Bill to Abolish IRS Introduced

This is coming just a day or two after Ron Paul introduces legislation to end the Federal Reserve. Thanks to the tin-foil hat websites like abovetopsecret.com for pointing me in the right direction...

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.25:

H.R. 25 Fair Tax Act of 2009


40 have signed on to Rep. John Linder's [GA-7] bill to abolish the
income tax, and replace it with a national sales tax.

Here is the list
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 1/6/2009
Rep Alexander, Rodney [LA-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Bachus, Spencer [AL-6] - 1/6/2009
Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 1/6/2009
Rep Bilbray, Brian P. [CA-50] - 1/6/2009
Rep Brady, Kevin [TX-8] - 1/6/2009
Rep Brown, Henry E., Jr. [SC-1] - 1/6/2009
Rep Brown-Waite, Ginny [FL-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Carter, John R. [TX-31] - 1/6/2009
Rep Conaway, K. Michael [TX-11] - 1/6/2009
Rep Crenshaw, Ander [FL-4] - 1/23/2009
Rep Culberson, John Abney [TX-7] - 1/6/2009
Rep Deal, Nathan [GA-9] - 1/6/2009
Rep Duncan, John J., Jr. [TN-2] - 1/6/2009
Rep Fallin, Mary [OK-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Franks, Trent [AZ-2] - 1/6/2009
Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] - 1/6/2009
Rep Hensarling, Jeb [TX-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Issa, Darrell E. [CA-49] - 1/9/2009
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Kingston, Jack [GA-1] - 1/6/2009
Rep Lamborn, Doug [CO-5] - 1/6/2009
Rep Lucas, Frank D. [OK-3] - 1/6/2009
Rep McCaul, Michael T. [TX-10] - 1/6/2009
Rep Mica, John L. [FL-7] - 1/9/2009
Rep Miller, Gary G. [CA-42] - 1/14/2009
Rep Moran, Jerry [KS-1] - 1/13/2009
Rep Myrick, Sue Wilkins [NC-9] - 1/8/2009
Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 1/6/2009
Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 1/6/2009
Rep Poe, Ted [TX-2] - 1/6/2009
Rep Price, Tom [GA-6] - 1/6/2009
Rep Stearns, Cliff [FL-6] - 1/6/2009
Rep Sullivan, John [OK-1] - 1/6/2009
Rep Thornberry, Mac [TX-13] - 1/6/2009
Rep Tiahrt, Todd [KS-4] - 1/6/2009
Rep Westmoreland, Lynn A. [GA-3] - 1/6/2009
Rep Wittman, Robert J. [VA-1] - 1/6/2009
Rep Young, Don [AK] - 1/6/2009

23%

For those who don't want to go searching for themselves.

I like the idea.

Atta boy rp. Let's get some fair tax up in this bitch.

alex22 said:

23%

For those who don't want to go searching for themselves.

Click to expand...

Fed 23% + % State+% Local= ~40%

The problem with a sales tax is that it assumes people will spend 100% of their income. Would you tax money when you buy stocks and other investments? Yea, I guess you would.
aperwork

Welcome to 1999.

Bent said:

Fed 23% + % State+% Local= ~40%

The problem with a sales tax is that it assumes people will spend 100% of their income. Would you tax money when you buy stocks and other investments? Yea, I guess you would.
aperwork

Click to expand...

I wouldn't.

Any tax is a discouragement on whatever is taxed. Why do we want to discourage people from earning money? (I also think a personal income tax is unconstitutional)

A sales tax discourages people from buying stuff. People will still buy, but they'll buy quality instead of disposable crap. It would be a better system.

Let's not forget that democratic politicians will finally have to pay their share using fair tax. It might be make for an easier vetting process for their next socialist idiot.

Never gonna happen. What they'll do is institute the National Sales Tax and keep income tax.

ONly thing is what does this do to say Property Tax. My wife works for a law frim that deals in Property tax and collecting fines and fees for counties in the state of Texas. I am all for the fair tax as long as it dosent effect my wifes job.

www.fairtax.org explains it all

Bent said:

Fed 23% + % State+% Local= ~40%

The problem with a sales tax is that it assumes people will spend 100% of their income. Would you tax money when you buy stocks and other investments? Yea, I guess you would.
aperwork

Click to expand...

It's a solution to a major problem of unfair taxation and countless loopholes.

only 50% of the population actually PAYS taxes. And what is it, the top 3% of wage earners pay 39% of the tax?

I've said it before - the idea of a National Retail Sales Tax is a good one, provided:

1) It replaces the Federal Income Tax in toto. Period.
2) Rather than making it "revenue neutral," make it a flat rate of not more than ten percent (I'm thinking 7-10%,) and government is just going to have to be brought to heel to spend less.

Being able to scrap most of the IRS will help - they'll just have to go produce something for a living. This will also take a considerable burden off of the GPO, and reduce costs (I'm quite sure printing all of those wretched forms I have to fill out every year isn't free.) The NRST will also eliminate all of the taking advantage of loopholes in 26CFR, having to keep track of all of our damned expenses, having to store all of the supporting paperwork for 7-10 years (last year's tax return - file copy - is about four inches thick. It's gotten worse every year...) and should simplify things all around.

How to administer?
1) Assess the NRST in the same manner as state sales taxes - staple foodstuffs and labour are ineligible to be taxed. Services? That's a grey area, and I keep seeing about how service taxation is variable from state-to-state. Perhaps services considered "luxury" could be taxed, while services considered "essential" or "staple" should not (examples of the latter? Medical services, dental services, haircuts, home purchases and/or leases, and the like. The former would be foodservice, spas, and the like.)
2) One word I keep seeing on the "FairTax" site is "prebate." No, no need for prebates - just administer the tax properly, and it will sort itself out.
3) The Fairtax site was talking about, as I recall, running a tax rate of 17-20%. Sorry - that's too damned high! Trim spending, put more people out in the workforce where they're doing something to contribute, instead of being a sea anchor on our economy and dragging the value of the dollar down further.
4) By reducing the tax bite on everyone, the NRST has the potential to effectively revaluate the dollar upwards. This is a good thing! This 23% NRST isn't going to help with anything but a fair tax administration - but increasing the cost of an item by 30-35% (state sales taxes run 5-8.5%, and there's talk of increasing the basic CA sales tax. Since each county - and some cities! - add to the basic sales tax, that means that we could see a 10% combined local sales tax in some places - like Santa Clara County.) This is not going to help to stimulate the economy by encouraging cash flow! Chew on that for a minute...

In its pure form, the NRST is a good thing, and I'd like to see the idea come to pass. However, I strongly urge everyone to write a double-edged letter to their elected reps. Yes, pass the NRST. No, not at 23%. Explain why, and offer solutions. There's no reason that we couldn't get the rate down around, Hell, even 10-12% and get them to learn to live with it! They keep telling us we need to spend less and save more - why should it be any different for Washington than a family of four?

Rod Knee said:

I think a national sales tax as a primary source of federal revenue is a terrible idea. It places too much of a burden on middle and low income families in that a higher proportion of the money these people have must be spent on non-discretionary items. Many of these families will be forced to “cut corners” resulting in lesser demand for goods and services. If you want to stimulate the economy, the last thing you want to do is decrease demand for goods and services. I once heard Rush Limbaugh say that you tax the middle class because that is where the money is. I contend that if you want to stimulate the economy, don’t place more tax burden on the demographic segment not only where the most money is, but also from which that money is most likely to be spent.

Click to expand...

Have you read the "Fair Tax" book? If the feds aren't taking taxes out of your pay check you'll have more money for non-discretionary spending. Plus it has provisions for a prebate. That would be the avg. amount a household of _ would pay in taxes for power, water,food, etc.
Only the end user would pay tax on purchases and no tax on preowned (used)goods, used cars, houses, etc. Only the states would be getting in your paycheck and taxing you on everything. Most likley competion would bring states to implement their own "fair tax"
You would only pay federal tax when you wanted to.:yelclap:

Ironmen77 said:

If the feds aren't taking taxes out of your pay check you'll have more money for non-discretionary spending.

Click to expand...

Sure, but my money will have less purchasing power because of additional costs due to the Fed. sales tax. The result will be fewer purchased goods and services negatively impacting the businesses I patronize.

I'll have to check that book out Ironmen.

It will. The prebate will pay for the assumed amount of essentials for your household. Ask any old joe on the street how much he pays in taxes and he won't have any idea. People can only tell you how much the benevolent government gives back to them. WTF is wrong with us? How did it get this way?....Well, the book answers that too.

Rod Knee said:

Sure, but my money will have less purchasing power because of additional costs due to the Fed. sales tax. The result will be fewer purchased goods and services negatively impacting the businesses I patronize.

Click to expand...

There won't be additional cost. The mfgs.will not be taxed on materials to make products, retailers won't be taxed on the product. All the way down the line, figures to be about 22% of things you buy, before you pay sales tax. Competion will bring the price of goods and services to a fair market price.
Our country will become a maganet for business who want to opreate in a country that won't tax them to death. New business, new jobs.

Ironmen77 said:

There won't be additional cost. The mfgs.will not be taxed on materials to make products, retailers won't be taxed on the product.

Click to expand...

That's good, but as a middle class income earner I could purchase even more of these goods without the additional sales tax imposed by the feds, which would be better for both me and the economy. Remember, I am raising the issue of where revenue to the fed govt comes from, not how much it should collect. How much could be a discussion for later on. I would invoke removing all encumbrances on middle class spending as would be reasonably possible. A side effect would be more competition for business from middle class consumers such as myself resulting in increased efficiency in the business sector. How is the lost revenue from not taxing the manufacturers and retailers compensated for? An even higher fed sales tax?

Thank you for the discussion.