• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Flat Taxes on income?

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Is there anyone currently supporting a flat tax on income for America?

The Democrats seem to want to punish the successful and reward welfare. It certainly takes away incentives for those who want to achieve anything with their lives/businesses etc.

The current system's loopholes favor writing off everything for those with big bucks with enough nickels to afford specialists. There is too much reward for the rich. The Rockefellers got away with something like $10 income tax a few years back.

This leaves the middle class to carry the burden.

The system is broke. It seems to me the only fair way is a flat tax percentage and/or combination thereof. Maybe everyone could pay a minimum percentage and the extremely well off pay SLIGHTLY more. Would the Demo's support something like that?

I'd be interested in reading everyone's thoughts on this subject.

Let's please not allow the 5 or 6 perverts on this board to change this thread to yet another sicko lifestyle discussion. This board used to be interesting to read, I joined in, but now it seems to be becoming a pervert reunion/celebration locale. I can ignore the ignorant (and we all know who they are).
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Is there anyone currently supporting a flat tax on income for America?


This leaves the middle class to carry the burden.



But be it right or wrong, the middle class has historically carried the burden.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
backhoeboogie said:
Is there anyone currently supporting a flat tax on income for America?

The Democrats seem to want to punish the successful and reward welfare. It certainly takes away incentives for those who want to achieve anything with their lives/businesses etc.

The current system's loopholes favor writing off everything for those with big bucks with enough nickels to afford specialists. There is too much reward for the rich. The Rockefellers got away with something like $10 income tax a few years back.

This leaves the middle class to carry the burden.

The system is broke. It seems to me the only fair way is a flat tax percentage and/or combination thereof. Maybe everyone could pay a minimum percentage and the extremely well off pay SLIGHTLY more. Would the Demo's support something like that?

I'd be interested in reading everyone's thoughts on this subject.

Let's please not allow the 5 or 6 perverts on this board to change this thread to yet another sicko lifestyle discussion. This board used to be interesting to read, I joined in, but now it seems to be becoming a pervert reunion/celebration locale. I can ignore the ignorant (and we all know who they are).

I'll jump into this one and see if we can have a civil discussion on this board. There's not much history of that here.

There are several flat tax proposals around. Some of them aren't what I'd call a flat tax. They take income into consideration. Sen Brownback has suggested a dual tax system. He suggests a flat tax option or continue filing your taxes as you have been doing. He claims in countries with those two options, most people choose the flat tax. But several countries that have tried the flat tax have gone back to their old systems.

I think the devil is in the details and it will be hard to decide whether or not to support a flat tax until you actually see what that means.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
ff said:
I think the devil is in the details and it will be hard to decide whether or not to support a flat tax until you actually see what that means.

You're right about that. I'd hate to see a sugar coated sour grape.

Welcome to the boards by the way.
 

quickdraw

Well-known member
I have yet to see any real proposal, but I think that almost anything would be better than what we are going through and would be an improvment.
Just because middle class has always carried the burden does not mean it need continue.


Let's please not allow the 5 or 6 perverts on this board to change this thread to yet another sicko lifestyle discussion. This board used to be interesting to read, I joined in, but now it seems to be becoming a pervert reunion/celebration locale. I can ignore the ignorant (and we all know who they are).

:agree:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
quickdraw said:
I have yet to see any real proposal, but I think that almost anything would be better than what we are going through and would be an improvment.
Just because middle class has always carried the burden does not mean it need continue.


Let's please not allow the 5 or 6 perverts on this board to change this thread to yet another sicko lifestyle discussion. This board used to be interesting to read, I joined in, but now it seems to be becoming a pervert reunion/celebration locale. I can ignore the ignorant (and we all know who they are).

:agree:

Congressman Dick Armey has introduced something along the flat tax idea. But it's not what I'd call a flat tax. You get deductions based on how many in your family. All income isn't taxed. Retirements, capital gains, dividends, etc., aren't. It's not revenue neutral either.

Depending on where you stand on taxes (and how much of your income is from capital gains, dividends, etc. versus earned), you can find an article supporting or bashing Armey's plan. Do a Google search and you'll find several articles on his proposal. Here are a couple:

http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba136.html

http://www.proaxis.com/~randau2/taxes/armey.htm
 

Texan

Well-known member
ff said:
I'll jump into this one and see if we can have a civil discussion on this board. There's not much history of that here.
Welcome - If you're really interested in civil discussion, you'll find that it's not nearly as disagreeable around here as it used to be. :lol:
 

Cowpuncher

Well-known member
We will never have a flat tax - even if we had an idea on how it would be calculated.

There are legions of taxpayer groups that have lobbied since the revenue code was passed in 1954. They all have a financial axe to grind and there will never be enough people supporting change to get the job done.

Learn to cope with the code, take advantage of its peculiarities and focus on your business.

I guess I am a real pessimist on tax reform. Years ago when I was a tax compliance manager for a large corporation, we had 15 years of returns that were still open with the IRS. The rules changed constantly and it was a job to remember what set of rules applied to which year.

I retired, and nothing has changed except the code gets more complex.
 

NMRANCHER

Well-known member
backhoeboogie said:
Is there anyone currently supporting a flat tax on income for America?

I havn't heard of a Flat Tax on income but a Flat Tax as a national Sales Tax. I came across this website Called Fairtax.org.

http://www.fairtax.org

"The FairTax Plan is a nonpartisan national grassroots campaign to replace the federal income tax system with a progressive national retail sales tax. It provides a "prebate" to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue replacement and, through companion legislation, repeal of the 16th Amendment."

Our local Representative has had many open meetings down here about this and I think it would have a good chance of working, but I think that the citizens would have to put it into effect and not Washington politicians and those big money people.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Texan said:
ff said:
I'll jump into this one and see if we can have a civil discussion on this board. There's not much history of that here.
Welcome - If you're really interested in civil discussion, you'll find that it's not nearly as disagreeable around here as it used to be. :lol:
:lol2:
Welcome to the boards ff.
 

Cowpuncher

Well-known member
In Europe they have a national sales tax called Value Added Tax. It is on everything you buy. Cars are taxes abouty 25%, heating oil much lower. Food and everything else.

The intention ws to replace income taxes. Now they have both. Anyone who thinks they are going to get rid of a tax is mighty optomistic. As soon as the revenue come in, it will be spent - along with a demand for more.

I have often said that if we gave the education system ALL OF OUR MONEY, the schools would turn out the same type of students and they would be clamoring for more money the next year. Government spending is insatiable. Look at the rotten job the republicans did when they had control of the white house and congress.

At least here, in Colorado, we passed an amendment to the Colorado constitution that requires a vote of the people before taxes can be increased by more than inflation and population growth. The same applies to spending. Sure made the politicians angry - especially democrats.
 

Goodpasture

Well-known member
The fairtax proposal is pretty good. I am, for the most part, against a "flat tax" as it is still based on income. In other words ANY income tax is punishment for earning. What we need to do is have a tax based on spending. If you are going to encourage anything, we should encourage people to earn and we should encourage people to save. Further, I would have graduated sales taxes, where the percentage of tax is based on what you buy. Food, medicine, reading material, and soap should not be taxed at all. Luxury automobiles and fancy boats and private airplanes should be taxed pretty high. Working clothes and boots should be taxed fairly low (we want people to work). Stuff bought to generate business or an income should not be taxed, but the end product should be. Don't tax cattle feed, tax the shoes made from the leather.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cowpuncher said:
At least here, in Colorado, we passed an amendment to the Colorado constitution that requires a vote of the people before taxes can be increased by more than inflation and population growth. The same applies to spending. Sure made the politicians angry - especially democrats.

Are you talking about TABOR? If it worked so well, why did the taxpayers vote to suspend it in 2005?

http://www.pennbpc.org/colorado.php
 

Cal

Well-known member
Goodpasture said:
The fairtax proposal is pretty good. I am, for the most part, against a "flat tax" as it is still based on income. In other words ANY income tax is punishment for earning. What we need to do is have a tax based on spending. If you are going to encourage anything, we should encourage people to earn and we should encourage people to save. Further, I would have graduated sales taxes, where the percentage of tax is based on what you buy. Food, medicine, reading material, and soap should not be taxed at all. Luxury automobiles and fancy boats and private airplanes should be taxed pretty high. Working clothes and boots should be taxed fairly low (we want people to work). Stuff bought to generate business or an income should not be taxed, but the end product should be. Don't tax cattle feed, tax the shoes made from the leather.
I think that over-taxing the high end products will be counterproductive, and ultimately hurt those involved in their manufacture. What about high end food items?
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
Cal said:
Goodpasture said:
The fairtax proposal is pretty good. I am, for the most part, against a "flat tax" as it is still based on income. In other words ANY income tax is punishment for earning. What we need to do is have a tax based on spending. If you are going to encourage anything, we should encourage people to earn and we should encourage people to save. Further, I would have graduated sales taxes, where the percentage of tax is based on what you buy. Food, medicine, reading material, and soap should not be taxed at all. Luxury automobiles and fancy boats and private airplanes should be taxed pretty high. Working clothes and boots should be taxed fairly low (we want people to work). Stuff bought to generate business or an income should not be taxed, but the end product should be. Don't tax cattle feed, tax the shoes made from the leather.
I think that over-taxing the high end products will be counterproductive, and ultimately hurt those involved in their manufacture. What about high end food items?
Like beef :shock:
 

jcummins

Well-known member
I am not necessarily against a tax on spending, but how do you get from where we are at with income tax to a tax on spending.

Consider this. A person spends all their life spending, is in debt, has saved little but doesn’t need to spend money on anything, since they have bought everything they need. Another has saved all their live, ready to retire and have AFTER TAX DOLLARS, monies already taxed, to spend. And wants to enjoy the fruits of his savings.

I will not be doubled taxed. How is a sales tax program under this situation going to be implemented.?
 

Goodpasture

Well-known member
Cal said:
I think that over-taxing the high end products will be counterproductive, and ultimately hurt those involved in their manufacture. What about high end food items?
All taxes are counter productive. Of course high end taxation is going to hurt the manufacturing of high end goods. But if a item is taxed at 50% will that prevent those who have the money from buying it? I doubt it. So while some manufacturing is hurt, if you figure in the net savings in not paying taxes on income and the additional disposable/discretionary income available, it should be a nearly painless transition. Remember, they are NOT paying 20%+ in income taxes.

jcummins said:
I am not necessarily against a tax on spending, but how do you get from where we are at with income tax to a tax on spending.
The necessary infrastructure/point of sale equipment/collection system is already in place. All we have to do is
1) set the tax rates and notify merchants as to what taxes are to be collected.
2) Fire the folks at the IRS.

jcummins said:
Consider this. A person spends all their life spending, is in debt, has saved little but doesn’t need to spend money on anything, since they have bought everything they need.
Then they pay no tax.....or very little tax.

jcummins said:
Another has saved all their live, ready to retire and have AFTER TAX DOLLARS, monies already taxed, to spend. And wants to enjoy the fruits of his savings.
They paid the taxes due AT THE TIME THE TAXES WERE DUE. We do the same thing now. If you are audited and they decide you owe for 2002, you pay according to 2002 rates.
 

jcummins

Well-known member
A National sales tax program is implemented. I go into any store and instead of paying 6-7% the normal sales tax, let's say I have to pay 20% sales tax.

HOW, do I avoid that, since I'm paying with AFTER tax dollars that was earned under the OLD income tax setup. With those dollars I would expect to only pay the 6-7% tax.
 

Cowpuncher

Well-known member
ff wrote:

Are you talking about TABOR? If it worked so well, why did the taxpayers vote to suspend it in 2005?

http://www.pennbpc.org/colorado.php




It is true that TABOR was suspended for a five year period. During the last recession, tax revenues fell rapidly and spending was severely constrained. The state resorted to all sorts of chicanery to get money from other sources. For example our ranch scale license went from $75 to $ 375 annually. Real pain since it is used just a couple of times a year. Our brand inspection and brand tax went out of sight.

The republican governer (Bill Owens) got in bed with the democrats and proposed a five year suspension of TABOR at the state level. It passed. The result is that the state is collecting great amounts of revenue, well in excess of amounts projected. Now the schools are mad because part of the windfall is going towards highway construction.

One of the results of this caper by Owens was the end of his political career, the loss of two US house seats and one senate seat by the republicans. Owens who was considered to be a potential vice-presidental candidate couldn't even carry his own state now.
 
Top