Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I’m a populist; I contend that a flat general sales tax is less regressive than a flat income tax.
The right wants people to succeed (at times at the expense of others.. including taxation)
The left wants to take care of people ( at the times at the expense of others.. including taxation).
... well at least that's what they want ordinary people to believe....
There's got to be a medium in which we can care for our citizens AND provide opportunities for success through class mobility.
Populist = a member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
In history, we've seen this term thrown around like popcorn as a marketing word in hopes to send out a message that some party is lead by ordinary citizens and represents ordinary citizens. Kinda like that hair club for men ad... I'm not only the President, but I'm also a client. Heck, there are elements of this messaging used during the Nazi political rise. In truth, there have been hard right leaning populists as well as left leaning populists...... As far as I can tell, when people throw this term around, what they are really saying is anti-elitism (at least superficially).
If you are claiming to be a member of the more recent "American Populist Party"? If so, what is their platform on taxation? (I honestly don't know)
Personally, I have a hard time seeing how anyone who claims to be "for the ordinary people" show preference towards a sales tax over an income tax.
Originally Posted by Supposn
A flat general sales tax is less regressive than a flat income tax.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
I think you have that backwards. ...
...
MrRational, generally sales taxes are not applied to sales or barter of intellectual property, real estate, and transferable financial instruments such as stocks, bonds or currency.
Calculations of taxable net incomes are reduced by expenditures for the purpose of acquiring wealth.
The proportion of all those afore mentioned items for which taxes are waived, are in proportion to the taxpayers’ individual and their aggregate actual net incomes are certainly no greater in the cases of sales taxes.
I contend that (even among the wealthiest taxpayers) purchases within the USA or goods purchased beyond our borders and brought into the USA, are more reflective the actual rather than the reported net incomes upon which federal net income taxes are based upon.
Due to the many waivers, exclusions and other income tax regulation more favorable to incomes not derived from wages and salaries, federal income taxes are much less progressive than conservatives would have us believe.
I contend transferring our major tax revenue sources from a basis of net income to a sales tax to the most feasible political and financial extent would result in a hybrid of both taxes upon gross sales and net incomes and only the wealthier taxpayers would pay income taxes.
I affirm my statement that it would result in a federal tax policy that is less regressive than our current policies.
The right wants people to succeed...
The left wants to take care of people...
Tripe.
Quote:
There's got to be a medium in which we can care for our citizens
AND provide opportunities for success through class mobility.
There is.
Achieving that balance depends on limiting the number of those who need to be cared for
which is the root problem we have today: TOO MANY who draw on public wealth.
Once upon a time the solutions would be about "jobs".
That isn't the world we have now.
Within our complex income tax regulations there are innumerable waivers, exceptions and exclusions of items that are greatly reduce taxpayers’ net taxable incomes. These tax considerations in aggregate greatly reduce our tax revenues and are more favorable to wealthier taxpayers. Those regulatory provisions that are of the greatest benefit to the wealthy are drastically less or entirely not applicable to wage and salary incomes. Consequentially greater proportion of tax burdens are shifted from wealthier to middle income earners.
Our progressive rated taxes upon net incomes are not nearly as progressive as we are being led to believe.
The differences between actual net incomes and the taxed net income amounts extremely differ. It is the wealthier taxpayers that proportionally to their actual individual and to their actual aggregate net incomes that are the greater beneficiaries of our tax regulations’ complexities.
Many advocate that we “simplify” our regulations and have a single rate of taxes upon net incomes. If this were done in a revenue neutral manner, I doubt if it would not increase lesser income earner’s proportions of our income tax revenues.
Among a room full of accountants, or among tax attorneys examining other than the most any but the very simplest of accounting journals concerning enterprise owners and their enterprises, a majority of those professionals could not agree upon the amounts of the enterprise and the enterprise’s owners’ net incomes.
Our progressive taxes upon net incomes are complex but not as progressive as you believe.
Determining gross amounts of sales transactions is much simpler than determining net incomes. Individual’s purchases rather than tax form calculations proportionally more accurately are reflective of those individuals’ net incomes.
Enterprises’ purchases that are not passed on to their customers, serve to reduce those enterprise’s taxable incomes.
I affirm my statement that a flat rated sales tax is less regressive than a flat rated tax upon net incomes.
Sales tax exemption of "essential" items is only less regressive than a sales tax on all goods and services.
A flat income tax is more regressive than a progressive income tax but less regressive than a sales tax.
Linda_D, waivers can be incorporated within a sales tax that to a limited extent would effectively reduce the taxes burden upon the poor. The items waived should represent a greater proportion of lower income earners’ purchases.
Some governments waive their sales taxes upon food not from restaurants or caterers. I suppose a federal sales tax could not be passed if it didn’t waive the tax upon prescription medications and/or medical care from federal and state licensed healthcare providers.
I’m an advocate for waiving threshold amounts of utility services delivered to primary residences (e.g. the first $75 of electricity (and/or any other legislative specified similar public utility services) delivered to the primary residence.
(All waived threshold amounts would need to be annually cost of living monitored and updated).
I wouldn’t be opposed to waiving a threshold of primary residence rents but I’d be opposed to doing the same for clothing. Clothing represents a comparatively small proportion of the working poor’s expenses. Adding to a long “laundry list” of waived items reduces tax revenues; revenues are the tax’s purpose.
Due to the calculations for determining net incomes, a flat sales tax is less regressive than a flat income tax.
Refer to what my post of 3:36 PM, March 25, 2015.
I am NOT arguing with you when I say this BUT if we are to have a flat general sales tax in this nation, I am of the opinion that there are certain items that should NOT be taxed. Ie: groceries (obviously not including alcohol and cigarettes) medicine/prescriptions, clothing under $100.00. The basic necessities. And certain utilities like electricity, fuel oil, propane and natural gas. Don't make the burden harder on those trying to squeak by.
But who decides what's basic. The left has been increasing more and more things on the list of rights. Where do you draw boundaries.
The right wants people to succeed (at times at the expense of others.. including taxation)
The left wants to take care of people ( at the times at the expense of others.. including taxation).
... well at least that's what they want ordinary people to believe....
There's got to be a medium in which we can care for our citizens AND provide opportunities for success through class mobility.
Populist = a member or adherent of a political party seeking to represent the interests of ordinary people.
In history, we've seen this term thrown around like popcorn as a marketing word in hopes to send out a message that some party is lead by ordinary citizens and represents ordinary citizens. Kinda like that hair club for men ad... I'm not only the President, but I'm also a client. Heck, there are elements of this messaging used during the Nazi political rise. In truth, there have been hard right leaning populists as well as left leaning populists...... As far as I can tell, when people throw this term around, what they are really saying is anti-elitism (at least superficially).
If you are claiming to be a member of the more recent "American Populist Party"? If so, what is their platform on taxation? (I honestly don't know)
Personally, I have a hard time seeing how anyone who claims to be "for the ordinary people" show preference towards a sales tax over an income tax.
The left does not wa t to take care of people. They want to make people dependent and get votes. Then they can dictate what transportation means you use for commute and who gets to be a sucker. It is the quest for power. For the colonization of what is otherwise public shared government structure. Make it represent only one group of self righteous people.
I'm only a passer-by. But there actually are some states that do have sales tax on (grocery) food purchases.
A number of states allow sales tax on (restaurant) food purchase.
I didn't realize this because most (maybe all) of the states I've lived in exempted grocery food purchases, and so I assumed that was nation-wide. Then I read/heard something somewhere and realized it wasn't true.
A quick google shows
* 31 states and DC exempt MOST food purchased for consumption at home from state sales tax
* Seven states tax groceries at lower rates: AR, IL, MO, TN, UT, VA and WV
Which seems to suggest that there are 12 states that tax groceries at normal sales tax rates.
Assuming of course, that google is up-to-date.
Anyway - housing/legal/medical is a whole nother matter. I believe Ohio was looking at expanding sales tax to include "professional services" within the last couple of years. I'm not sure if legal services was included in that expansion. I know many in the business community were unhappy with that, but the income tax reduction had to be paid for somehow.
Lastly - housing - depends on what type of housing it is. Mobile Homes (i.e. trailers) are generally subject to sales tax, the same as a vehicle, as in most places they fall in that defintion (titled, not deeded).
Exactly.
Most people dont get it. The issue is total tax percentage, that is total tax divided by total income. Only when one has complete information can one draw conclusions of one versus the other.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
