Cruz: Abolish The IRS...

[The Rabbi]

Which was 2 years ago and not really germane here because he hast indicated if he will push the same details or not.
Which part of that is unclear to you? Hell you cant tell a flat tax from a fair tax. Jarhead is right.

Rabbi....Skylar actually thinks that the IRS takes into consideration ones geographical location and corresponding cost of living when determining ones tax burden.

Do you not see what we are debating with?

I see no evidence to support Skylar's contention. And here is the IRS's own publication, which of course says nothing about location.
New IRS Fresh Start Initiative Helps Taxpayers Who Owe Taxes
Yes we are dealing with someone who cannot read and comprehend. And who probably votes.

Rabii...I have prepared hundreds of returns over the years.....mine, my children, my sister, brother, friends....I do it for the fun of it.
Nowhere is there a consideration of where you live and what your cost of living is compared to someone elses.....
Ones personal income tax is based solely on ones income .....not based on where you live.

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Oh...I see...higher cost of living areas have higher real estate taxes...so a larger write off....
But seeing as that only applies to property owners, you cant really say it is taking "cost of living" into consideration as the moron claimed.

True. I was giving the best interpretation.

 

[Skylar]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

 

[Jarhead]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011....and suggested I read it so I can debate it with you.
So I did. It discussed a consumption tax with the elimination of the income tax.

Still having trouble admitting you erred.

 

[Jarhead]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

lol...I suggest you cut your losses now Skylar. Who in the hell is talking about back taxes?

 

[Skylar]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

 

[Siete]

It says one is to be taxed on what they spend...not what they make. I don't know if it is a viable idea seeing as there will also be a state sales tax....so in the end, here in NY we would be paying 32% between fed and state....and whereas I can afford it, I cant see how someone making 20K a year can afford it.

no federal taxes are collected under a fair tax .. and yes, the prebate is considered entitlement or in RW terms, WELFARE... Everyone gets the same amount of $ regardless of income.

 

[Skylar]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

lol...I suggest you cut your losses now Skylar. Who in the hell is talking about back taxes?

I'm talking about the IRS takes one's ability to pay into account when assessing tax liability. And I'm giving specific examples. Specifically, the 'Local Standards' which are used by the IRS to determine one's housing and transportation expenses....and vary wildly by location.

Given that the IRS recognizes that actual expenses play a role in one's ability to pay taxes, would a 'fair tax' also take this into account?

 

[Jarhead]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

actually, yes, that IS the one you posted the link to and that IS the one I read and that IS the one that eliminates the income tax and implements the 23% sales tax.

So my guess is you did NOT read it?

 

[The Rabbi]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

Post a link or admit you're making it up.

 

[Skylar]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

actually, yes, that IS the one you posted the link to and that IS the one I read and that IS the one that eliminates the income tax and implements the 23% sales tax.

So my guess is you did NOT read it?

So that's from 2011? What '2011' link are you referring to?

 

[Jarhead]

Look...I gotta go. I will accept your explanation in regard to your claim that geographical location is an IRS consideration, although I disagree with your interpretation....so I will take that quote of your off my sig because it can be taken out of context. But overall, you are a very difficult person to debate with because you are all over the place, have a very short attention span and refuse to admit you erred when you do...So I am not interested in debating with you in the future. You don't want to learn...you want republicans to be wrong. I get it.

 

[g5000]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

I think Cruz is using the term "flat tax" in lieu of Fair Tax™ when speaking in public. He dumbs down his rhetoric for the audience. "Abolish the IRS! YEEEEE-HAWWWW!"

But the legislation he co-sponsors clearly indicates that when he is talking about a "flat tax", he means the Fair Tax.

The Fair Tax is technically a flat tax. It is also technically a sales tax. But it has mechanisms in it which are too complex to go into any great depth during a public speech. He does not want to put his audience to sleep. So he just goes with the generic "flat tax" term.

 

[Jarhead]

No skylar. Read the bill.....it specifically states that income tax would be eliminated.

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

actually, yes, that IS the one you posted the link to and that IS the one I read and that IS the one that eliminates the income tax and implements the 23% sales tax.

So my guess is you did NOT read it?

So that's from 2011? What '2011' link are you referring to?

what difference does it make? I thought your link was the 2011 proposal....it was the 2013.....but the bottom line is yo9u had no idea what the proposal was in the link you provided.

 

[Skylar]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

Post a link or admit you're making it up.

So that's a no, you're not familiar with local standards. How about the term 'offer in compromise'? Both are used by the IRS. With the IRS using Local Standards to help determine one's ability to pay taxes. Local standards are estimates of housing, transportation, etc expenses used to help determine an individuals ability to pay taxes. And they vary wildly between locations.

If I post a link verifying both, will you acknowledge that the IRS does in fact take location and housing expenses into account when assessing tax debt? Or will you ignore it regardless? If the latter, then there's not much point is posting the link. If the former, then I'd be happy to.

 

[g5000]

no federal taxes are collected under a fair tax .. and yes, the prebate is considered entitlement or in RW terms, WELFARE... Everyone gets the same amount of $ regardless of income.

They took a page right out of Thomas Paine's Agrarian Justice.

Having thus in a few words, opened the merits of the case, I shall now proceed to the plan I have to propose, which is,

To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person,when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling,as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance,by the introduction of the system of landed property

 

[Skylar]

So in 2012 he calls for a flat tax. In 2013 he calls for a national sales tax. In 2014 he calls for a flat tax.

Does that about cover it?

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

actually, yes, that IS the one you posted the link to and that IS the one I read and that IS the one that eliminates the income tax and implements the 23% sales tax.

So my guess is you did NOT read it?

So that's from 2011? What '2011' link are you referring to?

what difference does it make? I thought your link was the 2011 proposal....it was the 2013.....but the bottom line is yo9u had no idea what the proposal was in the link you provided.

I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about. And as bill summary I sent you had the year 2013 in the title, with the words 'introduced in 1/23/13' written in bold on the page, it makes me curious if you'd even looked at it. As there's no way you could mistake that for 2011.

 

[Contumacious]

Unlike all the rest, I have a simple plan, a straight Income Tax for people and corporations,

Nah, too much of a hassle.

How about outright confiscation after all we need to

1- feed you
2- insure you
3- clothe you
4- quench your thirst
4- pay for your education up to and including Community College
5- Defend and support the Jewish State
6- invade every country on the face of mother earth

 

[The Rabbi]

The claim was in regards to back taxes they would consider location. Which is sort of kind of true if real estate tax paid is part of your tax return.
But as I say, I see no evidence to support Skylar's claim. And with the last post wondering if Cruz is proposing both a VAT and a flat tax I am convinced we are dealing with a mental midget.

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

Post a link or admit you're making it up.

So that's a no, you're not familiar with local standards. How about the term 'offer in compromise'? Both are used by the IRS. With the IRS using Local Standards to help determine one's ability to pay taxes. Local standards are estimates of housing, transportation, etc expenses used to help determine an individuals ability to pay taxes. And they vary wildly between locations.

If I post a link verifying both, will you acknowledge that the IRS does in fact take location and housing expenses into account when assessing tax debt? Or will you ignore it regardless? If the latter, then there's not much point is posting the link. If the former, then I'd be happy to.

Your post 145:

So your income is irrelevant to the rebate? How then would you not be taxed on the first $23,000 of your yearly income? And what if the cost of living is higher in one area than it is in another. The IRS totally takes local cost of living into account.

But you have not shown the "IRS totally takes local cost of living into account." That is true ONLY in regards to negotiations on back taxes repayment schedules. That is a so different from what you first stated as to be a lie.

 

[Jarhead]

You specifically posted a link to the 2011

I specifically posted a link to a bill introduced in 2013.

Introduced in Senate (01/23/2013)

Text - S.122 - 113th Congress 2013-2014 Fair Tax Act of 2013 Congress.gov Library of Congress

Have you read it?

actually, yes, that IS the one you posted the link to and that IS the one I read and that IS the one that eliminates the income tax and implements the 23% sales tax.

So my guess is you did NOT read it?

So that's from 2011? What '2011' link are you referring to?

what difference does it make? I thought your link was the 2011 proposal....it was the 2013.....but the bottom line is yo9u had no idea what the proposal was in the link you provided.

I'm trying to figure out what you're talking about. And as bill summary I sent you had the year 2013 in the title, with the words 'introduced in 1/23/13' written in bold on the page, it makes me curious if you'd even looked at it. As there's no way you could mistake that for 2011.

well, lets see....I cited what the proposal was....23% consumption tax with the elimination of the income tax. Would that in itself pretty much show you looked at it? I was not wrapped up in the year it was proposed. I was wrapped up in the proposal itself. Where did I get 2011? I don't know. Maybe it was a typo on my part. The year was irrelevant to the discussion seeing as the discussion was the proposal itself and its contents.

But seeing as you did NOT know that it eliminated the income tax which was the very first line of the proposal, I have more reason to wonder if YOU read it....but I really don't care if you did or did not...for even if you did, it is likely you would not be able to understand it.

But as I said....you just want republicans to be wrong. I get it. Go for it. I was wrong with the year. You were wrong with the contents of the bill you posted a link to and wanted to debate. I prefer being wrong with the date.

Go away.

 

[Skylar]

Why would I need to support my claim if you agree with it?

I dont agree with it.

You've never heard of 'Local Standards' in regard to determining tax liability for back taxes?

Post a link or admit you're making it up.

So that's a no, you're not familiar with local standards. How about the term 'offer in compromise'? Both are used by the IRS. With the IRS using Local Standards to help determine one's ability to pay taxes. Local standards are estimates of housing, transportation, etc expenses used to help determine an individuals ability to pay taxes. And they vary wildly between locations.

If I post a link verifying both, will you acknowledge that the IRS does in fact take location and housing expenses into account when assessing tax debt? Or will you ignore it regardless? If the latter, then there's not much point is posting the link. If the former, then I'd be happy to.

Your post 145:

So your income is irrelevant to the rebate? How then would you not be taxed on the first $23,000 of your yearly income? And what if the cost of living is higher in one area than it is in another. The IRS totally takes local cost of living into account.

But you have not shown the "IRS totally takes local cost of living into account." That is true ONLY in regards to negotiations on back taxes repayment schedules. That is a so different from what you first stated as to be a lie.

Then if you agree that as far as back taxes are concerned, the IRS takes location and the ability to pay into account?

If so, then what are we disagreeing about?