Fair(er) tax

[Kadmos]

Coming from another thread I realized there was an idea that to my knowledge hasn't been discussed, or at least not much.

I get there are some benefits to the fair tax, flat tax, whatever you want to call it.

But here was my thought..

What if instead of trying to move directly to that type of system we institute a federal law saying that states that do not have a sales tax of at least X% (maybe 8%) will not receive federal funding for certain programs, whatever those may be?

Looking at it, Oregon, New Hampshire, Montana, Delaware, and Alaska do not appear to have any state sales tax...others have rates from 4% to 9%.

Making a minimum uniform rate throughout the states could go a long way towards easing the burden on the federal government, with the combined idea that the states would take on the burden for at least some of what the federal government gives now.

Thoughts?

[mriddick]

I'm not getting the reasoning for forcing a state to come up with a sales tax if they don't want one. What business is it of the feds if a state has a sales tax or not? States ought to be free to devise a system they want and fund their own form of government as they wish.

IMO the feds should simply have a simple progressive tax without deductions, you make XXXX dollars, you pay XX dollars, and stay out of the states business in anything not delegated to them in the Constitution.

[Krupski]

I'm not getting the reasoning for forcing a state to come up with a sales tax if they don't want one. What business is it of the feds if a state has a sales tax or not? States ought to be free to devise a system they want and fund their own form of government as they wish.

IMO the feds should simply have a simple progressive tax without deductions, you make XXXX dollars, you pay XX dollars, and stay out of the states business in anything not delegated to them in the Constitution.

Even simpler. Have a federal sales tax and no income tax. Whatever anyone buys, they pay the fixed "X" percent federal sales tax along with any state and local tax that there always was.

No need for the IRS, no way to cheat the system, no need to file tax returns every year.

Nah... too simple.

[mriddick]

I would bet if there was a national sales tax the IRS might be larger then it is now, and as outlined in the other thread you are proposing forcing every retail store to be an unpaid tax collector for the feds that would probably end opening up every cash register to the feds.

Not sure that's the best way either...

[stinker]

What if instead of trying to move directly to that type of system we institute a federal law saying that states that do not have a sales tax of at least X% (maybe 8%) will not receive federal funding for certain programs, whatever those may be?

And where in the constitution would the federal government derive the authority to order any state to set/collect/institute any tax of any kind on it's own citizens to provide money for the states budget?

One more step towards a federal dictatorship and the eradication of the reason we have states rights in the first place.

[Kadmos]

I'm not getting the reasoning for forcing a state to come up with a sales tax if they don't want one. What business is it of the feds if a state has a sales tax or not? States ought to be free to devise a system they want and fund their own form of government as they wish.

My thought is that the states take in benefits from the federal government that they could be paying for themselves.

Take for instance New Mexico, for every dollar they pay into the federal system they receive two dollars. Yet their state sales tax rate is only about 5.5%, well under the national average for states that collect sales tax.

This wouldn't be so much saying "You have to pay" but more of "We're going to stop paying for crap that you can pay for locally" or "We won't pay for X,Y,Z unless you are taking up some of the slack in other ways".


Stinker, on the flip side this could also make states less dependent on the federal government and allow them to keep more of their money at home. That other dollar New Mexico gets comes from the other states.

Granted, New Mexico, and other states may have special needs that require them to spend more (like a huge ass border with Mexico).....?

[5.56NATO]

Before the treason that brought to power the fed and irs, government was funded by imports. That should be the way it is today.

[mriddick]

My thought is that the states take in benefits from the federal government that they could be paying for themselves.

Take for instance New Mexico, for every dollar they pay into the federal system they receive two dollars. Yet their state sales tax rate is only about 5.5%, well under the national average for states that collect sales tax.

This wouldn't be so much saying "You have to pay" but more of "We're going to stop paying for crap that you can pay for locally" or "We won't pay for X,Y,Z unless you are taking up some of the slack in other ways".


Stinker, on the flip side this could also make states less dependent on the federal government and allow them to keep more of their money at home. That other dollar New Mexico gets comes from the other states.

Granted, New Mexico, and other states may have special needs that require them to spend more (like a huge ass border with Mexico).....?

Do places like NM get more or is it because they have higher populations of retirees (more SS dollars going into the state), more in the way of federal installations (my son is stationed there) or maybe more in the way of federal lands which require more in the federal management? I really don't think one state gets that more then another in funds the state gets to spend, however I'm sure some states have more in the way of other federal things going on that mean more money goes to the state. I really don't see it as fair if say Florida had to pay more of it's citizens SS then say NY just because NY makes it an unfriendly place to grow old in...

[alismith]

The fairest way to tax would be to eliminate Federal income tax and institute a federal sales tax. That way, no matter what you buy, you pay a tax on it. If you're a millionaire and buy a $375,000 boat and $5,000,000 house, you pay the taxes on those. If you buy a $6,000 boat and $89,000 house, you pay taxes on those.

This way, everyone pays their fair share and no one can find loopholes around paying taxes. If you buy it, you pay taxes; if you don't, you don't pay taxes on it.

I would, gladly, pay a federal sales tax if there were no federal income taxes to have to worry about.

Seems fair to me.

[GreenhawK]

I really like the fair tax. The bill for the fair tax actually gets rid of the IRS. It doesn't make it larger. A product also has the tax imbedded in it before it makes it to the store, so there is no responsibility on the store owner for collecting. I assume that it would be on the manufacturers.

I like either the Fair Tax or a Flat Tax. I don't really care for a progressive tax. I don't think that someone should pay a higher percentage of tax just because they made more money.

I believe that our country's founders wanted the federal government to stay out of the daily lives of the people. We shouldn't have to be sitting here worrying about what the federal government is going to do next. It was pretty much only intended to provide the military, defend the borders, any other national security, and settle disputes between the states. If the federal government was intended to be what it has become, why would we even need state governments? Our founders knew that we would have different views from one state to the other, and that a centralized government over such a large land and so many people wouldn't work. We should only pay a small federal tax to allow for the expenditures that are allowed the federal government by the constitution. The majority of our tax dollars should go to our state and local governments where we have more of a say so in what our money is spent on, and we can make sure that it goes along with our views. I personally don't think that the money that I work 15 hours a day for should be used to pay for someone to inspect a 4 year olds lunch in North Carolina, build a walking trail in Missouri, or build an electric car in Finland. We all have different ideas of how our tax money should be spent, so the closer to home it stays, the better our governments will be run in our views. If you don't like the way things are in your state, you can always move to another one.

Just my views. Sorry for my first post on this forum to be so long. This is just something that has been stewing for a while.

[ninner]

The federal government would use a national sales tax to crawl up your ass in all aspects of your life to make sure you pay taxes on everything you buy. How do you like the idea of facing federal charges for not collecting taxes on a private sale. They may not start there but thats where they will end up. The only hope we have is drastically cutting spending, at current rates the system is unsustainable. God forbid my lazy ass inlaws have to work for a living but if faced with starvation they may try.

[mriddick]

I think you'd find the government would not trust business to turn in the correct amount of tax (cheating) which would result in a vast amount of street auditors going around and trying to trap business owners cheating the system. Anyone who knows how states handle this would be very fearful of the amount of power this could give bureaucrats to shut down and or harass businesses they might not like...

Can anyone think of a type of business the feds might want to drive out of business for some reason?

[Krupski]

The federal government would use a national sales tax to crawl up your ass in all aspects of your life to make sure you pay taxes on everything you buy. How do you like the idea of facing federal charges for not collecting taxes on a private sale. They may not start there but thats where they will end up. The only hope we have is drastically cutting spending, at current rates the system is unsustainable. God forbid my lazy ass inlaws have to work for a living but if faced with starvation they may try.

Private sales should not be taxed anyway. Chances are, the item being privately sold was once purchased new and tax paid on it. Why should any more tax be due... no matter how many more times it is resold?

[Kadmos]

Private sales should not be taxed anyway. Chances are, the item being privately sold was once purchased new and tax paid on it. Why should any more tax be due... no matter how many more times it is resold?

So a secondhand store would be tax free? Couldn't anyone simply call their shop a resale shop and avoid the tax?

[Warthogg]

Coming from another thread I realized there was an idea that to my knowledge hasn't been discussed, or at least not much.

I get there are some benefits to the fair tax, flat tax, whatever you want to call it.

But here was my thought..

What if instead of trying to move directly to that type of system we institute a federal law saying that states that do not have a sales tax of at least X% (maybe 8%) will not receive federal funding for certain programs, whatever those may be?

Looking at it, Oregon, New Hampshire, Montana, Delaware, and Alaska do not appear to have any state sales tax...others have rates from 4% to 9%.

Making a minimum uniform rate throughout the states could go a long way towards easing the burden on the federal government, with the combined idea that the states would take on the burden for at least some of what the federal government gives now.

Thoughts?

Perhaps you might consider 'how' some states are able to operate just fine with no state income tax ?? Your thought is to penalize those states not properly shafting their citizens.

Add Tennessee and Florida and Texas.



Wart

[Warthogg]

I would bet if there was a national sales tax the IRS might be larger then it is now, and as outlined in the other thread you are proposing forcing every retail store to be an unpaid tax collector for the feds that would probably end opening up every cash register to the feds.

Not sure that's the best way either...

Collection of a national sales tax is not a problem. That apparatus is already in place for all states having a sales tax. Not particularly onerous to bidness owners.


Wart

[Sidartha]

I've got an idea!
How about the Federal Government stop all funding to the States and reduce the federal income(or whatever method) tax by a proportional amount.
Then..wait for it.
The States can increase their own taxes to pay for any now unfunded programs they see as being necessary.

That way if California wants to provide free healthcare for illegal immigrants then they can do so at their own expense and if Utah that wants to enjoy a low tax rate, they will have to find a way to either reduce gov programs or make those programs more cost effective.

Additionally this would force each state to live within it's own budget.

Of course this will never be adopted because the Federal Gov doesn't want to give up any control over the State Governments.

BTW;

GreenhawK
A fine first post.

[Kadmos]

Perhaps you might consider 'how' some states are able to operate just fine with no state income tax ?? Your thought is to penalize those states not properly shafting their citizens.

Add Tennessee and Florida and Texas.



Wart

I assume they either shaft them in different ways, such as property taxes, use taxes, fuel taxes, suck the money from the federal government, or actually either don't spend that much and have balanced budgets, or just really crappy services.

My thought was, is this possibly a good way to see if we can ease up on federal spending, and have the states dealing with their own stuff?

[mriddick]

Once again how is one state getting more from the feds that another state isn't? Granted there are some projects, bridges and airports a congressman inserts as pork but it's not coming from the state level up to the feds, it's coming from the elected federal reps attempting to buy votes.

Wouldn't it be easier to outlaw pork and make the regs apply to all states equally? (and yes I know that would be impossible to do).

[mriddick]

Collection of a national sales tax is not a problem. That apparatus is already in place for all states having a sales tax. Not particularly onerous to bidness owners.


Wart

I would disagree, it would be bad for business owners on several levels.