Great ideas! I think the FairTax is a great step in that it takes the power of taxation from the IRS and puts it in our hands. Certainly would eliminate any reason for lobbying. And, the education people would get by seeing the cost of government on every receipt might help us make the steps to your ideas of returning to the Constitution.

There is one thing that would make it more palatable than the "flat" tax and it's pretty big. That is that the FairTax it is a voluntary tax on consumption and the flat tax is still a tax on production.

What about all the POOR tax attorneys, CPAs and H&R Block workers that would have to find a new way to scam us.

Hello JuliBMe,
It is far superior to what we have now and could be a stepping stone. One of my favorite features is that it gets the government busy bodies and bean-counters out of my business.
Some of us have posted interesting discussions on this subject over the last few years. Here is a link to my book review (The Fair Tax Book:...) on this site from a couple years ago. https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
Respectfully,
O.A.

Thanks CBJ. That was the point I was making.

The Objectivist term for what you're being a proponent of is Sanction of the Victim.

The very concept of a fair/fairer atrocity is one of the most extreme examples of illogical irrational thinking one can imagine. Either one truly understands Individual freedom and rights or one accepts slavery to the state and those that won't or can't take care of themselves.

hear hear

With any government of force, nothing is "fair".
Let's have a dissolution item on every ballot for every level of "GOVERNment"

If someone is too stupid to look at his pay stub and then notice how much tax he reports on his own tax forms then physically shoving it in his nose a little at a time at the "check out" will not help him. This is another conservative mania avoiding fundamental principles.

We earn money in order to spend it, without which it is useless. Punishing people for spending is not a "positive". The "name" "fair" is a hoax to sell a shell game that is in some ways worse than what we have now.

The so-called fair tax is better than what we have now. But then, almost any tax scheme would be better than we have now. Actually, in my case the F%$#@#$% tax is not good for me as we are retired with SS and income waay below the poverty level, so we wind up paying zip. Which is one of the reasons the current system smells worse than 3 day old whitefish.
No taxation in a 350 million population nation at the current level of understanding by the citizenry is impossible. Any suggestions?

Correct, right now, about 50% +/- don't pay a dime of income taxes, so there isn't any skin in the game. It's always easy to vote for more free shit when you're not the one paying for the free shit.

Well, that's rather simple to understand, most people that earn more, spend more. You may have a few hermit crabs, but those are pretty few and far between.

Sure, it drives prices up, but without 43% of my salary being deducted before I ever see it between state, federal, and payroll deductions, I am very happy to consider it an option. At least then my taxes are controlled by my spending, and if I need to help a family member out financially or something, I have the flexibility to do that by reducing my spending. Right now, it all goes to support 25% on MediCaid and 33% getting food stamps and Medicare and Social Security that will be long-bankrupt before I ever make a claim.

I've been a proponent for a very long time. At first I thought it was a terrible idea, but rather than condemn it on 'opposition talking points', I decided to use my skills to analyze the proposal.

What I learned is that the FairTax would, all other things being equal, increase the US GDP, by many billions of dollars, simply by reducing the compliance cost of taxpaying.

But all things are not equal! The FairTax would as published, create a far stronger economy. That would allow the US GDP to increase significantly more than the simple savings from lower compliance costs.

Additionally, the FairTax offers the one thing that the Left and the SJWs espouse, it is truly a 'fair' system that allows those who are more capable of carrying a tax burden pick up more of that load, while liberating those who for whatever reason are unable or unwilling to pay into the system avoid taxation altogether -- no implementation of the Income Tax can make that claim.

There are a few things wrong with the proposed version as published. It taxes services, such as professional fees (e.g. Doctor, Lawyer, Musician, etc.) These services should not be taxed anymore than non-pro services like babysitting, dog-walking, parking lot attendant, etc.) I would suggest a STRICT clause that restricts the tax to NEW GOODS for CONSUMPTION and nothing else.

Would adopting the FairTax cause some disruption to the US economy? Yes, in the short term, like ripping the band-aid off a healing wound. We've suffered the wound of the Income Tax for over a century. In less than 60 days under the FairTax, those 410+ fiscal quarters of pain would be on the way to being forgotten.

I did the math, it was an enormous spreadsheet where I analyzed basic commodities like bread & produce, and complex ones like automobiles & housing. In every case the effect of the FairTax would allow the economy to transition with a minimal disruption. The bookkeepers & accountants would be busy for what is essentially a thorough inventory and audit, leading up to the day of the changeover. Following that the businesses would be free to decide how to transition over the next year (if they need that much time before taking advantage of the panoply of other FairTax benefits).

Within a year the only complaint we'll hear will go something like this:

J.Taggart: "Before the FairTax I had all these coupons for 35% off my expense for supplies."

F.D'Anconia: "But have you noticed that the price of those same supplies has declined by 75% from last year?"

J.Taggart: "That's not the point. My coupons aren't worth anything anymore."

F.D'Anconia: "But, you didn't pay anything for those coupons, they cost you nothing. And now you're saving 75% instead of 35%."

Being “hopeful” does not justify jumping into a new tax system, especially one with so many obvious negatives, and one that reallocates but does not lower today’s crushing tax burden. Any fundamental reform must dramatically lower both taxes and government spending. “Creative disruption” is a free-market phenomenon caused by advances in technology, not the destructive disruption caused by a sudden change in government tax policy. Employers will merely be trading IRS oversight for increased state-level oversight, and in addition they will have more frequent audits to look forward to (according to the fair tax’s own website.)

Slavery is a pretty good definition of legal theft.

+1

And if it doesn't work we will have created economic havoc for nothing. And just because it doesn't work doesn't mean that it will be easy to change back. Look at Obamacare.

The income tax accounts for a third of the moneys the fed takes in. Why not cut spending by a third and repeal the 16th amendment.

FairTax, FlatTax, XYZTax -- all wrong.
Now, what would you as an individual be willing to contribute for defense of your individual rights? Would you pay for a volunteer fire department that saved your house? Would you pay for a volunteer fire department that might save your house someday? How about defense of your life or property? Those are the questions that need to be answered.

The Fair Tax takes a major existing violation of individual rights and makes it much worse. Businesses should not be required to be tax collectors for the government. They are already being badly harassed by government paperwork, much of it related to taxation, and the Fair Tax proponents support more frequent and more intrusive audits, with “rewards” to the public for turning in “tax cheats”?? This opens the door for a higher level of abuse and shakedowns of small businesses by corrupt governments. If you don’t think governments will take advantage of this power, check out “asset forfeiture” laws and practices.

"Death and taxes" as the saying goes for "unavoidable."

The day that the Fair Tax goes into effect, the price of a new house will rise 30% while the price of a used house will not. Builders who were unlucky enough to bring their housing developments to the market during this time will be bankrupted. The new house market will be destroyed for some time to come, until the interruption in supply of new houses forces the price of used houses up sufficiently to justify new construction once again. (A side effect will be a devastating fall in construction employment.) Meanwhile, renters will be faced with an immediate 30% increase in their rents, which for many of them will be enough to make existing rents unaffordable for low-income renters and their families (who pay little or no income tax now), and they will be forced to move to shabbier quarters or become homeless. Economics 101. The Fair Tax is anything but fair.

I am huge proponent of the Fair Tax, and let me explain why. First, this has nothing to do with government spending. That is an entirely separate issue that is a much bigger problem than how they collect tax. I personally believe the only money the federal government should be allowed to collect should be for defense and a federal court system, but I digress.

Assuming we are still going to be forced to pay tax, the Fair Tax would allow individuals to pay tax when they want to pay tax. You only pay it when you purchase a NEW item or service. A person could actually choose to not pay ANY federal tax by living off of the fruits of their land and buying only pre-owned merchandise. In this aspect it is somewhat a voluntary tax system. Businesses do not pay tax on any of the wholesale items they purchase. It is only taxed at the consumer level, so even business owners could not have to pay any federal tax if they so choose.

Being self employed, the biggest issue with income tax is knowing I have to pay tax whether I have the money to do it or not. The Fair Tax eliminates that. It makes budgeting, saving, and planning extraordinarily easier. I am all for it.

I like the concept of "radical" tax reform whereas we can get away from the Socialistic "Progressive" (or should I say "Regressive" tax?). The only problem that I see is that it is much more difficult to get your brain around rather than a simple "Flat" tax with no loopholes. Net, Net, bottom line, we must enact one of those two approaches. The Tax code we have now is an abomination!

It's better, but not perfect. It lets you know, up-front, what portion of the production of "new stuff" has to go to pay for the government. Its implementation might improve the economy by removing tax-loss and compliance computations from people's thinking about consumption or investment.

And that thirty-percent figure might make people think about how much government they really want.

But real reform will need a Great Awakening to the cost of government and the (im)propriety of most of its current functions.

Rand said the proper functions of government all have to do with managing force. That means police, military, and judiciary.

The Constitution lists a set of "enumerated powers," one of which I would strike at once: "the power to establish post offices and post roads." That reflects obsolete thinking about communications and transportation, and the government's role in each.

George Washington had a very small cabinet: Secretaries of State, Treasury, and War, and an Attorney General. (The Navy Department had to wait until the United States built enough fighting ships.) To get back to that system, we would need only Secretaries (and Departments) of State, Treasury, and Defense, plus the Attorney General and the Department of Justice. That's all the executive would need.

Only then could we discuss how to fund that, and how to make it work as Rand proposed: that people pay voluntarily as they now pay for insurance, whether to use a lottery, etc.