Flat Tax vs Fair Tax

[Skull Pilot]

The fair tax is regressive and will make the rich richer. It will have a negative impact on the middle class and working poor and is the final step necessary to transform our nation into a Plutocracy.

Think for a moment about percentages. What percentage of income does a millionaire spend on products (and services?) and what percentage does a middle class family spend. An individual or a family can only buy so many things. I hope that's clear.

I'm glad you brought this up...and I would agree with you if it were true. But the Fair Tax has a prebate system built in. This is how it works...every house hold (depending on the size) will get a check from the government each month for the same amount. A house hold of 4 will get around $500. This will off set some of the cost of the taxes that month. $500 for a poor family is a lot but $500 for a millionaire is pocket change. So in the long run the rich will pay more of the tax then the poor.

If you spend your money wisely you could be paying very little if any taxes.

Do you know how much it would cost the send a check to everyone in the country every month?

 

[akelch]

So far no takers for the flat tax.

I prefer a flat tax.

Less moving parts more simplicity and less cost to oversee.

A 10% flat tax on the first dollar of income regardless of its source would bring in more money than our current income tax and cost billions less to enforce. We could use the savings to offset debt or to shore up safety nets.

As for Social Security I say leave the contributions as they are but let people own their own accounts. People would retire with more money and we could cut administration costs thereby increasing net revenue which then could be used to lower the income tax even more.

The fair tax with it's "prebates" and other calculations is cumbersome.

So 10 million people filing for tax returns and the government sending out checks every year is not "cumbersome"? Cumbersome for who?

The prebate would be automatic and mostly electronic.

 

[Dreamy]

I would lean toward a Flat Tax although I would want to know more about the exemptions for families.

 

[akelch]

The fair tax is regressive and will make the rich richer. It will have a negative impact on the middle class and working poor and is the final step necessary to transform our nation into a Plutocracy.

Think for a moment about percentages. What percentage of income does a millionaire spend on products (and services?) and what percentage does a middle class family spend. An individual or a family can only buy so many things. I hope that's clear.

I'm glad you brought this up...and I would agree with you if it were true. But the Fair Tax has a prebate system built in. This is how it works...every house hold (depending on the size) will get a check from the government each month for the same amount. A house hold of 4 will get around $500. This will off set some of the cost of the taxes that month. $500 for a poor family is a lot but $500 for a millionaire is pocket change. So in the long run the rich will pay more of the tax then the poor.

If you spend your money wisely you could be paying very little if any taxes.

Do you know how much it would cost the send a check to everyone in the country every month?

Most will be electronic and automatic. The cost would not be as much as you may think. We do it now with unemployment checks, SS checks, Medicare checks, food stamps, etc. and those amounts change all the time. This would be fixed.

But know I don't.... Do you?

 

[akelch]

I would lean toward a Flat Tax although I would want to know more about the exemptions for families.

Not sure...but I don't think there are any.

 

[RDD_1210]

I prefer a flat tax.

Less moving parts more simplicity and less cost to oversee.

A 10% flat tax on the first dollar of income regardless of its source would bring in more money than our current income tax and cost billions less to enforce. We could use the savings to offset debt or to shore up safety nets.

As for Social Security I say leave the contributions as they are but let people own their own accounts. People would retire with more money and we could cut administration costs thereby increasing net revenue which then could be used to lower the income tax even more.

The fair tax with it's "prebates" and other calculations is cumbersome.

Right on time....just strengthens what I just said. These ideas are liked because they are simple. Not because they are effective or productive.

It would be effective because revenue would increase.

I don't see how one can argue otherwise after all isn't it the purpose of taxes to raise revenue?

Why do you assume simplicity would not be effective? Our current bloated unfathomable complicated system doesn't seem to work very well does it?

Increase off the backs of the poor and middle class. How is that productive?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So far no takers for the flat tax.

I prefer a flat tax.

Less moving parts more simplicity and less cost to oversee.

A 10% flat tax on the first dollar of income regardless of its source would bring in more money than our current income tax and cost billions less to enforce. We could use the savings to offset debt or to shore up safety nets.

As for Social Security I say leave the contributions as they are but let people own their own accounts. People would retire with more money and we could cut administration costs thereby increasing net revenue which then could be used to lower the income tax even more.

The fair tax with it's "prebates" and other calculations is cumbersome.

So 10 million people filing for tax returns and the government sending out checks every year is not "cumbersome"? Cumbersome for who?

The prebate would be automatic and mostly electronic.

With a flat tax there would be no tax refunds therefore no checks, no electronic deposits etc. and therefore it would cost less.

You make 100 dollars this week, your employer withholds 10 and sends it in to the government for you just like it is now.

You paid your 10% you get no refunds.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Right on time....just strengthens what I just said. These ideas are liked because they are simple. Not because they are effective or productive.

It would be effective because revenue would increase.

I don't see how one can argue otherwise after all isn't it the purpose of taxes to raise revenue?

Why do you assume simplicity would not be effective? Our current bloated unfathomable complicated system doesn't seem to work very well does it?

Increase off the backs of the poor and middle class. How is that productive?

The lowest tax bracket is already 10% so I don't see the problem.

No one with an income should be exempt from the income tax.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I would lean toward a Flat Tax although I would want to know more about the exemptions for families.

Not sure...but I don't think there are any.

There shouldn't be. The rate would be lower and there would be no exemptions.

If you receive income you pay an income tax. It is the only way to be fair.

 

[akelch]

I prefer a flat tax.

Less moving parts more simplicity and less cost to oversee.

A 10% flat tax on the first dollar of income regardless of its source would bring in more money than our current income tax and cost billions less to enforce. We could use the savings to offset debt or to shore up safety nets.

As for Social Security I say leave the contributions as they are but let people own their own accounts. People would retire with more money and we could cut administration costs thereby increasing net revenue which then could be used to lower the income tax even more.

The fair tax with it's "prebates" and other calculations is cumbersome.

So 10 million people filing for tax returns and the government sending out checks every year is not "cumbersome"? Cumbersome for who?

The prebate would be automatic and mostly electronic.

With a flat tax there would be no tax refunds therefore no checks, no electronic deposits etc. and therefore it would cost less.

You make 100 dollars this week, your employer withholds 10 and sends it in to the government for you just like it is now.

You paid your 10% you get no refunds.

What about Social security and Medicare? Would we not need to file for them? Plus, if you pay me in cash there is no record of me working for you, thus the same as the current income tax. Only the ones that are productive and honest pay. Drug dealers and the underground economy will pay nothing.

 

[Contumacious]

We all agree the tax system is broke. The question is how do we fix it or do we replace it with something else?

Do you support a Flat Tax or the Fair Tax plans and why?

And the NON-SOCIALIST definition of a "fair tax" is ............

.

 

[Skull Pilot]

So 10 million people filing for tax returns and the government sending out checks every year is not "cumbersome"? Cumbersome for who?

The prebate would be automatic and mostly electronic.

With a flat tax there would be no tax refunds therefore no checks, no electronic deposits etc. and therefore it would cost less.

You make 100 dollars this week, your employer withholds 10 and sends it in to the government for you just like it is now.

You paid your 10% you get no refunds.

What about Social security and Medicare? Would we not need to file for them? Plus, if you pay me in cash there is no record of me working for you, thus the same as the current income tax. Only the ones that are productive and honest pay. Drug dealers and the underground economy will pay nothing.

There will always be an underground economy under any system.

In the sales tax scenario all one has to do is sell an item for cash and not record the sale.

People will always cheat the system just as they have always done.

All the sales tax system does in to put more burden on the business community to act as a tax collector.

 

[eflatminor]

We all agree the tax system is broke. The question is how do we fix it or do we replace it with something else?

Do you support a Flat Tax or the Fair Tax plans and why?

I believe, as did our founders, that taxing a person's labor is immoral.

It's also worth mentioning that if the federal government operated within the confines of the enumerated powers, there would be no need for an income tax of any kind.

Just a thought.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If the people want it bad enough then it will happen.

Let's see you convince the DEA of that.

*​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Fair tax would work out best.

I get to keep what I earn and the rich pony up every time they buy overly expensive items.

But then liberals would have nothing to fear monger or divide us with, so it's a non-starter.

 

[akelch]

With a flat tax there would be no tax refunds therefore no checks, no electronic deposits etc. and therefore it would cost less.

You make 100 dollars this week, your employer withholds 10 and sends it in to the government for you just like it is now.

You paid your 10% you get no refunds.

What about Social security and Medicare? Would we not need to file for them? Plus, if you pay me in cash there is no record of me working for you, thus the same as the current income tax. Only the ones that are productive and honest pay. Drug dealers and the underground economy will pay nothing.

There will always be an underground economy under any system.

In the sales tax scenario all one has to do is sell an item for cash and not record the sale.

People will always cheat the system just as they have always done.

All the sales tax system does in to put more burden on the business community to act as a tax collector.

The burden is already on business to collect taxes and on us to file. Under the Fair tax businesses would have to file what they made and the taxes they collected. They can not claim high profits without paying the tax. Plus, not all businesses will have to worry about it. Business to business transactions are not taxed.

Under the flat tax they have to file for every employee and what they paid that employee. Hope you don't have high turnover. Don't think that the employee will bare no responsibility for this....they will have to file too.

Sorry... But I'll stick with the Fair Tax.

BTW, estimated cost of sending out the prebate is $180 billion a year and it is factored into the 23% Fair Tax.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So far no takers for the flat tax.

I prefer a flat tax.

In a few years the flat tax will create a greater spread between the very wealthy and the rest of us; in fact is it a prescription for a caste system.
Less moving parts more simplicity and less cost to oversee.

A 10% flat tax on the first dollar of income regardless of its source would bring in more money than our current income tax and cost billions less to enforce. We could use the savings to offset debt or to shore up safety nets.

As for Social Security I say leave the contributions as they are but let people own their own accounts. People would retire with more money and we could cut administration costs thereby increasing net revenue which then could be used to lower the income tax even more.

Many people lost their retirement in the crash of 2008; how can you assure those too big to fail will not fail their investors again?

The fair tax with it's "prebates" and other calculations is cumbersome.

A progressive income tax which allows success to benefit from their success but not rule seems most sensible if one wants to protect our democratic institutions.

 

[blastoff]

I'd take either over the monster tax code we now have.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The fair tax is regressive and will make the rich richer. It will have a negative impact on the middle class and working poor and is the final step necessary to transform our nation into a Plutocracy.

Think for a moment about percentages. What percentage of income does a millionaire spend on products (and services?) and what percentage does a middle class family spend. An individual or a family can only buy so many things. I hope that's clear.

I'm glad you brought this up...and I would agree with you if it were true. But the Fair Tax has a prebate system built in. This is how it works...every house hold (depending on the size) will get a check from the government each month for the same amount. A house hold of 4 will get around $500. This will off set some of the cost of the taxes that month. $500 for a poor family is a lot but $500 for a millionaire is pocket change. So in the long run the rich will pay more of the tax then the poor.

If you spend your money wisely you could be paying very little if any taxes.

I don't understand.

I earn $1 million dollars a year and pay a 10% tax; this leaves me $900,000; you earn $100,000 a year, pay 10% and get to keep $90,000. We both get $500 from the government. Is that correct?

If money is power, you would lose as would the greatest number of our citizens.

 

[tooAlive]

The Fair Tax would also likely make the IRS obsolete.

For that reason alone the government would probable not want to pass it.