11 Responses to “Pass the FAIRTAX”

1. Curtis Says:
   June 25th, 2007 at 10:20 am

   The Fair Tax is a great idea, and has wide-based support from Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, etc. One problem is that it actually gives economic and some political power back to the people (actually a lot) and there are those who would oppose it just on that basis. Eliminating the IRS and the thousands of pages of incomprehensible code should delight almost all people in the U.S. The current tax code actually decreases our competitiveness in the world markets and penalizes people for doing well and making their own economic decisions. You cannot really blame American companies for moving offshore and to various other countries around the world to remain competitive, and in many cases, just to stay in business. You can support the fair tax. It is true that some things will have to be carefully worked out in the plan, but once folks really understand what the Fair Tax is, they are quite likely to support, if not embrace it wholly. It seems appropriate to question candidates and potential candidates to find out where they stand on the Fair Tax, and to expect a straight answer, yes or no.

2. B-son Says:
   August 10th, 2007 at 4:48 am

   There are issues that would have to be addressed, such as, which items are included/excluded from the tax, to make sure that it is not a tax that favors one economic group. Another issue that would have to be addressed is the impact that it would have on the retail section of the economy and weigh it over the positive impact of people who are more inclined to save. Overall I think that it is a good plan but it has to be implimented very carefully because it would not be difficult to turn this good idea into a disaster.

3. Jeff Horgan Says:
   August 11th, 2007 at 11:38 am

   The biggest obstacle to the FairTax is education on how it works. If more citizens understood how it worked it would have a tidal wave of support. For instance the only thing that is exempt form the FairTax is education. Under the FairTax, education is considered an ongoing business expense and since businesses are not taxed neither is education.

   As for tax collection that will be left to the states and commonwealths to collect. It should not be a significant burden since 45 of the 50 states already have state sales taxes. That means the infrastructure is in place in all but a hand full up states. Those states will be able to contract those services from neighbor states if they choose not to open their own collection offices. The states and retailer are also compensated for collecting the tax to the amount of one quarter of one percent. What we are more likely to see is that states will see a rise in revenue because its citizens will have more money to pump into the local economies.

4. wbhill Says:
   November 7th, 2007 at 11:51 am

   A consumption tax is more fair, impossible to manipulate, and easy to implement.

5. James Roeder Says:
   November 10th, 2007 at 7:57 am

   A consumption tax has a effect on criminals “on-the-lam” and illegal immigration, in that those individuals will not have legal basis for receiving monthly (electronic?) rebates for their living expenses. Thus, their cost of living will rise. It would be a greater effect if the consumption tax were collected at ‘the-point-of-sale’ at a 200% rate, and immediately the overage 100% refunded via electronic banking. Use of a PRIVATELY ISSUED “state” tax ID (not federal government!) might also preclude any need for a national ID program. The IRS could become the Identity Review SERVICE, used only by those who think their consumption tax rate is unfair/incorrect. The 100% overage collected could be used to pay for our local police departments, thus making ‘crime pay’ in a reverse sense!

6. Jerry McConnell Says:
   November 17th, 2007 at 3:14 pm

   I certainly don’t understand all the ramifications of the Fair Tax, but just looking at it quickly says to me: What could be more fairer than everybody, from the obscenely wealthy to the utterly penniless poor, paying the exact percentage of taxes on items purchased.

   Of course some will still say that the rich should have a higher rate of taxation, but they have to be shown that by virtue of the hugely higher number of and cost of expenses for purchases for the rich as compared with purchases for the poor, the wealthy will be paying much, much more in taxes than the poor.

   But to me the most significant benefit that ALL Americans will gain is the total loss of the 12 billion dollar a year expense to provide the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This huge amount of money will not leave the US Treasury as all of the IRS will no longer exist. It won’t be needed as there will be no tax forms to fill out each year and there will be no way to cheat on taxes due. You pay the tax when you buy the merchandise. There will be no federal tax deductions from your paycheck and no checks to write on April 15th.

   I say, “Bring it on!”

   The Fair Tax is just that: a FAIR TAX.

7. Robert W Logsdon Says:
   November 18th, 2007 at 1:16 am

   Think about this, instead of punishing success, using income tax to fund the government, we will use retail sale of new products to fund the goveernment, even if that product is made in China! So when you buy that new product made in China, a percentage of the price will go to fund the government.
   We need http://www.fairtax.org now more than ever as I think http://www.fairtax.org will boost the value of the dollar and boost the economy of the USA.

8. Ian from Ann Arbor Says:
   November 18th, 2007 at 2:34 am

   While many who are invested in the current income tax system seek to demagog the well-researched FairTax plan (1), FairTax’s theoretical underpinnings have been professionally reviewed (2), and its acceptance in the professional / academic community continues to grow (3).

   Renown economist Laurence Kotlikoff believes that failure to enact the FairTax - choosing instead to try to “flatten” what he deems to be a non-flattenable income tax system - will eventuate into an irrevocable economic meltdown (4) because of the hidden aspects of the current system that make political accountability impossible. Tom Frey, of the DiVinci Institute, foresees the coming collapse of the income tax system (5).

   Here is why the FairTax MUST replace the income tax. It’s:

   • SIMPLE, easy to understand
   • EFFICIENT, inexpensive to comply with and doesn’t cause less-than-optimal business decisions for tax minimization purposes
   • FAIR, loophole free and everyone pays their share
   • LOW TAX RATE, achieved by broad base with no exclusions
   • PREDICTABLE, doesn’t change, so financial planning is possible
   • UNINTRUSIVE, doesn’t intrude into our personal affairs or limit our liberty
   • VISIBLE, not hidden from the public in tax-inflated prices or otherwise
   • PRODUCTIVE, rewards, rather than penalizes, work and productivity

   Its benefits are as follows:

   For INDIVIDUALS:
   • No more tax on income - make as much as you wish
   • You receive your full paycheck - no more deductions
   • You pay the tax when you buy “at retail” - not “used”
   • No more double taxation (e.g. like on current Capital Gains)
   • Reduction of “pre-FairTaxed” retail prices by 20%-30%
   • Adding back 29.9% FairTax maintains current price levels
   • FairTax would constitute 23% portion of new prices
   • Every household receives a monthly check, or “pre-bate”
   • “Prebate” is “advance payback” for taxes payable on monthly consumption to poverty level
   • FairTax’s “prebate” ensures progressivity, poverty protection
   • Finally, citizens are knowledgeable of what their tax IS
   • Elimination of “parasitic” Income Tax industry
   • NO MORE IRS. NO MORE FILING OF TAX RETURNS by individuals
   • Those possessing illicit forms of income will ALSO pay the FairTax
   • Households have more disposable income to purchase goods
   • Savings is bolstered with reduction of interest rates

   For BUSINESSES:
   • Corporate income and payroll taxes revoked under FairTax
   • Business compensated for collecting tax at “cash register”
   • No more tax-related lawyers, lobbyists on company payrolls
   • No more embedded (hidden) income/payroll taxes in prices
   • Reduced costs. Competition - not tax policy - drives prices
   • Off-shore “tax haven” headquarters can now return to U.S
   • No more “favors” from politicians at expense of taxpayers
   • Resources go to R&D and study of competition - not taxes
   • Global “free (and equitable) trade” becomes possible for currently-disadvanted (6) U.S. exports
   • US exports increase their share of foreign markets

   For the COUNTRY:
   • 7% - 13% economic growth projected in the first year of the FairTax
   • Jobs return to the U.S.
   • Foreign corporations “set up shop” in the U.S.
   • Tax system trends are corrected to “enlarge the pie”
   • Larger economic “pie,” means thinner tax rate “slices”
   • Initial 23% portion of price is pressured downward as “pie”
   increases
   • No more “closed door” tax deals by politicians and business
   • FairTax sets new global standard. Other countries will follow

   (1) http://snipurl.com/taxpanelrebutted (.pdf)
   (2) http://snipurl.com/taxnotes_galerebut (.pdf)
   (3) http://snipurl.com/econsopenletter (.pdf)
   (4) http://snipurl.com/meltdowninprogress
   (5) http://snipurl.com/incometaxcollapse
   (6) http://snipurl.com/tradeinequity

   The income tax system must ultimately fail, if for no other reason than that Washington politicians cannot seem to wean themselves from being “sucked down the spending hole” while seeking ways to hide the magnitude of taxation from those who ultimately pay for all of it - every working American. It’s well past time to scrap the tax code ( http://snipr.com/scrapthecode ) and pay for government the way that America’s working men and women are paid - when something is sold.

   —

   There is no reasonable equity of distribution under the current INCOME tax system. What’s more, the income tax code has become a tinkerer’s paradise for 53% of the lobbyists who game it in Washington DC. It’s a lucrative business, and the U.S. TAXPAYER pays for ALL of it in higher prices (a hidden tax which is incomprehensible to the average working person).

   Prices AFTER FairTax would look SIMILAR to prices BEFORE FairTax - NOT 30% HIGHER - as opponents contend; competition would see to it. The FairTax rate on new items would be 29.9% (on the new, reduced cost of items because business isn’t taxed under FairTax - thus lowering retail prices by 20% to 30%), or 23% of the “tax inclusive” price tag - this is the way INCOME TAX is figured (parts of the total dollar).

   The effective tax rate percentages, that different income groups would pay under a FairTax consumption tax, are calculated by crediting the monthly “prebate” (rebate of tax on necessities) against all likely monthly spending of citizen families (1 member, and greater based on figures established by the Dept. of HHS - a single person receiving ~$200/mo. A family of four receiving ~$500, in addition to family earners receiving their WHOLE paycheck). Prof.’s Kotlikoff and Rapson (10/06) have concluded,

   (From study: http://snipurl.com/kotcomparetaxrates ) “…the FairTax imposes much lower average taxes on working-age households than does the current system. The FairTax broadens the tax base from what is now primarily a system of labor income taxation to a system that taxes, albeit indirectly, both labor income and existing wealth. By including existing wealth in the effective tax base, much of which is owned by rich and middle-class elderly households, the FairTax is able to tax labor income at a lower effective rate and, thereby, lower the average lifetime tax rates facing working-age Americans.

   “Consider, as an example, a single household age 30 earning $50,000. The household’s average tax rate under the current system is 21.1 percent. It’s 13.5 percent under the FairTax. Since the FairTax would preserve the purchasing power of Social Security benefits and also provide a tax rebate, older low-income workers who will live primarily or exclusively on Social Security would be better off. As an example, the average remaining lifetime tax rate for an age 60 married couple with $20,000 of earnings falls from its current value of 7.2 percent to -11.0 percent under the FairTax. As another example, compare the current 24.0 percent remaining lifetime average tax rate of a married age 45 couple with $100,000 in earnings to the 14.7 percent rate that arises under the FairTax.”

   Further,

   (From study: http://snipurl.com/kotftmacromicro ) “…once one moves to generations postdating the baby boomers there are positive welfare gains for all income groups in each cohort. Under a 23 percent FairTax policy, the poorest members of the generation born in 1990 enjoy a 13.5 percent welfare gain. Their middle-class and rich contemporaries experience 5 and 2 percent welfare gains, respectively. The welfare gains are largest for future generations. Take the cohort born in 2030. The poorest members of this cohort enjoy a huge 26 percent improvement in their well-being. For middle class members of this birth group, there’s a 12 percent welfare gain. And for the richest members of the group, the gain is 5 percent.”

   It’s well past time to scrap the tax code ( http://snipr.com/scrapthecode ) and pay for government the way that America’s working men and women are paid - when something is sold.

   (Permission is granted to reproduce in whole or part. - Ian)

9. mike Says:
   December 25th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

   I think the Fair Tax is the best thing going for this country, however I have a question that I have emailed Neil Boortz, John Linder, and the Fair Tax website and still have not gotten a single answer from either. If a person incurs a rather large medical bill for services rendered, and the persons insurance company pays its share of the bill, who pays the 23% Fair Tax, the insurance company or the person who received services? The tax alone could be a substantial amount.

10. kelly Says:
    December 30th, 2007 at 12:21 pm

    In 1960, the top income tax rate was about 70%. Now with tax “reform” the top rate has been cut in half for the wealthiest people while shifting the cost of government more and moe to the middle class and the poor. I used to support many republican candidates, but in my view the republican party has pretty much been hijacked by giant corporations, or to paraphrase Eisenhour, the “military and industrial complex.” I watch C-Span quite a bit, and it appears that when you summarize republican public policy in a nutshell, it is all about legislation which benefits the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. A good example of this “Bush Ackwards” b.s. was the tax credit for buying trucks and SUV’s which get horrible gas mileage, which of course, makes us more dependent on foreign oil. Driving through south Tulsa you will discover that 90% of the vehicles on the road are SUV’s which were written off for business purposes and are being driven by wives and kids of businessmen who took advantage of the tax credit. . Why don’t you pass a similar 100% tax credit for purchasing hybrid, or hydrogen powered or high mileage compact cars? Is it because G.M. and Ford don’t make near the profit on fuel effecient vehicles, or is it because Exxon would make less profit and can’t monopolize hydrogen which is made from tap water?
    Why don’t we have universal health care when 90% of Canadians would not exchange their “socialist health care” for the American version. The Canadian system costs about 50% less than ours, and everyone is covered. Canadians now live years longer than Americans, and despite the lies you are being told by insurance companies, they don’t have lines or waiting lists for urgent or emergency care.
    I campaigned for Nixon, voted for Reagan and have in the past often supported republicans. I won’t do so anymore until I see candidates which show me some evidence that they are interested in public policy which is designed to benefit ALL AMERICANS rich and poor. I don’t agree with Ron Paul very often, but the man is sincere. Iraq was based upon a pack of lies and needs to be brought to an end soon. By the way, my son-in law is a Marine serving in Iraq, who should have been stationed in Afghanistan pursuing Bin-Laden.
    I was a charter member of Howard Phillips’ National Taxpayers Union which forced the passiage of the Balanced Budget Amendment and still believe in the principal of fiscal responsability.

11. Low Income Says:
    February 17th, 2008 at 12:09 am

    Ian from Ann Arbor said:

    • FAIR, loophole free and everyone pays their share

    Fair? Loophole free? The buyer of an existing home pays no tax, but the person who cannot buy and must rent that house instead pays through the nose indefinitely. Is that FAIR? Is that loophole free? Does everybody (specifically the homeowner) pay their fair share?

Discuss This Solution

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website