Fair thax - What's Bad about it.ts2.mm.bing.net
Fair thax - What's Bad about it.
Made popular 511 days ago in Politics
fairtax.org — The Act is called the “Fair Tax Act of 2007.” It repeals all income taxes and payroll taxes, specifically:

• The individual income tax (including capital gains taxes and the alternative minimum tax)
• All individual and employer payroll taxes including Social Security, Medicare, and federal unemployment taxes
• The corporate income tax
• The self-employment tax (a self-employed person pays both the individual and the employer portions of Social Security and Medicare taxes)
• The estate and gift tax

Effectively it replaces the above taxes with a national retail sales tax on all goods and services sold at retail. The tax rate is set to be revenue neutral – at the level necessary to replace the revenues generated by the repealed taxes.

A 23-percent (of the tax-inclusive sales price) sales tax is imposed on all retail sales for personal consumption of new goods and services. Exports and the purchase of inputs by businesses (i.e., intermediate sales) are not taxed, nor are used goods or any savings, investment, or education tuition expenses. The sales tax must be separately stated and charged on the sales receipt. This makes it clear to the consumer exactly how much they are paying in federal taxes.
There are no exemptions under the FairTax, meaning that no lobbyist, corporation, or individual can obtain tax advantages that are not available to the general public. Also, everyone pays the same rate, but those who spend more pay more total taxes than those who spend less.
The FairTaxSM provides every American family with a rebate of the sales tax on spending up to the federal poverty level (plus an extra amount to prevent any marriage penalty). The rebate is paid monthly in advance. It allows a family of four to spend $27,380 tax free each year. The rebate for a married couple with two children is $525 per month ($6,297 annually). Therefore, no family pays federal sales tax on essential goods and services and middle-class families are effectively exempted on a large part of their annual spending.

Funding for Social Security and Medicare benefits remains the same. The Social Security and Medicare trust funds receive the same amount of money as they do under current law. The source of the trust fund revenue is a dedicated portion of sales tax revenue instead of payroll tax revenue.

States can elect to collect the federal sales tax on behalf of the federal government in exchange for a fee of one-quarter of one percent of gross collections. Retail businesses collecting the tax also get the same administrative fee.

Strong taxpayer rights provisions are incorporated into the Act. The burden of persuasion in disputes is on the government. A strong, independent problem resolution office is created. Taxpayers are entitled to professional fees in disputes unless the government establishes that its position was substantially justified.

Report This Post
Posted by 945call
Add To Favorites
57 Votes
Similar Issues
4 Comments
ShareThis
What are your thoughts about the proposed Fair Tax Act?
It would over tax the Poor
0%
It is bad for the Poor and Middle Class.
0%
It helps the Rich get richer..
0%
It would not generate the Revenue the Government needs to function.
0%
It will increase the prices of our exports.
0%
it would destroy Social Security.
0%
It would destroy Medicare
0%
It would greatly increase retail prices in the US.
5.3%
All of the above
58%
None of the above
37%
This is not a scientific survey, click here to learn more. Results may not total 100% due to rounding and voting descrepencies.
User Comments
james2044
Posted 511 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
The choice "greatly increase retail prices in the US" is offset by having much more money in your paycheck.
lastbaldeagle
Posted 511 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Probably too confusing for the millions who voted for their Messiah. Don't forget that they leave the thinking to their organizers, minders and union officials. So much easier than having to think for yourself.
lastbaldeagle
Posted 511 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Isn't this a sad commentary on today's society? 10 to 1 this is a democRAT appointed judge making this decision.

DOJ: ‘Elimination of party affiliation on the ballot will likely reduce the ability of blacks to elect candidates of choice’

A U.S. District Court judge has rejected a challenge to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — filled when the Department of Justice barred the city of Kinston, N.C. from holding nonpartisan elections — reasoning that lack of access to party affiliation would discriminate against minority voters who otherwise wouldn’t know how to find Democratic candidates on a ballot.

The challenge was initiated after the Justice Department rejected a 2008 referendum vote in which the city of Kinston voted to stop listing candidates’ party affiliations on ballots.

Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department must approve changes to election law in regions with a history, however distant, of racial discrimination.
945call
Posted 510 days ago
0 up votes, 0 down votes
Actually, for all those who voted "all of the above" you should read the link for this article. In fact, none are true. The poor would actually pay no tax to the Federal government for the IRS, Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment t insurance.

Zero! Nada!

The rich would pay all the freight. They would get taxed on everything from Rolls Royces to caviar. Their clothes would be taxed. Their huge houses would be taxed.

Manufactured goods would not have to carry the federal taxes on any of the companies in the supply chain and our products would be attractively priced for global consumption.

Liberals need to get their heads out of their butts is only to read the proposals of the thinkers in this country.
You will have 2 minutes to edit your comment.

Add your comments