The American people nationwide would no longer pay income tax, but were taxed on the items they bought, hence, nationwide sales tax. What are your opinions on this and why. Would it work?
2006-10-22 15:52:48 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
It would be much more equitable - everyone would pay the same amount and there would be no loopholes for the rich. Obviously, the Republicans aren't big fans of this concept. It makes much more sense than does the current system with a tax code which runs into the tens of thousands of pages and can only be understood by a tax lawyer - and some of them have problems. Its time to abolish the IRS.
2006-10-22 16:21:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, I would rather exact 10% income tax on all earned income, no matter the source. Retired persons would not be taxed on retirement income, only on money they earn working for wages or commission. Earn a dollar, pay a dime.
Fill out your income tax report on a 3 x 5 card and send it in.
Every plan has some flaws, and people are going to gripe.
The flaw I see right off in this plan is it is going to put a lot of people out of work. All the tax accountants lawyers, and tax preparers will have to get in a different line of work because you average 8th grader could properly fill out the card.
As for the sales tax only, see Spongeworthy's answer.
2006-10-22 16:09:45 · answer #2 · answered by eferrell01 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It would be a boon to the rich, because their taxes would be greatly reduced. It's called a regressive tax because the poor and middle class would pay a greater percentage of their entire income on sales taxes than wealthy people. And in order to raise the same amount of revenues, the sales tax rate would have to be prohibitive. That, in turn, would have an effect on consumer buying because people would not be able to purchase as much as before.
Europe has experimented with it; it's called the VAT (value added tax).
2006-10-22 16:07:34 · answer #3 · answered by Shelley 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
This would only work on state income tax levels, which I agree but not federal income tax. To many social programs to fund.
2006-10-22 16:10:20 · answer #4 · answered by show_em_your_badge 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would be great for those who don't spend everything they earn, i.e. those who are well off or earn more than the poverty level. But for the poor, who spend almost everything they earn, it would be a nightmare. Also, since most of our economic growth is predicated on consumption, giving an incentive such as that to not consume would mean instant depression. No, it wouldn't work.
2006-10-22 15:56:36 · answer #5 · answered by spongeworthy_us 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Go to Fairtax.org for the best of all possible tax systems.
2006-10-22 15:55:17 · answer #6 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have looked at this alot....what about corporate entities??? Are they exempt?? If so, I'll spend the few hundred bucks it costs to incorporate and then what??/ To me, this only sounds like making loopholes bigger for those who don't need them...
And if it is that corps. are taxed too then consider this:
item costs $1.00 to make - the maker must charge $1.23 to break even.
warehouse distributor buys it for $1.23 (at best) must charge $1.51 to break even.
distributor sells it to retail outlet for $1.51 who must sell it at $1.86 to break even.
AND we aren't even talking about the amount of payroll or warehouses or anything...just to break even on tax..
2006-10-22 16:04:49 · answer #7 · answered by elysialaw 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes definately
2006-10-22 18:13:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
YES YES YES
2006-10-22 16:06:27 · answer #9 · answered by curious 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yes, it would work well
2006-10-22 15:59:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋