|
Huckabee’s Tax Plan Appeals, but Is It Fair? by possibly noteworthy at 11:09 am EST, Jan 6, 2008 |
Supporters of the FairTax plan are particularly drawn to the feature that calls for repealing the 16th Amendment and abolishing the Internal Revenue Service. That fits with the insurgent, populist-tinged nature of Mike Huckabee’s campaign.
Don't forget "folksy" ... “Am I running for president to shut down the federal government? Not exactly. But I am running to eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes. And I do mean all — personal federal, corporate federal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment.” But even though critics acknowledge that there would be some economic benefits from introducing a broad-based consumption tax, William Gale of the Brookings Institution said that the proposal itself was “fundamentally a ruse.” “The notion that there is a 23 percent rate that solves all our problems,” he said, “is politically unrealistic and mathematically impossible.” Whatever the rate, critics say, a steep federal retail tax, piled on top of existing state sales taxes, would encourage widespread illegal tax evasion, black market transactions and other forms of cheating, creating a cycle that would require even higher tax rates.
|
|
RE: Huckabee’s Tax Plan Appeals, but Is It Fair? by Ian at 3:18 am EST, Jan 7, 2008 |
possibly noteworthy wrote: Supporters of the FairTax plan are particularly drawn to the feature that calls for repealing the 16th Amendment and abolishing the Internal Revenue Service. That fits with the insurgent, populist-tinged nature of Mike Huckabee’s campaign.
Don't forget "folksy" ... “Am I running for president to shut down the federal government? Not exactly. But I am running to eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes. And I do mean all — personal federal, corporate federal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment.” But even though critics acknowledge that there would be some economic benefits from introducing a broad-based consumption tax, William Gale of the Brookings Institution said that the proposal itself was “fundamentally a ruse.” “The notion that there is a 23 percent rate that solves all our problems,” he said, “is politically unrealistic and mathematically impossible.” Whatever the rate, critics say, a steep federal retail tax, piled on top of existing state sales taxes, would encourage widespread illegal tax evasion, black market transactions and other forms of cheating, creating a cycle that would require even higher tax rates.
Economist Dale Jorgensen, Harvard University, was commissioned to find out what portion of current prices were represented by costs for complying with the federal income tax code (i.e., embedded tax costs). He concluded that 22% (average) of every retail dollar, spent by consumers, constituted a price-embedded tax. Thus, in addition to individual income tax and FICA withholding, individuals are unwittingly paying these unseen, embedded business tax costs with every purchase of a new product, or service. Under FairTax, prices would fall, due to removal of embedded business tax-related costs. Concurrently, wages may rise due to a mix of factors, including reversion of withheld pay (or some portion thereof) to employees, advancement opportunities due to business expansion resulting from retained earnings, and/or increased demand for labor accompanying increased competition (from that expansion). Where profits (or wages) appear lucrative, competition will move into the market space, driving out excesses (immediately present after FairTax is enacted), arriving at new "market-adjusted" prices. For FairTax to constitute 23% of new transaction cost (i.e., "market-adjusted" price plus FairTax), a mark-up of 29.9% (tax exclusive rate) on the new "market-adjusted" price is necessary. (Before balking, consider what we're paying now... [ Read More (1.1k in body) ] |
|
|
|