What do you think about the Fair Tax?

Question

Would it make taxes the same percentage for all people-poor taxed same percentage as rich?

I found this on Wikipedia.
It shows that a the rich DO get taxed a higher percentage and poor are taxed lower percentage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:FairTax_married.png

I think I'm ok with it as long as the rebates insure that the rich are taxed more % and the poor less %.

Answer 1

One tax rate for everybody, and no unfair taxbreaks for the rich.

I agree with it completely.

Answer 2

The poorly named "Fair Tax" is a terrible idea, unless you're very wealthy. The wealthy only spend a tiny fraction of what they earn, unlike the poor and middle class. They would massively benefit from that horrible tax. The poor would be decimated even with the so-called "prebate" and the middle class would bear the brunt of the load.

Does it REALLY sound like a great idea to have to pay an additional $60,000 in taxes when you buy a new $200,000 home? Or an additional $6,000 in taxes to put tags on a new $20,000 car? Needless to say, such a tax burden would crash the construction and automotive industries and put thousands of people out of work. The knock-on effects of that would crash the entire US economy over night.

While it sounds tempting that it would tax the "underground economy" such as illegal aliens and tax cheats, it would trigger massive black marketing in everyday goods as people tried to avoid the tax and remain solvent. That type of activity is run by criminal gangs so you'll be buying that next DVD and box of Fruit Loops from the gang bangers just to make ends meet. Is this REALLY a good idea?

Of course, to combat that type of tax fraud, the government will be passing draconian new laws. Imagine a field audit in your home as IRS agents paw through your drawers looking for untaxed gruns or armies of agents coming through your neighborhood and rummaging through your trash looking for evidence of untaxed goods.

Not no, but HELL NO! And ANY politician who proposes this farce automatically loses my vote for all time. This would destroy the country and will never pass as cooler heads in Congress will never allow it out of committee. There's a reason that it has languished in committee for nearly a decade -- it's a political football that will never make it into the end zone, thank God!

Addendum: The rate is a flat 30% on top of the regular retail price. Everyone pays the same rate. It's NOT possible to levy different rates on a sales tax. The wealthy might well pay more in dollars, but they will pay MUCH less as a percentage of their income than the poor or middle class. That Wikipedia link is PURE smoke and mirrors, and is very typical of the half-truths and outright misstatements of fact that many of the "Un-Fair Tax" proponents are guilty of.

Answer 3

The "FairTax" as presented at "FairTax.org" has massive problems.

First, the concept that every American household should receive a check from the government every month reimbursing them for what they SHOULD have spent on medical care and food is outrageous and frankly unAmerican to the core. (Do NOT talk to me of Social Security, that is also unAmerican and that is part of why the system is going bankrupt). Everyone who is ill is automatically paying many times over the tax that the healthy pay. Their own website states that if they didn't do it this way and exempted necessities (food and medical care) that the tax rate would have to be more than 30% instead of the "mere" 23% (see q.3 answer yourself).

This tax does NOT abolish the IRS. Clearly some department, call it what you like, must collect all the taxes, issue all the checks (and the cost of issuing checks is a HUGE expense), etc. Changing the name of something is irrelevant.

The tax does NOT address things such as taxes on gas. The amount of tax per gallon exceeds the PROFIT per gallon of the gas companies, but the pols are always shrieking that the gas companies have "unfair" profits. Chutzpah lives!

The tax does NOTHING to prevent a really cute trick I guarantee will happen if people are dumb enough to buy this joke plan: the feds will simply transfer MORE things to the state to fund. They've done it in the past, it can't be prevented with so many Constitutionally illiterate judges and administrative personnel in the government.

The tax rate CAN be raised from the 23%--nothing prohibits it.

The government can CHOOSE to add "fees" for other services--has nothing to do with this form of tax.

This has ZERO impact on the STATE and LOCAL taxes, so the claim we'll be paying "so much less" is bogus. Like the government is going to control its spending all of a sudden!

Frankly, the bulk of people in the US pay very little in federal taxes.
"The top 1% of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2% of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4% of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1% of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95% of tax returns." http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2007/10/top-1-pay-more-.html

There are other issues, but right there, you can see it's garbage. Sorry Neal Boortz, YOU just don't get it.

Though not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, Steve Forbes' version of the flat tax (there are numerous proposals out there) has more to speak for it--including the 17% rate AFTER a decent size amount of income is exempt. Furthermore if anyone is silly enough to like the broken system we have NOW, he can file under that. His plan doesn't abolish it. Can you DO that? They do it in Hong Kong: you can pay a stupid way or a flat tax way--choice.

Forbes also documents numerous countries where the flat tax works. THAT has a record of working. Consumption taxes are too often found ALONG WITH other taxation systems, such as a VAT, and they don't lower the overall tax rate in those countries.

IF we returned to a Constitutional government, that would end the problem. This game-playing with "fiat currency" and entitlement programs that have NO authorization under the Constitution got us in this mess.

Also, by definition, as the poorer people spend more on necessities (food, shelter, medical care) they will pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the rich. And trust me, the rich will figure out ways to circumvent the "FairTax"--if nothing else, buying a lot of their luxury goods from other countries. See the infamous (though now forgotten "Luxury Tax." This was the 1990 idiocy that Congress passed to increase tax revenues by placing an EXTRA tax on "luxury items" like yachts and private jets. Revenues dropped and expenses shot up. Why? Yacht retailers reported a 77% drop in sales resulting in around 25,000 thousand boat builders being laid off. Obviously that meant they were on unemployment while seeking other work in an industry the kooks in Congress were trying to kill off with excessive taxation. Some may also have ended up needing other government services to tide them over while seeking work--something they would NOT have had to do if a Congress that can't control spending would have not attacked their industry.

Congress plays all the games it wants, but the LAWS of supply and demand and human nature will trump them each and every time. A "FairTax" is a windfall for the black market crooks.

Answer 4

Yup, the poor would pay the same percent as the rich. Everybody would get the "prebate", but no more EIC.

The poor would lose. The middle class would lose big. The only winners would be the rich.

Great idea, huh?

Answer 5

Tax fair only for the rich. It would increase taxes for everyone but the rich. Another brainwashing term.

Answer 6

No tax is fair tax it's a waste of time paper and Patience.

Answer 7

No thats a Flat tax.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/taxes/a/aafairtax.htm

Answer 8

How is that "fair"?

If I make $400'000.00 a year and my neighbor makes for 4 billion and we're both taxed 65%, how is this fair?

Answer 9

Any flat tax is woefully regressive.

Answer 10

Sounds fair to me, except the country would go bankrupt.