U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
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 08-24-2017, 12:21 PM
 
1,030 posts, read 561,267 times
Reputation: 300

Advertisements

[quote=Jim1921;49299057]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Jim1921, I'm somewhat in agreement with the conservatives' supporting the "Fair Tax" concept.

It is doubtful that our Congress would ever abolish a tax.
Jim1921, I don’t disagree with your statement, but what’s your opinion of the proposed concept?

It’s proposed that wealthier entities pay taxes based upon their net incomes and their purchases, while the the entire remaining portion of our entities, (a great plurality of our entire population) would pay only sales taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
3,766 posts, read 1,597,277 times
Reputation: 4156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Replacing reduced FICA payroll tax rates with a federal general sales tax.

Transcribed from the thread:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/newre...ply&p=49254002

I advocate to some extent reducing the FICA payroll based tax for funding Social Security retirement, and replacing it with revenue from a general sales tax. Due to the general sales tax there’d be no net tax reduction to employees, but it would increase tax revenue ear marked for Social Security retirement, better enabling full Social Security benefits for the benefit of employees when they retire. this is of some net financial benefit to retiring employees’ families and of net economic benefit to our nation.
This is a page out of the Koch brothers playbook. It reduces the burden on employers and places the burden of Social Security funding on the purchasing public.

Another scam brought to you by the Republican right always working in your best interest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:10 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
3,766 posts, read 1,597,277 times
Reputation: 4156
Another thing. Most sales taxes state and local are already maxed out. What I mean by maxed out is that there is a point where sales taxes make an item too expensive for the individual to afford. It is generally around 8.25%.

What it also may do is undermine SS by making it part of the general budget rather than the SS trust fund. Don't trust these bastards any further than you can bodily throw them.

Last edited by Tonyafd; 08-24-2017 at 02:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:22 PM
 
437 posts, read 199,077 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonyafd View Post
This is a page out of the Koch brothers playbook. It reduces the burden on employers and places the burden of Social Security funding on the purchasing public.

Another scam brought to you by the Republican right always working in your best interest.
I haven't seen any republican or the Koch brothers proposing a new sales tax. Perhaps you can provide a link.

Last edited by Jim1921; 08-24-2017 at 03:20 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:27 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
3,766 posts, read 1,597,277 times
Reputation: 4156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim1921 View Post
I have seen any republican or the Koch brothers proposing a new sales tax. Perhaps you can provide a link.
Look up the Cato Institute or read Dark Money. After a while you get to know the MO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Close to an earthquake
890 posts, read 627,286 times
Reputation: 2384
There's something to be said for a consumption tax like a federal general sales tax because it makes it harder for the tax cheats working under the table to not pay. Having said that, I'm not in favor of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 02:47 PM
 
Location: Proxima Centauri
3,766 posts, read 1,597,277 times
Reputation: 4156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
LowExpectations, currently, federal FICA’s total tax revenue is approximately or effectively 15.3% of USA’s payrolls. The tax levied equally upon employers and their employees. It’s approximately rather than precisely 15.3% because individual employees annual FICA taxes are “capped” at a legally maximum amount.

Its proposed that the entire 2.9% of payrolls earmarked for Medicare and half of the 12.4% of payrolls earmarked for Social Security be halved.
Thereafter FICA would be expected to fund no more than half of Social Security retirement plans, and nothing else.
Both each employers and employees FICA taxes would be reduced from 7.65% to be 3.1% for each of them.
The reduction of FICA revenue would (at least) be sufficiently replaced by an effectively 4.55% sales tax.
In many areas sales taxes are already 8%. Would the sales taxes then be 12.55%?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:22 PM
 
437 posts, read 199,077 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonyafd View Post
Look up the Cato Institute or read Dark Money. After a while you get to know the MO.
Try again. Better yet, just look at all the tax increase proposals from Bernie and Hillary during the last election.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...creases-220267

15 Trillion increase from Bernie.

http://www.atr.org/full-list-hillary...nned-tax-hikes

Hillary is a light weight at 1 trillion

Last edited by Jim1921; 08-24-2017 at 03:30 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:40 PM
 
1,030 posts, read 561,267 times
Reputation: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by borninsac View Post
There's something to be said for a consumption tax like a federal general sales tax because it makes it harder for the tax cheats working under the table to not pay. Having said that, I'm not in favor of it.
BornInSAC, TonyAFD, Jim1921, is it of any interest to you guys that this proposal to shift some revenue sources from FICA to a sales tax By reducing the 15.3% total FICA to 6.2% of USA’s payrolls would somewhat reduce employees current net federal taxes.

Aside from FICA employees directly pay, the employer’s share of FICA is passed on an imbedded within all prices as effectively an unstated sales tax. That’s an unstated, concealed sales tax we all now pay. (Employees cannot pass their taxes on to anyone).

If my "guestimit" of payrolls being approximately 1/3 of sales that would be subject to a federal sales tax, the consequences of the 4.55% of FICA payroll tax reduction (from both employees’ and from employers’ FICA taxes), reduces prices by over 1%.

So employees and employers will pay 4.55 % less payroll taxes, reducing prices by over 1% and they and their dependents will be paying an additional 4.55% on those reduced prices. The 1% difference is not the big gain. What we gain is increased tax revenues for Medicare and Social Security with no increase of taxes to employees and no reduction of Social Security or Medicare benefits.

There’s no free lunch.
Everyone with incomes not derived from employment or from something like Social Security that’s cost-of-living adjusted, (i.e. COLA’d), will be paying a greater proportion of their incomes for federal taxes.

Investors, and all others with incomes not directly derived from employment, will now pay federal sales taxes. Employees that capped out of FICA will still have to pay their full share of sales tax. (I‘m opposed to employees’ annual FICA taxes being capped). The sales taxes paid by the wealthier, the wages above the annual caps are tax revenues not now available for Medicare and Social Security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-24-2017, 03:44 PM
 
437 posts, read 199,077 times
Reputation: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
BornInSAC, TonyAFD, Jim1921, is it of any interest to you guys that this proposal to shift some revenue sources from FICA to a sales tax By reducing the 15.3% total FICA to 6.2% of USA’s payrolls would somewhat reduce employees current net federal taxes.

Aside from FICA employees directly pay, the employer’s share of FICA is passed on an imbedded within all prices as effectively an unstated sales tax. That’s an unstated, concealed sales tax we all now pay. (Employees cannot pass their taxes on to anyone).

If my "guestimit" of payrolls being approximately 1/3 of sales that would be subject to a federal sales tax, the consequences of the 4.55% of FICA payroll tax reduction (from both employees’ and from employers’ FICA taxes), reduces prices by over 1%.

So employees and employers will pay 4.55 % less payroll taxes, reducing prices by over 1% and they and their dependents will be paying an additional 4.55% on those reduced prices. The 1% difference is not the big gain. What we gain is increased tax revenues for Medicare and Social Security with no increase of taxes to employees and no reduction of Social Security or Medicare benefits.

There’s no free lunch.
Everyone with incomes not derived from employment or from something like Social Security that’s cost-of-living adjusted, (i.e. COLA’d), will be paying a greater proportion of their incomes for federal taxes.

Investors, and all others with incomes not directly derived from employment, will now pay federal sales taxes. Employees that capped out of FICA will still have to pay their full share of sales tax. (I‘m opposed to employees’ annual FICA taxes being capped). The sales taxes paid by the wealthier, the wages above the annual caps are tax revenues not now available for Medicare and Social Security.
Suppose,

I just don't like adding another new tax method. It provides a new source of revenue that will likely just increase over time for other things. Secondly, the decrease in the SS rate will only be temporary and then will be raised by future politicians to expand benefits. I think the only way it works is when you actually eliminate the other tax as part of the process.
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