MORE on their income simply because they own the business, as I do working for the Govt.



What are the benefits? Well, obviously the taxes that all citizens must pay(Take that, you freaking crackheads. No more Bentleys without Taxation). Also, for saving your money, you earn on your entire income. Not what the government gives you, but everything. If you are responsible and invest your money wisely, you make more in the long run. Making more means spending more, ask any economist in the world.

Who gets a tax-free bentley? In WA state I'd pay $23000 in tax on a $250,000 Bentley. Extortion.

First thing we should do - as a nation - eliminate Social Security Extortion.



You also eliminate "Tax Brackets". If I make $100,000 dollars a year, I pay the same percentage of tax that someone who makes three times that pays. And I know someone will be angry about the "Luxury Tax" proposal. But guess what? If I really want that private aircraft, yacht, mansion, etc., I will pay. No doubt.

I'm sure there are flaws in my reasoning, and that any number of people will berate my ideas here. Bring it on. I relish knowledge and new perspectives. Please reply.

And remember, I love my country. I do NOT speak out against any particular person or political group. I am only "Outraged Citizen" Because I miss the America we onde had, where you weren't afraid to walk down a street at 2 in the morning. (And I'm only 23....)

God Bless America


I'm not afraid to walk down the street at 2am because I carry a Springfield XD40 pistol. :)

[LuvRPgrl]

Is it a shock to know that there is a proposal to start a FEDERAL sales tax?
Not to me. For years, I have extolled the virtues of this version of tax reform. Let's start off with some basic guidelines that should be established...

1. Taxes should vary from item to item. Bill Gates should not pay the same percentage of tax on a private yacht that I pay on a tomato. This seems reasonable, a "Luxury Tax" is a pretty common idea. If you disagree, you're probably wealthy.

2. The tax should be high, but replace, NOT SUPPLEMENT the federal income tax. Imagine a world where all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and other people who mooch off the system and don't pull their weight finally HAVE to give federal homage to the government? Maybe we could finally pay off the national Debt

3. Business taxes should be left alone. Their would be no difference as there is now, the money you spend doing business is a tax write-off at the end of the year.

What are the benefits? Well, obviously the taxes that all citizens must pay(Take that, you freaking crackheads. No more Bentleys without Taxation). Also, for saving your money, you earn on your entire income. Not what the government gives you, but everything. If you are responsible and invest your money wisely, you make more in the long run. Making more means spending more, ask any economist in the world.

You also eliminate "Tax Brackets". If I make $100,000 dollars a year, I pay the same percentage of tax that someone who makes three times that pays. And I know someone will be angry about the "Luxury Tax" proposal. But guess what? If I really want that private aircraft, yacht, mansion, etc., I will pay. No doubt.

I'm sure there are flaws in my reasoning, and that any number of people will berate my ideas here. Bring it on. I relish knowledge and new perspectives. Please reply.

And remember, I love my country. I do NOT speak out against any particular person or political group. I am only "Outraged Citizen" Because I miss the America we onde had, where you weren't afraid to walk down a street at 2 in the morning. (And I'm only 23....)

God Bless America

Everything bought and sold, whether wholesale, retail or business, straight across the board, 10%, simple easy and harder to cheat

[Outraged Citizen]

DMP, do you see no merit to any of my ideas?

And I'm sure that your hard-core, republican attitude will say, "Well, our government needs to outright STOP drug dealers!! Who cares about their taxes?! The moral fabric of America..." etc.

The tomato analogy? You took that completely out of context. LUXURY ITEMS refer to items that no common person would ever need. "What's common? " Maybe a private jet? $250,000 car?(sounds luxury to me.)

I appreciate your well articulated response, but I take minor offense at the thought that you would think of me as a liberal. I wish only for the American people to take matters into their own hands. To take responsibility for the nation's current condition. Our nation has gone from a community minded organism to an instant gratification one. We all buy what we want, when we want it. It truly sickens me.

Wow. The fact that you carry a handgun is reassuring. More people should. But the underlying feeling of your statement is disturbing. would you really have no objection to pulling the trigger? I admit that I own a handgun, and would not hesitate to use it if the need arose!! But, it would break me to have to do so. I cherish all human life, and the only possible reason to do so would be to avoid a death. See a shrink if killing wouldn't make you question yourself.

Where are the movie stars throwing fund raisers to releive national debt? We all consider this the governments responsibility, but we forget that the government was only established to represent the will of the people!! Rise, America! Democrats beleive in a socialist community, where we give all our money to the government and they take care of us. Republicans beleive the opposite, that the government should only take a minor role in our lives, almost invisible. I propose a new party. The people support the government. This is the America I beleive we have escaped. Our government can only do what we allow them to do, and when we don't support them properly, we get stupid laws. Oh well, maybe I'm insane.

I anxiously await your rebuttal.

[KarlMarx]

Up until FDR, only the wealthy paid an income tax.

FDR was the president who brought it to the middle class because he needed a means to pay for his New Deal... does this sound familiar?

[darin]

DMP, do you see no merit to any of my ideas?


Of course I do - did you read what I wrote? I only took exception to those items I mentioned.



And I'm sure that your hard-core, republican attitude will say, "Well, our government needs to outright STOP drug dealers!! Who cares about their taxes?! The moral fabric of America..." etc.

Why do you think I'm a republican, much-less a Hard Core republican - or possess the attitude of same?

Our government IS a 'drug dealer'...(shrug)



The tomato analogy? You took that completely out of context. LUXURY ITEMS refer to items that no common person would ever need. "What's common? " Maybe a private jet? $250,000 car?(sounds luxury to me.)

Did you see my smilie? I thought the tomato comment was funny.

Now you are betraying your liberal tendencies...you've decided what 'common' people "need". You're becoming the moral police.



I appreciate your well articulated response, but I take minor offense at the thought that you would think of me as a liberal. I wish only for the American people to take matters into their own hands. To take responsibility for the nation's current condition. Our nation has gone from a community minded organism to an instant gratification one. We all buy what we want, when we want it. It truly sickens me.

...but your liberal/progressive ideas on what people NEED vs what they have the freedom to BUY betrays liberal leanings. Don't be offended for what you believe. You're also betraying socialist (hence liberal) tendencies w/ your comments on community-minded. We should be individually-minded. Free to buy what we can afford. Free to, yes, get up to our eyeballs in debt and ruin our lives.

[qutoe]
Wow. The fact that you carry a handgun is reassuring. More people should. But the underlying feeling of your statement is disturbing. would you really have no objection to pulling the trigger? [/quote]

Objection? To shooting at somebody who is trying to harm me or my family? The only sadness I'd feel is if I killed him by hitting him ONLY 11 times out of 12. People don't draw because they want to scare somebody away. We draw when we have no other means of protection/escape/etc.

My comment was with regard to the security I feel. I feel safe because I've taken measures to protect me and those around me.



I admit that I own a handgun, and would not hesitate to use it if the need arose!! But, it would break me to have to do so. I cherish all human life, and the only possible reason to do so would be to avoid a death. See a shrink if killing wouldn't make you question yourself.

See a shrink? I cherish human lives of good people. Evil people have no right to harm me or my family. BECAUSE I cherish the lives of those around me MORE than an evil person, I carry. And will shoot if I have to.



Where are the movie stars throwing fund raisers to releive national debt? We all consider this the governments responsibility, but we forget that the government was only established to represent the will of the people!!

...They are ruining this nation due to the oppressive debt DESPITE the will of the people... :(


Rise, America! Democrats beleive in a socialist community, where we give all our money to the government and they take care of us. Republicans beleive the opposite, that the government should only take a minor role in our lives, almost invisible. I propose a new party. The people support the government. This is the America I beleive we have escaped. Our government can only do what we allow them to do, and when we don't support them properly, we get stupid laws. Oh well, maybe I'm insane.

I anxiously await your rebuttal.

I before E except after C. Believe. Not Beleive.

DMP : dmp as OUTRAGED CITIZEN : Outraged Citizen

And it's not a rebuttal...it's me essplay'n stuff to somebody who might-should think about Enlisting into the Military. Would really help.

[Outraged Citizen]

2 days on this site, and I have a very interesting friend. Oh yes, dmp, I would love to actually love to sit and have a conversation with you.

And beleive Vs. believe? Finger slowness. Common error, and I seldom review (reveiw?:)) anything I write. So take that, qutoe.Hahaha, I love debate.

And maybe I do have some liberal views. I certainly never thought of myself as a liberal, but more of an open minded individual. I merely thought you were republican (and still do) because of your ideas and opinions. I may be wrong, but I never judge.

But I digress. I merely want to find a way for our country to resolve the crisis we are in. And all here must admit that we are in a crisis. The country is in debt, and we keep pumping money into the things we don't need. If you can't afford to pay your rent, do you loan money to your buddy for cigarettes? No. Let's take care of ourselves, to put us in a better position to help other countries.

I'm sorry, I really didn't see your smiley. My bad. Thank you for finding the witticism in my analogy. But can you really not distinguish from necessary items for everyday and luxury items? Maybe I am liberal.

dmp, my new friend, I pray that you read and reply to every post I ever write. Which might be a few, I'm very opinionated. Until next time, forum.

P.S. To everyone I have not responded to in this forum, thank you for your posts. I wish all views to be expressed, it's the only way we learn anything. The definition of insanity is repeating an action several times and expecting a different outcome, and being blind to new ideas always leads to repeating behaviors. I only reply to dmp because he provides me with a wall to bounce my ideas off of. Thanks to all, all opinions welcomed.

[Sweetchuck]

I am fairly convinced that any significant tax and/or political reform will not be had without violence.

[darin]

Just want to say, I miss the panhandle of Florida. Very pretty there...

[DragonStryk72]

1. Taxes should vary from item to item. Bill Gates should not pay the same percentage of tax on a private yacht that I pay on a tomato. This seems reasonable, a "Luxury Tax" is a pretty common idea. If you disagree, you're probably wealthy.

2. The tax should be high, but replace, NOT SUPPLEMENT the federal income tax. Imagine a world where all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and other people who mooch off the system and don't pull their weight finally HAVE to give federal homage to the government? Maybe we could finally pay off the national Debt

3. Business taxes should be left alone. Their would be no difference as there is now, the money you spend doing business is a tax write-off at the end of the year.

What are the benefits? Well, obviously the taxes that all citizens must pay(Take that, you freaking crackheads. No more Bentleys without Taxation). Also, for saving your money, you earn on your entire income. Not what the government gives you, but everything. If you are responsible and invest your money wisely, you make more in the long run. Making more means spending more, ask any economist in the world.

You also eliminate "Tax Brackets". If I make $100,000 dollars a year, I pay the same percentage of tax that someone who makes three times that pays. And I know someone will be angry about the "Luxury Tax" proposal. But guess what? If I really want that private aircraft, yacht, mansion, etc., I will pay. No doubt.

I'm sure there are flaws in my reasoning, and that any number of people will berate my ideas here. Bring it on. I relish knowledge and new perspectives. Please reply.

And remember, I love my country. I do NOT speak out against any particular person or political group. I am only "Outraged Citizen" Because I miss the America we onde had, where you weren't afraid to walk down a street at 2 in the morning. (And I'm only 23....)

God Bless America

Okay, to elaborate on what Mr. P posted. The Fair Tax is probably the closest thing to what you're talking about. The Fair Tax is a federal retail sales tax on finished goods that would replace the current income taxes.

I understand your thought about the rich getting taxed more, but it is one formed in ignorance. Rich people are rich because they own businesses, and can thus dictate the price of goods and services. The rich will never have to pay taxes no matter how you levy them, because they can simply raise prices to compensate for any such tax. It's that simple, really. So it's better to keep it to a set tax that decreases the paperwork involved, and get everyone off the hook there.

The biggest benefit to the Fair Tax is the transparency of it. You know exactly how much you are contributing, because it's right there on your receipt. It also eliminates the problem of illegals not having to pay in, because everyone who buys anything would automatically be paying the tax. We would be able to cut the IRS down to less than a third of it's current size, since we really only need the basic monitoring of incoming funds, as opposed to keeping tax files on every single american worker.

Now, to run with your tomato analogy a bit, the Fair Tax covers this by doing a monthly debit system of the taxes taken for necessity items, which can be adjusted according to cost of living in the area you live in easily enough. The debit would occur by monthly allotment, not enough to cover your essentials, but it would cover the taxes you pay on said essentials. Overall, it's easier and simple that way, to keep things consistent.

One big benefit is to the used items market, which would be operating tax free, creating an ancillary "recycling" program as people who want a deal go after used goods that are tax free. This is especially useful in the housing market, encouraging people to use the houses already available, rather than increasing sprawl.

The reason the fair tax gets rid of the business taxes, real estate taxes, and whatnot is because there's no reason for them. by using the retail sales tax, we can move all of those individual transactions that need to be monitored and categorized, and move them to the end of line at the register. About 30% of what you pay for goods right now (before state sales tax) is just the costs of the taxes that occur at various junctures. Think of it like this: you want make an iphone, so you have the taxes on the raw materials, the taxes on the shipping of the raw materials, the taxes on the purchase of those raw materials, the taxes on the processing, so on and so forth until you have the finished product on the shelf. If you assume even one or two accountants per transaction point (I'm being optimistic), then you have a vast ton of people overseeing every facet. Changing it to a federal retail sales tax changes the equation, and takes the red tape out of the way as much as possible.

[sgtdmski]

Is it a shock to know that there is a proposal to start a FEDERAL sales tax?
Not to me. For years, I have extolled the virtues of this version of tax reform. Let's start off with some basic guidelines that should be established...

1. Taxes should vary from item to item. Bill Gates should not pay the same percentage of tax on a private yacht that I pay on a tomato. This seems reasonable, a "Luxury Tax" is a pretty common idea. If you disagree, you're probably wealthy.

2. The tax should be high, but replace, NOT SUPPLEMENT the federal income tax. Imagine a world where all the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, and other people who mooch off the system and don't pull their weight finally HAVE to give federal homage to the government? Maybe we could finally pay off the national Debt

3. Business taxes should be left alone. Their would be no difference as there is now, the money you spend doing business is a tax write-off at the end of the year.

What are the benefits? Well, obviously the taxes that all citizens must pay(Take that, you freaking crackheads. No more Bentleys without Taxation). Also, for saving your money, you earn on your entire income. Not what the government gives you, but everything. If you are responsible and invest your money wisely, you make more in the long run. Making more means spending more, ask any economist in the world.

You also eliminate "Tax Brackets". If I make $100,000 dollars a year, I pay the same percentage of tax that someone who makes three times that pays. And I know someone will be angry about the "Luxury Tax" proposal. But guess what? If I really want that private aircraft, yacht, mansion, etc., I will pay. No doubt.

I'm sure there are flaws in my reasoning, and that any number of people will berate my ideas here. Bring it on. I relish knowledge and new perspectives. Please reply.

And remember, I love my country. I do NOT speak out against any particular person or political group. I am only "Outraged Citizen" Because I miss the America we onde had, where you weren't afraid to walk down a street at 2 in the morning. (And I'm only 23....)

God Bless America

Luxury taxes do not work, just ask Jimmy Carter, he tried one on yachts and diamonds, do you know what the rich did?? They stopped buying which caused higher unemployment in the yacht and diamond industry.

From your post it sounds to me that you are a proponent for the flat tax. Eliminate all deductibles and charge everyone a flat tax percentage.

Get rid of payroll and the income tax and start a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage which means everyone pays the same amount. Whether u make $40,000, $400,000 or $4,000,000 a year u pay the same amount!!!

dmk

[Little-Acorn]

Is it a shock to know that there is a proposal to start a FEDERAL sales tax?
Not to me. For years, I have extolled the virtues of this version of tax reform. Let's start off with some basic guidelines that should be established...

(other proposals for raising some taxes while lowering others follow)

Currently, nearly half the personal income of the entire country, is taken in taxes (Fed, State, Local), including sales taxes, gasoline taxes, property taxes, and all the rest.

As long as that remains true, no proposals for changing who gets taxed and for what, will make the slightest difference in saving the country.

Back to the drawing board, OC.

[Outraged Citizen]

Currently, nearly half the personal income of the entire country, is taken in taxes (Fed, State, Local), including sales taxes, gasoline taxes, property taxes, and all the rest.

As long as that remains true, no proposals for changing who gets taxed and for what, will make the slightest difference in saving the country.

Back to the drawing board, OC.

Well, that just goes to prove that our country can never be as great as it once was until becoming a politician stops being profitable

[DragonStryk72]

Luxury taxes do not work, just ask Jimmy Carter, he tried one on yachts and diamonds, do you know what the rich did?? They stopped buying which caused higher unemployment in the yacht and diamond industry.

From your post it sounds to me that you are a proponent for the flat tax. Eliminate all deductibles and charge everyone a flat tax percentage.

Get rid of payroll and the income tax and start a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage which means everyone pays the same amount. Whether u make $40,000, $400,000 or $4,000,000 a year u pay the same amount!!!

dmk

Unfortunately, our current progressive tax system started out as the flat tax system, so going back to it would just be starting the problem over again.

[Supposn]

I would hope that no U.S. president or congress would be so imprudent as to attempt transferring our nation’s major revenue source in a single step.

Any problem encountered within such an extremely hugh scale of tax modification would be financially disastrous. There’s much less down side to multi-step simultaneous transfer of revenue sources. A single step could be a financial disaster to our nation. Those that will accept only a single step transfer must also accept that a federal sales tax will never be enacted.

I believe that an acceptable rate of sales tax could not feasibly replace the entire revenue we derive from income taxes, (i.e. the “fair tax”). If I’m wrong, sales taxes could completely replace income taxes. If I’m correct, after some incremental step the sales tax rate will approach an unacceptable rate and the transfer of the tax sources will have to be halted or interrupted.

Respectfully, Supposn

[DragonStryk72]

I would hope that no U.S. president or congress would be so imprudent as to attempt transferring our nation’s major revenue source in a single step.

Any problem encountered within such an extremely hugh scale of tax modification would be financially disastrous. There’s much less down side to multi-step simultaneous transfer of revenue sources. A single step could be a financial disaster to our nation. Those that will accept only a single step transfer must also accept that a federal sales tax will never be enacted.

I believe that an acceptable rate of sales tax could not feasibly replace the entire revenue we derive from income taxes, (i.e. the “fair tax”). If I’m wrong, sales taxes could completely replace income taxes. If I’m correct, after some incremental step the sales tax rate will approach an unacceptable rate and the transfer of the tax sources will have to be halted or interrupted.

Respectfully, Supposn

Except that it doesn't work and here's why: the "step-by-step" method never gets off the ground, because as soon as the changes start to mount, people start getting other ideas, and lobby groups jump in.

Visit the FairTax site in my link, the site can help break it down for you better. Firstly, you would have a vastly larger taxable base with the sales tax than you do with income tax (all tourists, illegal and legal immigrants alike, everyone's paying in, cause everyone buys things.), to help balance a bit out. Second, Costs of maintaining the tax system drop radically, as you really only need some minor bits of monitoring to ensure the flow of tax revenue.

For the poor, they would get to hold onto their entire paycheck, to use as needed to improve their status, as opposed to the current policy of taxation that cuts a bunch of their immediate funds out, even if some of it is later given back to them if they pay to get the money back.

[Supposn]

Dragon Stryke72, I’m a proponent of a general consumption tax, (i.ee. the “fair tax”) to whatever extent it can feasibly replace our income taxes. You’re preaching to the choir.

I would hope that no U.S. president or congress would be so imprudent as to attempt transferring our nation’s major revenue source in a single step.

Any problem encountered within such an extremely huge scale of tax modification would be financially disastrous. There’s much less down side to multi-step simultaneous transfer of revenue sources. A single step could be a financial disaster to our nation.

Those insisting upon a single step transfer of our entire major revenue sources, (i.e. the income tax system), are insisting that no portion of our federal income tax system shall ever be replaced.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Supposn]

Outraged citizen,
. . . . unlike conventional sales taxes, a Value Added Tax, (VAT) transaction has no imbedded and hidden additional sales tax amounts carried forward from previous transactions. Purchasers do not pay taxes upon the amounts of previous purchasers’ sales taxes. The tax amount the purchaser sees is the only amount of sales tax the purchaser actually pays.

Using conventional sales tax methods the amount of final individual transactions’ additional sales taxes due to previous materials, components, distributions and other previous transactions may be estimated but cannot be determined with any certainty.

Within the USA there are jurisdictions where the state and local (conventional) sales taxes are 8% or greater. That means that many of their ultimate purchasers of goods and services are directly and indirectly now paying well in excess of 10% sales tax. How much in excess cannot be determined.

I’m a proponent of the fair tax but I do not have confidence in others’ claims that a 23% sales tax could replace all of our federal income tax revenues (if they are referring to the conventional sales tax method which significantly understates the actual rate of taxes paid by the ultimate consumers).

Is (23% federal plus 8% state and local) = 31% sales tax be an acceptable conventional sales tax rate? I believe even a conventional sales tax rate to replace all federal income taxes revenue would be significantly greater than 23% federal rate.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Mr. P]

Supposn...you need to visit the "Fairtax" (http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_main) web site. You say you support it but from your posts you really don't seem to be familiar/or understand it. I may be wrong.

[Solar]

Luxury taxes do not work, just ask Jimmy Carter, he tried one on yachts and diamonds, do you know what the rich did?? They stopped buying which caused higher unemployment in the yacht and diamond industry.

From your post it sounds to me that you are a proponent for the flat tax. Eliminate all deductibles and charge everyone a flat tax percentage.

Get rid of payroll and the income tax and start a flat tax. Everyone pays the same percentage which means everyone pays the same amount. Whether u make $40,000, $400,000 or $4,000,000 a year u pay the same amount!!!

dmk

I agree, DMK, the other point Outraged Citizen is missing, is that we are way over taxed.
Look at the economy, business is scared to death to invest in product, equipment, and employees, they know what's coming with gov run health care.
Why take on more tax burden, or employees, when the future is up in the air.

Show business you are willing to work with them, cut taxes, they will respond.

[Supposn]

From your post it sounds to me that you are a proponent for the flat tax. Eliminate all deductibles and charge everyone a flat tax percentage.dmk

SgtDmski, you are describing two different concepts as a “flat tax”.

Obviously no deductions from taxable income could produce equally as great revenue with a much lesser tax rate. For most individuals a tax based upon revenue rather than income is almost the same thing.

That would be a more of a radical change for entrepreneurs and commercial entities. Business could and would adjust to such a change. Business can and does adjust and to some extent continues within any government policy. [i.e. Commercial enterprises would continue be created, function, evolve or eventually vanish. I’m not stating that government policy do not or cannot promote or hinder commercial enterprises].

If we taxed revenue rather than income, that would be in effect a sales tax (or as some describe it), the “fair tax”.

You also describe a tax with only one tax rate as a “flat tax”. Sales taxes, due to their nature are generally but not necessarily created with only one tax rate.

Respectfully, Supposn

[Supposn]

If individual’s incomes are extremely taxed, then entrepreneurs and corporate executives will (as they had done during USA’s “expense account society” years), again live conspicuously and luxuriously on their corporate expense accounts. That would also be the consequences of extremely high corporate taxes.

Although all business taxes are in effect eventually paid for by the customers, I also believe that if a nation taxes incomes, it should tax both business and individual incomes and the tax rates should be approximately comparable.

Respectfully, Supposn