What do you think of Huckabee's FairTax?

[AcesFull]

Where do you get your information, because its wrong. The IRS doesn't make tax law. The more complicated the law, the harder their job is. And the AICPA has been a long time proponent of tax simplificaton. It's long past the point where any one CPA completely understands the tax code. If you want to lay blame, do it at the feet of industry lobbyists and the congressmen that they wine and dine.

That is a pretty bold statement to simply state that I am wrong without backing up the assertion with any facts. The Fair Tax would go way beyond tax "simplification." It would eliminate all federal income tax returns for individuals. Does the AICPA support the total elimination of individual tax returns? If so, then my hat is off to them.

 

Do you honestly believe that the IRS supports the eliminination of the federal income tax? Every large government bureaucracy has considerable political clout and the IRS is no different. The IRS carries a big stick, just ask Paula Jones and President Clinton's other former girlfriends.

 

I do blame politicians who simply take positions based upon the wishes of lobbyists, and I believe that my post was clear on that point. I admire the few politicians who have taken time to understand the Fair Tax proposal, whether they support it or not. Most of them opposed to the tax echo a little bit of jargon fed to them by lobbyists.

 

I support overhauling our tax system entirely, but there are certainly valid arguments to be made on the other side of this issue. Unfortunately, most of what I hear is misinformation from elected officials who could not explain the difference in a flat tax and a Fair Tax. That is why I believe that the Fair Tax is a lost cause.

[HHSDad]

That is a pretty bold statement to simply state that I am wrong without backing up the assertion with any facts. The Fair Tax would go way beyond tax "simplification." It would eliminate all federal income tax returns for individuals. Does the AICPA support the total elimination of individual tax returns? If so, then my hat is off to them.

 

Do you honestly believe that the IRS supports the eliminination of the federal income tax? Every large government bureaucracy has considerable political clout and the IRS is no different. The IRS carries a big stick, just ask Paula Jones and President Clinton's other former girlfriends.

 

I do blame politicians who simply take positions based upon the wishes of lobbyists, and I believe that my post was clear on that point. I admire the few politicians who have taken time to understand the Fair Tax proposal, whether they support it or not. Most of them opposed to the tax echo a little bit of jargon fed to them by lobbyists.

 

I support overhauling our tax system entirely, but there are certainly valid arguments to be made on the other side of this issue. Unfortunately, most of what I hear is misinformation from elected officials who could not explain the difference in a flat tax and a Fair Tax. That is why I believe that the Fair Tax is a lost cause.

The AICPA recommends employing the following, widely recognized indicators of good tax policy to analyze proposed changes. These ten guiding principles are equally important, and should be considered both separately and together when evaluating the current system and reform proposals.

1. Simplicity: The tax law should be simple so that taxpayers understand the rules and can comply with them correctly and in a cost-efficient manner.
    
   
2. Fairness: Similarly situated taxpayers should be taxed similarly.
   

   
   

3. Economic Growth and Efficiency: The tax system should not impede or reduce the productive capacity of the economy.
   

   
   

4. Neutrality:The effect of the tax law on a taxpayer's decisions as to how to carry out a particular transaction or whether to engage in a transaction should be kept to a minimum.
   

   
   

5. Transparency: Taxpayers should know that a tax exists and how and when it is imposed upon them and others.
   

   
   

6. Minimizing Noncompliance: A tax should be structured to minimize noncompliance.
   

   
   

7. Cost-Effective Collection: The costs to collect a tax should be kept to a minimum for both the government and taxpayers.
   

   
   

8. Impact on Government Revenues: The tax system should enable the government to determine how much tax revenue will likely be collected and when.
   

   
   

9. Certainty: The tax rules should clearly specify when the tax is to be paid, how it is to be paid, and how the amount to be paid is to be determined.
   

   
   

   
   
10. Payment Convenience:A tax should be due at a time or in a manner that is most likely to be convenient for the taxpayer.

http://tax.aicpa.org/Resources/Tax+Advocacy+for+Members/Tax+Legislation+and+Policy/Understanding+Tax+Reform+A+Guide+to+21st+Century+Alternatives.htm

[HHSDad]

Does it bother anyone that the "Fair Tax" will be a regressive tax? In other words, since savings aren't taxed, the poor will be taxed more than the rich, who have a greater ability to save money and spend a smaller percentage of their income.

[HHSDad]

Does that last one take into account that $75,000 earned in KY is not the same as $75,000 earned in NYC?

I'm not sure what difference this should make. It never has in the past.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I'm not sure what difference this should make. It never has in the past.

 

And that means that there is an disadvantage built into it. Both parties with the identical deductions get taxed the same correct?

 

But $75,000 in Lexington KY is far higher of a salary looking at standard of living compared to $75,000 in NYC. But they are taxed comparably in this country when their income is not comparable accept for number.

 

You said, "but reduce the tax rate for wages above a certain amount." And I pondered a certain amount in Lex, KY is not the same certain amount in NYC except for numerically. Would the wage earners in NYC be taxed more than the wage earners in Lex, KY?

[ladiesbballcoach]

Does it bother anyone that the "Fair Tax" will be a regressive tax? In other words, since savings aren't taxed, the poor will be taxed more than the rich, who have a greater ability to save money and spend a smaller percentage of their income.

 

Did you miss this in the first post?

 

All of us will get a monthly rebate that will reimburse us for taxes on purchases up to the poverty line, so that we're not taxed on necessities. That means people below the poverty line won't be taxed at all.

[HHSDad]

And that means that there is an disadvantage built into it. Both parties with the identical deductions get taxed the same correct?

 

But $75,000 in Lexington KY is far higher of a salary looking at standard of living compared to $75,000 in NYC. But they are taxed comparably in this country when their income is not comparable accept for number.

 

You said, "but reduce the tax rate for wages above a certain amount." And I pondered a certain amount in Lex, KY is not the same certain amount in NYC except for numerically. Would the wage earners in NYC be taxed more than the wage earners in Lex, KY?

I was talking about the Social Security tax.

[HHSDad]

Did you miss this in the first post?

 

All of us will get a monthly rebate that will reimburse us for taxes on purchases up to the poverty line, so that we're not taxed on necessities. That means people below the poverty line won't be taxed at all.

It's still a regressive tax.

 

This is a pipedream. Huckabee preaching that he will replace all taxes with a consumption tax lowers his credibility in my opinino.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I was talking about the Social Security tax.

 

O...

[ladiesbballcoach]

It's still a regressive tax.

 

This is a pipedream. Huckabee preaching that he will replace all taxes with a consumption tax lowers his credibility in my opinino.

 

At some point in starting the overhaul of the system, the overhaul system has to start. Why not now?

 

I like the idea of removing taxes from American products going overseas and lowering those costs to make them more competitive.

[HHSDad]

At some point in starting the overhaul of the system, the overhaul system has to start. Why not now?

 

I like the idea of removing taxes from American products going overseas and lowering those costs to make them more competitive.

As AcesFull correctly pointed out, it ain't going to happen. There's too many hands in the pot. Every line of the tax code has either a lobbyist or an activist standing behind it.

 

I also don't believe that taxes add that much cost to American products being sold overseas. The biggest problem with the cost of American products is the cost of labor.

[AcesFull]

Does it bother anyone that the "Fair Tax" will be a regressive tax? In other words, since savings aren't taxed, the poor will be taxed more than the rich, who have a greater ability to save money and spend a smaller percentage of their income.

It would bother me if it were true. The Fair Tax would provide monthly "prebates" to everybody to offset the taxes paid on basic necessities. The goal would be to make the same people who are essentially exempt from the current federal income tax exempt from the consumption tax.

 

The 2005 AICPA report makes a fleeting reference to these rebates before emphasizing in a bullet point that the tax would be regressive. Whether the Fair Tax or similar tax would be regressive would depend on the details of its implementation. A truly regressive tax would have an even worse chance of becoming a reality than the tax that has been proposed.

 

Tax preparation giants like H & R Block will not support a complete bottom up overhaul of our current tax system because they have too much invested. Granted, tax preparers go toe to toe with the IRS on behalf of their clients, but the bottom line is that the relationship is a symbiotic one.

 

I have not read the Fair Tax book by Linder and Boortz, but I have listened to both talk at length about their proposal. The book will be the next one that I read and I will write a view when I finish it.

[AcesFull]

It's still a regressive tax.

 

This is a pipedream. Huckabee preaching that he will replace all taxes with a consumption tax lowers his credibility in my opinino.

The Fair Tax would exempt people living in poverty. The flat tax plans that I have seen also exempt people living in poverty. Yet you said that you would support a flat tax but condemn the Fair Tax as "regressive." I don't follow that logic. Why is a tax that exempts poor people and then collects more money from people having progressively more disposal income a "regressive" tax?

 

Huckabee and a couple of other Republican candidates have obviously done their homework on the Fair Tax and demonstrated the willingness to think outside the box. I don't think that any of them believe that a Fair Tax bill would reach their desk if they were elected president, but I like the fact that they can speak intelligently on a subject that many conservatives support.

 

In contrast, Romney and Giuliani obviously have little knowledge of or interest in the Linder plan. I could support either of these candidates in the general election, but I would be more comfortable with them if they opposed the Fair Tax after having actually considered its merits and weaknesses. Their ignorance of the details of the plan shows a lack of respect to the Republicans who enthusiastically support the Fair Tax. (At this time I don't count myself as an enthusiastic supporter of the Fair Tax, I just hate the IRS and would like a president who shares my sentiments. :lol:)

[GusMcRae]

As AcesFull correctly pointed out, it ain't going to happen. There's too many hands in the pot. Every line of the tax code has either a lobbyist or an activist standing behind it.

 

I also don't believe that taxes add that much cost to American products being sold overseas. The biggest problem with the cost of American products is the cost of labor.

 

and taxes arent part of that cost?

[HHSDad]

Hey, if you guys think this Fair Tax is going to replace all federal taxes and your purchase prices will only go up 5-10%, go ahead and jump on that bandwagon. I'll be the guy standing on the curb laughing when your bandwagon crashes into the real tax rate.