Fred Thompson supports the FairTax...

[Guest Hyaloid]

STORY LINK

http:

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007 10:42 a.m. EDT

Fred Thompson Embraces 'Fair Tax'

Written by Susan Jones, CNSNews.com Senior Editor

Former Sen. Fred Thompson of Tennessee -- the not-quite-yet Republican presidential candidate -- says the next president "should enact a fundamental overhaul of the tax code that makes it fairer, simpler, and more pro-growth."

Thompson mentioned that there are a "number of ways to do that," and he said the "principles and ideas found in the Fair Tax are a good place to start."

The Fair Tax -- a national retail sales tax designed to replace the income tax system and all payroll taxes -- has the support of five declared Republican presidential candidates and one Democrat (former Sen. Mike Gravel).

Thompson, in an Aug. 10 letter to the national FairTax campaign, said it's time for Congress to begin "a serious consideration of real fundamental tax reform rather than nibbling around the edges."

FairTax said it welcomes the support of Republicans like Thompson as well as that of Democrats, Independents, and Americans who have given up on political parties.

"Wresting control of the tax system away from an army of Washington, D.C., tax lobbyists requires the kind of grassroots wildfire the FairTax campaign is producing," said Ken Hoagland of FairTax.org.

"Public response has been so strong and so broad we believe this campaign is now on the verge of becoming a powerful national movement," Hoagland added.

Americans for Fair Taxation, or FairTax for short, says it wants to make tax reform the main issue in the 2008 presidential election.

The group says a national sales tax, or consumption tax, would be self-limiting and enhance civil liberties, while direct taxes (such as the income tax) has been a tool of tyranny throughout history.

© CNS News.com. All rights reserved.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

2008 Presidential Race

-----

For those of you who haven't heard of this, please visit www.fairtax.org . I am a supporter of this system. It is NOT the same as a FLAT tax.

Another reason I am voting for Fred, if he ever announces that is

[Guest Len]

If it is revenue-neutral (does not bring in more $ than the current system) and necessities of life (food, water, medicine, some clothes) are not taxed I might be willing to listen to this. It sure would make tax season much easier -or do away with it altogether. I imagine there would be less need for the massive IRS bureaucracy as well.

Its clear the present system is broken, overly complex and burdensome even to tax experts, much less the average American.

[saintsfanbrian]

Food, Medicine, Clothing etc are not "Tax-Free" but EVERYONE gets a Pre-Bate every month to accommodate for these things based on the poverty level. According to the site, my family would get about $525 a month to cover the taxes that are paid on the necessities of life. Anything above and beyond that we would have to pay taxes on. It would do away with the IRS COMPLETELY!!!!

I have looked over it and need to do some more reading, but it looks like a sound proposal to me.

Go Fred - Are you ever going to announce?

[Marswolf]

Go Fred - Are you ever going to announce?

Maybe too late if he doesn't do it soon.

[Mike.357]

IRS bureaucracy

I have big doubts that the tax thing will ever happen. If they do away with the IRS what happens to all the fat cats who draw salaries from it, not to mention all the regular jobs. Gotta be a million people working because of our way of taxing income.

[molonlabetn]

H&R Block will throw a fit, for one...along with every other tax-prep accounting firm or independant in the nation.

I look at it as trimming the fat off of our bloated financial 'tribute' to the Federal Government and their whores.

[Guest Hyaloid]

I have big doubts that the tax thing will ever happen. If they do away with the IRS what happens to all the fat cats who draw salaries from it, not to mention all the regular jobs. Gotta be a million people working because of our way of taxing income.

Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must first be overcome.

Samuel Johnson

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try... our country kinda has the history of doing what others find impossible.

[The Rabbi]

I would support it only if it actually replaced the income tax. The same way I would support an income tax in TN only if it actually replaced the sales tax. If not then you end up with both income and sales taxes, eventually at higher levels than before.

I would favor a flat tax, which most of E.Europe has gone to.

I would favor eliminating a lot of deductions with lower overall rates.

I would favor eliminating corporate taxes, which corps dont pay anyway.

I would favor ANYTHING just about over the current system which tries to both raise revenue and engage in social engineering.

[Guest Hyaloid]

I would support it only if it actually replaced the income tax. The same way I would support an income tax in TN only if it actually replaced the sales tax. If not then you end up with both income and sales taxes, eventually at higher levels than before.

I would favor a flat tax, which most of E.Europe has gone to.

I would favor eliminating a lot of deductions with lower overall rates.

I would favor eliminating corporate taxes, which corps dont pay anyway.

I would favor ANYTHING just about over the current system which tries to both raise revenue and engage in social engineering.

It does eliminate the income tax, along with nearly every other tax, including employment taxes.

[Mike.357]

Do wealthy people favor or dis-favor the flat tax?

By wealthy I roughly mean people whose incomes are greater than mine j/k

You know what I mean by wealthy.

[molonlabetn]

Since the wealthy bear the lion's share of the tax burden, both proportionately and in-total, it stands to reason that leveling the playing-field in that regard would be desirable to them.

[towerclimber37]

Since the wealthy bear the lion's share of the tax burden, both proportionately and in-total, it stands to reason that leveling the playing-field in that regard would be desirable to them.

he's right you know...its something like the top 20% of the wealthy citizens pay something like 80% of the tax burden in the country.

I'm not exact, but the percentages are ridiculous like that.

[molonlabetn]

The top 1% income earners pay a bit over 1/3 of the taxes

The top 5% income earners pay over half of the taxes

the top 50% income earners pay 96% of the taxes

Yeah, it's ridiculous...

btw, The median income per household is $46K, and 17% of households make more than $100K per year. Fewer than 13% of households fall below the poverty threshhold.

(stats from the US Census Bureau, and Office of Tax Analysis, for 2005)

[Guest Hyaloid]

The top 1% income earners pay a bit over 1/3 of the taxes

The top 5% income earners pay over half of the taxes

the top 50% income earners pay 96% of the taxes

Yeah, it's ridiculous...

btw, The median income per household is $46K, and 17% of households make more than $100K per year. Fewer than 13% of households fall below the poverty threshhold.

(stats from the US Census Bureau, and Office of Tax Analysis, for 2005)

That also depends on how you define "poverty"... today, most who fit under the poverty guidelines have 1-2 cars, cell phones, etc etc...

Oh, an I am by FAR not wealthy... my net worth would make the weak of heart take a visit to the ER for chest pains.

I am a HUGE proponent of the FairTax. Is it perfect? Nope, but it is a gajillion times better than what we have and doesn't punish you for working hard and being successful!

[Guest Len]

but it is a gajillion times better than what we have and doesn't punish you for working hard and being successful!

Shoot, throwing darts at a board to determine how much tax anyone owes is probably better than what we have now....

Simplicity and fairness seem to be the two motivators behind this idea. It sounds interesting, but I must point out that our current income tax-based system started out as pretty simple and fair as well, and was convoluted by decades of political wrangling, compromise, etc. What starts out good and pure can become corrupt over time.

Here's a pretty simple test of an economic or tax system (or choice of of political party):

1) List out all the choices

2) Imagine you were about to be born into a society with one of the systems listed.

3) You know for sure what the system will be but have NO IDEA what class you will fall into (rich, poor, educated, not, middle, upper, management, employee, etc...)

4) Pick a system. Chances are that will be the fairest overall.

I forget the name of this little trick, I did not invent it, but always use it as part of the rationale whenever someone asks me why I'm a Democrat. Works for capitalists too!

(Warning: may create cognitive dissonance in Republicans!)

[fury2neon]

It does eliminate the income tax, along with nearly every other tax, including employment taxes.

The employment taxes are the income taxes by the way... Sorry I can't resist the evil accountant in me. I does take the place of Income (FICA) and FUTA and the Social Security "collection" i.e. tax.

The HR 25 and S 25 which were the original bills specifically calls for the repel of the income tax before it can be enacted.

The only tax it does not replace is the excise tax because these taxes (or ones very similar) have been in place since the start of the nation.

Since it does provide for the return to all citizens the tax they would pay up to the poverty level which eliminates the ability of politician to reward various groups with tax breaks. This is one of the major reasons it probably wont pass without a major up roar from the voter.

[fury2neon]

Since the wealthy bear the lion's share of the tax burden, both proportionately and in-total, it stands to reason that leveling the playing-field in that regard would be desirable to them.

With the way this tax is laid out those that spend the most will pay the most taxes. So if you don't want to pay taxes just don't buy anything.

Another group that may oppose this tax is the AICPA but right now they are claiming they are for it. That is until their members start screaming that they will have to find new jobs...

[Guest Hyaloid]

The employment taxes are the income taxes by the way... Sorry I can't resist the evil accountant in me. I does take the place of Income (FICA) and FUTA and the Social Security "collection" i.e. tax.

.....

No problem... You are absolutely right. Momentary lapse of reason, a good post Roger Waters Pink Floyd album.

Posted in a hurry and made a boo boo. I have even read the FairTax book , so that makes it more embarrassing!

[fury2neon]

No problem... You are absolutely right. Momentary lapse of reason, a good post Roger Waters Pink Floyd album.

Posted in a hurry and made a boo boo. I have even read the FairTax book , so that makes it more embarrassing!

And since I am an accountant/financial analyst I am little anal retintive.

I love the Fair Tax if it implemented as intended.

[The Rabbi]

With the way this tax is laid out those that spend the most will pay the most taxes. So if you don't want to pay taxes just don't buy anything.

Another group that may oppose this tax is the AICPA but right now they are claiming they are for it. That is until their members start screaming that they will have to find new jobs...

It has additional benefits in that avoiding taxes (i.e. cheating) will be near impossible, not to mention unprofitable. Also even illegals in this country will pay taxes (not that they arent now).

[fury2neon]

It has additional benefits in that avoiding taxes (i.e. cheating) will be near impossible, not to mention unprofitable. Also even illegals in this country will pay taxes (not that they arent now).

Yeah, and the illegals will not receive the refund of taxes up to the poverty level that citizens and legal immigrants will receive.

This tax plan has way to many good points, there is no way the Washington insiders are going to like it.

[Guest crytes]

Only problem I see is the potential for the raising of taxes on certain catagories of items and thus put them out f reach of those who can't afford the tax. In this way they could reduce sales of things like guns and alcohal and other thing tey've tried to take out of our hand "for our own good" and thus tax would remain a social engineering tool just less blouted than it is now.

Crytes

[saintsfanbrian]

crytes, the fair tax taxes EVERYTHING at the same rate. There aren't "special categories" for this and that. This is why they do not intend to remove the tax from Food, Clothing Etc. They don't want the "lobbyists" to be able to go to the government and add their item to the exempt clause. Everything would have an even 30% tax on it and with more "disposable" income you could still afford it.

[The Rabbi]

crytes, the fair tax taxes EVERYTHING at the same rate. There aren't "special categories" for this and that. This is why they do not intend to remove the tax from Food, Clothing Etc. They don't want the "lobbyists" to be able to go to the government and add their item to the exempt clause. Everything would have an even 30% tax on it and with more "disposable" income you could still afford it.

In theory that sounds great. But the temptation to social engineer is very very great. And what politician wants to be the object of "he's thrall to Big <fill in the blank>, he's in favor of lower taxes on <fill in favorite vice here>"?

If it truly

a) replaced current income taxes and other levies,

was across the board with no social monkeying around,

c) raised the same or less revenue as now,

I would support it for sure.

[Guest crytes]

That was kind of my point even comunism sound like a good idea in theory, but seen in practice it just dosen't work. People in power like to maintain their control and this tax reform could be easily fallowed by bills that catgorize and implement social engineering capabilities. So this bill or our laws somewere else needs a failsafe included to prevent this.

Crytes