HomeVAT, Flat Tax and Fairtax: the differences
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
susanexpress- Posts : 8
Join date : 2011-03-19
Re: VAT, Flat Tax and Fairtax: the differences
Ninetwelver Fri Apr 30, 2010 3:55 am
We should never allow a VAT to be brought on board at any level of the US.
Having experience with VAT for over 19 years, the weight it would throw upon all of us is beyond most Americans comprehesion. Not to mention if they were to get it in place cause they only want a 2%....yeah right, in 3 years it would be 6%+ and in 10 years over 10%. Most European countries pay a 50% income tax on what we consider normal income. which has health care and unemployment in it, which there is still private insurance as well to buy if you want good medical care, and then a 21% VAT in Germany, 19% in the Netherlands, 19% in Belgium. So, how does 69% tax sound to you? and this is fairly much the same for the fair tax, it would be twisted until it was just another version of wealth redistribution.
We should embrance a 11% to 12% flat tax as soon as we can to replace our current tax cose which only serves special interest anymore.
such as:
Charlie Rangel
Timothy Geitner
Tom Daschle
Chris Dodd
As others would say, pay your taxes!
Having experience with VAT for over 19 years, the weight it would throw upon all of us is beyond most Americans comprehesion. Not to mention if they were to get it in place cause they only want a 2%....yeah right, in 3 years it would be 6%+ and in 10 years over 10%. Most European countries pay a 50% income tax on what we consider normal income. which has health care and unemployment in it, which there is still private insurance as well to buy if you want good medical care, and then a 21% VAT in Germany, 19% in the Netherlands, 19% in Belgium. So, how does 69% tax sound to you? and this is fairly much the same for the fair tax, it would be twisted until it was just another version of wealth redistribution.
We should embrance a 11% to 12% flat tax as soon as we can to replace our current tax cose which only serves special interest anymore.
such as:
Charlie Rangel
Timothy Geitner
Tom Daschle
Chris Dodd
As others would say, pay your taxes!
Ninetwelver- Posts : 14
Join date : 2010-03-30
VAT, Flat Tax and Fairtax: the differences
Geo Tue Apr 27, 2010 2:34 pm
I believe we all agree some level of taxation is necessary to run a government. What we don't agree with is the current level of spending by our government as being necessary to operate our federal government. The type of governing our founding fathers had envisioned for our country seems to have gone awry. Our federal government has expanded into every aspect of our daily lives. This was expressly forbidden in the constitution and we were warned by our founding fathers that this could happen. The federal government has expanded to the point where it is spending tax money on everything it can. State projects receive matching federal funds for projects that have nothing to do with anything outside of the state. And let's not forget the funding of our politicians' pork projects that may not benefit anyone at all (Murtha's Airport, Bridge to Nowhere, etc.). Some of our taxes are going overseas to fund research projects that need no research, such as the one being done on the safe sex practices of Chinese hookers before and after drinking alcoholic beverages. This is an outrage! Our tax dollars were not intended to be spent in this way. This is the reason TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party groups have sprung up across our nation. We are NOT racist, we are NOT violent, and we will NO LONGER be silent.
Below is just a brief generalization of the three tax systems being considered by our politicians.
1. VAT is the Value Add Tax. VAT is in addition to all of the existing taxes we now pay. This is a European style national sales tax that may be applied at every step a product takes to the market. Think of a loaf of bread. The VAT could be applied to the sale of harvested wheat from the farmer to the wholesaler who then cleans and dries the product for sale to the company that grinds it into flour. The tax could again be applied to the grinder who sells the flour to the bread company that mixes the flour with other ingredients to make bread and sells it to the reseller or store. The tax could again be applied to a deli who purchases the bread for use in making sandwiches. Get the general idea? It is a progressive tax that will raise the cost of products dramatically. There are also issues to consider as to what products would or wouldn't be subject to this tax. It may or may not apply to food items, home construction, building materials, automobiles, airplanes, etc. In my humble opinion, VAT would complicate our already cumbersome tax system and cripple our economic recovery.
2. The Flat Tax. This is a flat rate tax that would be applied to the amount of income you make, much like our current federal income tax system. The difference is that everyone would pay the same rate. No loopholes, no exceptions, no lengthy forms to fill out from the IRS. Proponents claim this will save additional federal money that is currently used by the IRS to ensure compliance to today's complex taxation system. That is probably true, considering the ease of applying a single rate across the board to all citizens that bring home income. Would it be "fair"? That is open to debate.
3. The Fairtax. This is a consumption tax that could do away with the current federal income tax, and may be bundled into removing payroll taxes and other taxes as well. This is a consumption based tax, not an income tax. To be clear, we would no longer be taxed based upon our income, but rather on what we bought. This can become quite complicated if politicians decide to apply different rates to different items purchased, or have some sort of monthly base line of spending for "necessities of life" purchases. It would also likely require a constitutional ammendment to repeal the income tax and replace it with a consumption tax. Proponents claim it will do away with the IRS since compliance to the tax is done at the cash register by the retailer. Would this Fairtax really be "fair"? That is also open to debate.
In my humble opinion, it is useless to consider taxation options until we first regain control of the spending of these taxes. When all is said and done, we must first determine how to spend the money raised before we can determine how much money needs to be raised and by what methods to raise this money. We must educate ourselves and our neighbors to the taxation systems being proposed. Please do your research and discuss it openly with others. Let's flush out the garbage information (both pro and con) and get down to the facts. Then we can use those facts to make informed decisions at the ballot box!
Below is just a brief generalization of the three tax systems being considered by our politicians.
1. VAT is the Value Add Tax. VAT is in addition to all of the existing taxes we now pay. This is a European style national sales tax that may be applied at every step a product takes to the market. Think of a loaf of bread. The VAT could be applied to the sale of harvested wheat from the farmer to the wholesaler who then cleans and dries the product for sale to the company that grinds it into flour. The tax could again be applied to the grinder who sells the flour to the bread company that mixes the flour with other ingredients to make bread and sells it to the reseller or store. The tax could again be applied to a deli who purchases the bread for use in making sandwiches. Get the general idea? It is a progressive tax that will raise the cost of products dramatically. There are also issues to consider as to what products would or wouldn't be subject to this tax. It may or may not apply to food items, home construction, building materials, automobiles, airplanes, etc. In my humble opinion, VAT would complicate our already cumbersome tax system and cripple our economic recovery.
2. The Flat Tax. This is a flat rate tax that would be applied to the amount of income you make, much like our current federal income tax system. The difference is that everyone would pay the same rate. No loopholes, no exceptions, no lengthy forms to fill out from the IRS. Proponents claim this will save additional federal money that is currently used by the IRS to ensure compliance to today's complex taxation system. That is probably true, considering the ease of applying a single rate across the board to all citizens that bring home income. Would it be "fair"? That is open to debate.
3. The Fairtax. This is a consumption tax that could do away with the current federal income tax, and may be bundled into removing payroll taxes and other taxes as well. This is a consumption based tax, not an income tax. To be clear, we would no longer be taxed based upon our income, but rather on what we bought. This can become quite complicated if politicians decide to apply different rates to different items purchased, or have some sort of monthly base line of spending for "necessities of life" purchases. It would also likely require a constitutional ammendment to repeal the income tax and replace it with a consumption tax. Proponents claim it will do away with the IRS since compliance to the tax is done at the cash register by the retailer. Would this Fairtax really be "fair"? That is also open to debate.
In my humble opinion, it is useless to consider taxation options until we first regain control of the spending of these taxes. When all is said and done, we must first determine how to spend the money raised before we can determine how much money needs to be raised and by what methods to raise this money. We must educate ourselves and our neighbors to the taxation systems being proposed. Please do your research and discuss it openly with others. Let's flush out the garbage information (both pro and con) and get down to the facts. Then we can use those facts to make informed decisions at the ballot box!
Geo- Posts : 2
Join date : 2010-03-18
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum