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.
you have to make the base exemption float, using a fixed number like $15k leads to a fight as inflation shrinks its value. Better to link it to the poverty rate the government set each year, I say 3 times the rate would be fair, with ZERO deductions or credits for ANYTHING. Tax all income the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kele
I'm fine with the first $15,000 exemption. No to personal, standard, or itemized deductions. No to $4,000 tax refunds when you haven't paid in a dime.
Giving people tax loopholes to avoid paying taxes rather defeats the idea of a flat tax don't you think?
you have to make the base exemption float, using a fixed number like $15k leads to a fight as inflation shrinks its value. Better to link it to the poverty rate the government set each year, I say 3 times the rate would be fair, with ZERO deductions or credits for ANYTHING. Tax all income the same.
Not really. Being a "middle income person" who owns a home, it seems to me that a flat tax system would be a blessing, comparatively speaking.
It would be a much bigger hit to a married couple with lets say a combined income of $75,000 than a single person making $65,000, especially if the couple had kids. It would also be a big hit to someone who lives in a higher COL portion of the country that may have higher property taxes or higher mortgage interest amount.
Even for a single person with the $65,000 income with a property tax bite that isn't too bad ($3,500) and a mortgage interest amount that isn't bad (lets say about $1,250 a month) it would still be a hit and an increase in taxes even with the first $15,000 exempt. Those amounts are far from what they would be here, but using a lower COL area as an example.
Do you favor a flat tax on income if we exempt the first 15K?
fair tax fan here, no income tax at all and fire all tax revenue employees. have a sales tax of 10-12% after having the 16th Amendment repealed. then everyone is taxed on what they spend, not what they make.
No, I'm a fair tax fan. Tax on consumption, then everyone get's to pay, rich and poor alike. That way, we eliminate the income tax, and take home more of our pay.
The poorer you are, the higher percentage of your income you spend, and therefore poor people will end up paying a higher tax. Few people making 15K are putting money away in a 401K.
I'd suggest that those Fair Tax opponents do a bit more research before commenting. From reading the posts, few are actually familiar with the implementation and benefits of the Fair Tax.
i know enough about your "fair tax" to know it is a tax that burdens the poor and lets the rich stash more wealth away and spend it where there isn't a consumption tax.
the wealthy will just produce their wealth here, paying ZERO income taxes and then take those resources out of this economy, by spending it elsewhere, again, NOT PAYING TAXES.
win-win for the wealthy. it is a non starter. just what we need another inducement for the wealthy to bleed money out of our economy and to spend it elsewhere. A consumption tax would be great for the "duty free" countries that would spring up but it would destroy this economy.
of course the poor get hit with a double whammy, they would still pay tax on most of their earnings because they spend most of what they make to live, AND they would now pay a tax on the money they BORROW to fill their earning gaps. Payday loans would now have another hidden cost, a tax on the spending of that borrowed money.
lose-lose for the working poor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
I'd suggest that those Fair Tax opponents do a bit more research before commenting. From reading the posts, few are actually familiar with the implementation and benefits of the Fair Tax.
Last edited by buzzards27; 04-19-2011 at 08:11 AM..
In 2008, top 50% (an AGI of $33K or more) paid 13.65% of their income in federal income tax. Those making less than $33K paid 2.6% of their income. So, a 15% flat tax will be a tax increase on both groups, more so on those at the bottom of the pay scale. In the same year, the top 1% paid 23% of their AGI in income tax, so they will be getting a tax cut.
In other words, the idea is to make the poor pay more and the rich pay less. Right?
A flat tax as yet to be defined is mandatory and preferable to the current tax code that has been 'simplified' and customized for the benefit of political supporters while miraculously gaining in size.
A flat tax would save billions of $$ and man hours spent filing taxes each year. The bureaucratic haircut the IRS would take would save billions more.
A flat tax would eliminate the class warfare strategy Obama keeps making with his tax the rich ploy. Like Obamacare the move has no bearing on its proclaimed intent. Generating money sufficient to satisfy the irresponsible and inefficient government spending that has been so ingrained in the political culture by taxing the 'rich' is non nutritional propagandized pap baked and served to feed the hopelessly ignorant electorate. It reveals Obama's devious character.
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.
