U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-22-2017, 03:00 PM
 
708 posts, read 446,310 times
Reputation: 1154

Advertisements

This is a dumb idea. It would hurt sales with the additional tax and as Evening Sun above
Baby Boomers would never go for the idea as we already paid in for 40 years, now pay again
for no benefit?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-22-2017, 05:29 PM
 
Location: West Madison^WMHT
3,174 posts, read 2,743,911 times
Reputation: 3822
Thumbs down OP proposes a 4.55% nationwide sales tax, on top of local sales tax

I am morally opposed to funding Social Security through anything other than payroll taxes, as doing so eliminates the fiction that Social Security is anything other than yet another entitlement program.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willistonite View Post
This is a dumb idea. It would hurt sales with the additional tax and as Evening Sun above Baby Boomers would never go for the idea as we already paid in for 40 years, now pay again for no benefit?
Would a 4.55% (OP's proposal) Federal sales tax hurt sales? Would people just buy less stuff if they were faced with one more tax, one that would be difficult to evade?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2017, 08:55 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonesuch View Post
I am morally opposed to funding Social Security through anything other than payroll taxes, as doing so eliminates the fiction that Social Security is anything other than yet another entitlement program.

Would a 4.55% (OP's proposal) Federal sales tax hurt sales? Would people just buy less stuff if they were faced with one more tax, one that would be difficult to evade?
NoneSuch, Social Security has always been a government administered hybrid financial entitlement. Why does the word “entitlement” disturb you?

I doubt if USA general sales taxes of such a comparatively small rate, (i.e. less than 5%) have demonstrated long term significant detriment to sales. I doubt if they’ve demonstrated any detriment beyond short terms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2017, 09:36 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by evening sun View Post
So now I am retired & collecting SS, which I paid into all my life, & now you want me to continue to pay, via a sales tax. I think not.
have you forgotten Social Security benefits are annually monitored and if necessary they’re adjusted to retain their purchasing powers. A federal sales tax would not be of any significant detriment to those dependent upon Social Security retirement benefits.

This proposal with no increase of net employees’ taxes, would increase federal tax revenues,
and better enable the retention of full Social Security benefits,
and reduce enterprises’ tax rate to the extent of 4.55% of their payrolls,
which would all be of some net improvement to our nation’s economic and social wellbeing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-22-2017, 11:12 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Capital is a key determinant of economic growth, along with labor and technology. Yet, the U.S. tax system systematically penalizes saving, which finances capital formation. The tax penalty on saving could be eliminated by moving to progressive consumption taxation.

One progressive consumption tax is the personal expenditure tax, sometimes called a “consumed income” tax. This tax starts with a framework similar to the individual income tax, but with a crucial modification that strips out the income tax’s saving penalty. Households would report their income on annual tax returns, but would then claim a full deduction for all saving and add back in any dissaving. What’s left would be the household’s before-tax consumption for the year. That consumption amount would be taxed at graduated rates, with higher tax brackets for households with higher consumption. Exemptions and refundable tax credits could be provided to low-consumption households.

Such a system could be made as progressive as you want. At the same time it eliminates the current penalties on savings & would encourage more capital formation which, of course, leads to higher economic growth going forward.
SportyandMisty, I’m unaware of any USA jurisdiction’s general sales tax that’s applicable to transfers of wealth with regard to savings, or investments. Sales taxes are not levied on deposits to funds, purchases stocks, bonds, portions of enterprises, etc.
[There have been very few taxes at rates less than 1%, or at very small flat rates, applied to the public registering of documents or the attributes of those documents, but effectively these are not sales taxes].

Similar to your concept of a “progressive consumption tax”, general sales taxes are not applicable to divestment of saving or investments until the divested wealth has been spent for items subject to the general sales tax.
There’s financial disadvantages to such divested “wealth sitting idle”; it’s seldom and not purposely done.

Thus, general sales taxes in the USA have effectively behaved similarly to your description of a “progressive consumption tax”.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2017, 09:18 AM
 
708 posts, read 446,310 times
Reputation: 1154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nonesuch View Post
I am morally opposed to funding Social Security through anything other than payroll taxes, as doing so eliminates the fiction that Social Security is anything other than yet another entitlement program.


Would a 4.55% (OP's proposal) Federal sales tax hurt sales? Would people just buy less stuff if they were faced with one more tax, one that would be difficult to evade?

When you add it on some states already high sales tax rate plus local tax, yes it could hurt sales.
Some places you would be paying over 15% total sales tax. Perhaps the biggest concern is how
will does work for people like myself that has paid in SS for 45 years now we have to pay more
after we retire? This may have been answered but I don't understand it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2017, 11:54 AM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willistonite View Post
When you add it on some states already high sales tax rate plus local tax, yes it could hurt sales.
Some places you would be paying over 15% total sales tax. Perhaps the biggest concern is how
will does work for people like myself that has paid in SS for 45 years now we have to pay more
after we retire? This may have been answered but I don't understand it.
Willistonite, are you within the USA? your current total general sales taxes currently exceed 11.5%?

This proposal reduces each individual employees' and their employers' taxes by 4.55% 0f payroll.
It's of no net detriment to empoyees and their dependents.

I doubt if a general sales tax in the USA has ever demonstrated long term significant detriment to sales. There's no reason to believe, beyond a short initial term, this prposed tax would be of any or of significant detriment to total sales.[/quote]

From the thread “FICA payroll tax; our most regressive tax”:
FICA payroll tax; our most regressive tax.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
SuiteLiving, we remind them that some prior session of our U.S. Congress has done something to better serve our current and future needs. Due to Social Security benefits being annually cost-of-living adjusted, a federal sales tax is of no net detriment to Social Security retirees.

National currencies, (e.g. U.S. dollars) do not retain constant purchasing value. ...

Last edited by Supposn; 08-23-2017 at 12:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2017, 12:54 PM
 
17,624 posts, read 12,211,350 times
Reputation: 12859
Louisiana has the highest average at 9.98% but that doesn't mean there aren't some local rates country wide that are higher. This article even addresses the measures some high taxes states take that boarder non taxing because of the consumer reaction to higher rates

https://taxfoundation.org/state-and-...rates-in-2017/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-23-2017, 11:23 PM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
That inherently screws renters because homeowners get to enjoy untaxed housing consumption.

It's also regressive to the extent that lower-income people (esp renters) get inferior value for their spending.
No general sales tax in the USA is levied upon mortgages or real-estate sales. I’m unaware of their being levied upon real-estate rentals.
These correspondences regarding rental and/or purchases of residences are not germane to the topic of a general sales tax.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
General sales taxes.
LowExpectations, ... to the extent that general sales taxes are waived upon sales of products that are more often or in greater quantities consumed or used per capita by lower income persons, or upon capped monthly amounts of such utility service products sold and delivered to individual residences, a flat general sales tax is transformed to that extent be a more progressive sales tax.

My opinion is medicine, or food other than that supplied by restaurants, or caterers, not be subject to the general sales tax. ...
It’s difficult to draft legislation the parses ordinary and luxury priced products, I’d want much fewer waivers of sales taxes on classes of products. That’s much less of a problem for utility services that can be measured and confirmed as they're provided to individual residences via pipe or cable.

Last edited by Supposn; 08-23-2017 at 11:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 01:38 AM
 
1,027 posts, read 559,669 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
Louisiana has the highest average at 9.98% but that doesn't mean there aren't some local rates country wide that are higher. This article even addresses the measures some high taxes states take that boarder non taxing because of the consumer reaction to higher rates

https://taxfoundation.org/state-and-...rates-in-2017/
LowExpectations, you’re correct; sales taxes in some localities may now be exceeding 11%.
Referring to the link you provided,
https://taxfoundation.org/state-and-...rates-in-2017/ :
It mentions Louisiana having the highest average sales tax; it’s 9.98%
and
sales tax rate differentials can induce consumers to shop across states’ borders or buy products online.
Regarding border jurisdictions, sales taxes changed the location of the sales locations but much less affect sales volumes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top