No More Accountants

[John of PA]

Fair National Sales Tax

OK America, here your fair National Sales Tax,
Those of you who who are poverty level and do not pay income tax becasue you do not have the money, you now will have to come up with the money to pay the national sales tax. And those of you with medical hardships, or paying for a nursing home, you no longer get a tax break, in fact we will add 15% (or whatever) to your nursing home monthly fee for sales tax. Paying 20,000 per year for health insurance, now add 15% to that. both couples working with kids in day care? no more tax bread for you. Non-profit organizations now you will pay tax, sales tax. If your business lost money, you pay tax anyway. Gambling winnings? pay 15% sales on on them, with no deductiion for gambleing losses. The Govt wants to promote saving energy, well they now can't do it through the income tax system. What? You say, put this and that exception in the law so this and that group is exempt from the tax? We were are now back to needing tax professsionals to inerpret and implement all this. You see, this hype of doing away with the income tax systems has been going on for about 40 years, and it will continue for another 40 years; but the fact of the matter is it will never result in eliminating the sytem,; the only benefit will be those writing books about it will be cashing-in, and paying tax professionals to sort it all out to settle with the Govt. Don't worry folks, it ain't going to happen.

[WhiteOleander]

You got it correct. Here in the great state of Taxus, the sales tax code is more complicated than the IRS code!

In fact, I won't make a determination or help a client determine if his business is collecting sales tax correctly.

For instance, certain services are taxable for business use, but not for residential use. Also, if you have, for instance, a refrigerator that needs repairs and you take it to the shop, the parts are taxable, the labor isn't. If the repair man has to go to a business to repair the same refrigerator, the labor and the parts are taxable.

Farmers can buy all sorts of stuff tax-free. Go to the lumber yard to buy lumber to repair their residence and they say that it is for the farm, sign a statement, and get it tax free. Others buy stuff at the lumber yard for their rent houses and say that it is for their farm, that they do not own, and get it tax free.

Data processing services are taxable. Bookkeeping is not. Preparation payroll reports such as W-2's are. The total tax rate in Taxus is 8.25%, however these type of services are taxed at 6.6%!

And on and on and on.

I had a client that refurbished car interiors. If he just did seat upholstery and floor carpet, all was OK. But, if he put in a new liner on the inside of the roof, that was taxable. I asked why this was so???? They couldn't explain it.

[DaveO]

There will be a huge underground economy

under the "Fair Tax" system. An army of auditors and examiners will be needed to insure complience. If you think the "cash only" economy is big now wait and see what happens under the "fair tax". Maybe we can all switch sides and work for the government.

[sea-tax]

I think someone said this on this board a couple of weeks ago.

The only " FAIR TAX" is one that you don't have to pay. See most people view fair as a relative word. AS long as someone else pays then it is fair to me.

[jainen]

to find a way around it

>>we can all switch sides and work for the government<<

Can't do that--the Fair Tax eliminates the IRS completely.

This is one of my favorite arguments for the Fair Tax. It really shows how ridiculous are the assumptions behind this. Proponents claim, "The relative simplicity of the FairTax promotes compliance." This is an article of faith for them, which apparently doesn't need even a single example to support it. In somewhat of a contradiction, they also believe that, "because of the dramatic reduction in the number of tax filers, tax evaders are more easily monitored and caught." They are of course referring to the shopkeepers who don't pay over the tax, not the consumers who avoid paying it in the first place. (These quotes, by the way, are from the FAQ at fairtax.org.)

A third argument is that, "because tax rates decrease, tax evasion is less profitable." This one is laughable. Corporations now pay 35% of NET profit, which is much less than 10% of revenue. The Fair Tax bumps that up to 30% of GROSS sales, ignoring all the little complications like wholesale cost of goods and other expenses. I'm not a mathematician, but that seems to me like a ten-fold tax increase, and I can indeed imagine a scenario in which a retailer tries to find a way around it.

[veritas]

&quot; The Farce Tax&quot;

I think I can sum up the whole idea of replacing our current tax system with the following analogy;

Suppose your doctor diagnosed you with cancer spread through your entire body. He then proposes a treatment plan that would replace the cancer with degenerative heart disease. I'm sure you would feel all better.

[Roberts]

problems

The idea Fair Tax has is a nice idea and would probably be a very good idea but there are HUGE problems.

1. It says all prices will drop by 20% because of savings from not having to figure taxes and no taxes on products that go into production. Then prices would go up 20% to pay the taxes. Well this means everyone would earn 20% less. Very few like to admit it but FairTax.org reluctantly admitted that to achieve a 20% reduction in pricing, a 20% reduction in income for employees would be required. Who is going to go for that?

2. You will have to have a dual tax transition period. No way in the world you can't because people will stock up prior to the conversion on taxable items and then move to repairing used equipment after the conversion. This would have a massive downside to the economy which they predict will see a massive growth spurt. So a dual taxation period must exist - who honestly believes the government would then completely do away with one taxation method once they have a dual system in place? Some morons believe the US government brought down the World Trade Center buildings - they the conspiracy theorists might have a fit over something like this?

3. If they can't make minor adjustments to Social Security and Medicare to fix a system - how in the world are they ever going to completely destroy a government agency and make such a massive change? Never gonna happen.

4. Consumer taxes ALWAYS hurt the middle class more than they hurt the wealthy. How many politicians are going to chose a system that so obviously hurts the middle class in favor of the wealthy? Even if the pain is only a few hundred dollars - nobody can take that political hit.

[jainen]

It wasn't

It wasn't the U.S. Government, it was the New World Order uber-government.

[JoshinNC]

Jainen, I hope you're trying to be funny

If you don't believe that it was the radical Islamics (now there's an oxi-moron) you've been out on the left coast a little too long!

[jainen]

All I know

All I know is that a hijacked plane wandered our skies for HOURS before crashing into the only fortified section of the Pentagon, and in all that time those F-16's sat on the tarmac. As a matter of fact, that's all you know too.

[Bees Knees]

All I know is that a hijacked plane wandered our skies for HOURS before crashing into the only fortified section of the Pentagon, and in all that time those F-16's sat on the tarmac. As a matter of fact, that's all you know too.

As much as you would like to believe the government should have prevented it, unfortunately, no human government is capable of stopping terrorism.

During our Alaskan Cruise a few weeks ago, we received a Coast Guard escort on the 4th of July while leaving Juneau Alaska. Seeing several speed boats go by with guys aiming M-60 machine guns at any fishing boat getting too close was apparently meant to prevent terrorists from sinking our cruise ship with 2,500 passengers on board. However, after cruising several miles down the channel, our escort returned to port.

I guess out of the 1,500 miles our ship sailed from Seward Alaska to Vancouver Canada, the U.S. Coast Guard only had the resources to protect us for 3 or 4 miles. That should make us all feel more secure….right?

[jainen]

travel on the high seas

>>the U.S. Coast Guard only had the resources to protect us for 3 or 4 miles<<

Not to minimize the dangers of travel on the high seas, but there is some difference between monitoring a cruise ship, and protecting the military command center from an attack in progress.

[JoshinNC]

Hours? Try minutes

All I know is that a hijacked plane wandered our skies for HOURS before crashing into the only fortified section of the Pentagon, and in all that time those F-16's sat on the tarmac. As a matter of fact, that's all you know too.

From what I have read and observed the plane "wandered" for close to 20 minutes. Now, I realize that our fighter jets could cover the 1500 miles from Washington to Cleveland in a matter of 20 minutes, but we weren't exactly expecting a disaster of that scale. Prior to 9/11 no terrorist had ever hijacked a plane and crashed it into something. They always flew to some obscure island and demanded hostage releases or money. To expect that type of behavior, even out of barborous terrorists, was not part of our national psyche pre 9/11.

[jainen]

You are right

You are right. The Pentagon crash was less than an hour and a half after the hijackings began. Apparently that's not enough time to scramble from Andrews AFB near Washington. But what about the F-16's already in the air just a few minutes south? (At the time, NORAD was conducting a war game in which terrorists hijacked a plane to crash into a skyscraper, the exact scenario that you say they weren't expecting.) The fighter jets were ordered to land without engaging the enemy.