It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bill to abolish IRS introduced

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:06 PM
You should check out "The Fair Tax Book" by Neal Boortz & John really makes the whole idea simple to understand, and it's the best thing out there now...

1) Repeal the 16th amendment
2) Make the Fair Tax the law

No withholdings for income tax, FICA, social security, payroll business taxes...YOU GET YOUR WHOLE PAYCHECK!!

CRITIC A ) But, that will add 23% to everything we buy.

REBUTTAL) That's false. Because approximately 21-24% of the price of everything we buy is what is called EMBEDDED taxes (taxes paid from manufacture to sale)...and because there will be NO tax component to operating a business, (anywhere along the process) Embedded taxes will not exist anymore! Corporations do not pay taxes...they just pass their tax component along to us, the consumer, in the price of their goods and services. The embedded taxes are gone...and the Fair Tax replaces them, so goods and service will see little to no change in price. EXAMPLE: A $100 Radio contains about $23 dollars in taxes contained in the price...remove those taxes, the item costs $77. Take it to the register, pay for the item & the Fair Tax...said item is back to costing you $100. And, this $100 you just spent came from a paycheck that you kept every penny of.

Still with me?

CRITIC B) But, the Fair Tax will disproportionately affect the poor...they will have to pay more because they make less.

REBUTTAL) Read the bill. The Fair Tax has a provision for a rebate (or a "prebate") that every citizen in the country will receive. The amount of the prebate is based upon the poverty level and household size. The basic necessities of life are not taxed. You pay the Fair Tax on everything, but the prebate is equivalent to the taxes one could expect to pay on the basic necessities of life, based upon family size. Read the book for more detail on this because I am not explaining it nearly as well as the authors have.

Bonus!!! Because there is no tax component of operating a business under the Fair Tax, companies that have moved overseas (and those originally based overseas) will bring their money back to America to work for America and to work IN America. We currently have one of the most punishing tax systems in the world for businesses, and bringing TRILLIONS of dollars back to work in this country is the greatest economic stimulus plan I can see working.

Bottom line...this WILL work, it can work...and it should be the law of the land YESTERDAY.

Will it happen? Hard to say. The politicians manipulate the current tax structure to keep power and manipulate the wealth-envious sheeple into giving votes to those who can promise the most and to those who can say that the "other guy" wants to raise your taxes. Politicians fear losing their power, and this would be the largest transfer of power from the politicians to the PEOPLE in the history of our nation. A tax revolt is the way to go...peaceful but adamant. This can happen, but it's gonna take a lot of people to make it so.

So, before you doubt this plan, read up on it some more and see why politicians (especially Democrats) are so against it and why they twist the facts about it and LIE about it in order to keep their power. It isn't a perfect plan, but I see none better. There's so little fault with it that the critics have to MAKE UP LIES about it in order to demonize and attack it. If you read up on it, you will be able to counter any argument they bring to the table. I guarantee that.

So, yeah...find out why Ron Paul isn't on board...but in the meantime, we need to see about that Constitutional Convention to repeal the severely flawed 16th amendment.

Thanks for hearing my rant...

I hope that this discussion continues. I've been on board with this for a couple of years, and knowledge about it is spreading...slowly but surely.

Spread the Knowledge...


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:06 PM
This has been proposed already. Rep. John Linder has introduced this bill a few times. One time it even had 59 co-sponsors.

Each time it never made it out of committee. I think it will get shuffled under a pile of other bills, and eventually filed away in the wastebasket.

The fact that everyone that has backed this bill is a Republican just means the Democratically controlled congress will automatically reject it without even reading it. Or, if one of them does read it, the only reason would be so they could bad mouth it on the morning shows.

In the extreme remote possibility that it made it through congress and was placed on the president's desk...
Would President Obama sign it?

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by JamesTheScribe

Great explanation. The only thing I would add is to the first Rebuttal. Corporations and Companies do pay retail on supplies and services which would include the sales tax.

Another thing I see confused is that people actually believe that when they say Corporations don't pay taxes it means the Executives don't pay taxes on their huge incomes. They do and in fact the top 10% of wage earners pay most of the income tax.

Corporations do in fact pay taxes on profits. Exxon will end up paying about half its record profits in taxes. The MSM is a bit, shall we say hesitant to give that part of the equation

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:27 PM

Originally posted by MoonMine
reply to post by Total Reality

Isn't it strange that Ron Paul has not signed this bill (yet)?

How odd, I would suspect he would be frontrunner on this one.

I'm all for this if Ron Paul O.K.'s it. Come to think of it didn't Ron Paul say something about a 'Fair' Tax.

Food Commodities should not be taxed.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:32 PM
Another point to consider...

Also paying into the tax system would be the illegal immigrants, drug dealers, prostitutes, bootleggers, and anyone else involved in the "underground economy"...not to mention tourists.

If you buy something, you pay taxes...the more you buy, the more you pay. Those "evil executives" and CEO's would pay even more because they tend to have a more expensive even the wealth-envious could get behind this.

Doesn't it suck when the tax structure punishes achievement and rewards failure? Yeah...this plan could work.

my $0.02 for the evening...take it or leave it.


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 08:37 PM
Last thing...

Regarding Exxons taxes...

Yeah, big oil makes lots of money...but they pay a &h!tload in taxes as well...

Sure, they made a lot of profits...but their profit margin has remained pretty much the same...they just sold more product.

There's a task...try explaining to some of the sheeple the difference between a profit and a profit margin. They used to teach this stuff in school...
oh yeah, that's part of the big plan too ;-)


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by JamesTheScribe

I already told you why Ron Paul isn't on board. He's already addressed the fair tax in the past and laid out why he didn't support it. It's because it's not a solution, it's just a new way to collect the taxes. The people in government are still going to collect the taxes they want.

The only taxes that should exist are on profits. Labor is not profit, it is an equal exchange. They are paid for the costs.

This means if a product costs $2 to make, and the company that makes that product sells it for $5 then $3 of that product is taxable. The costs include labor and materials. This tax is paid by the corporations, which are soul less entities, and not real citizens. Aliens(from earth) working in the country are also bound to pay these taxes on their labor because they are not citizens. I'm a bit lax on that part myself, but that is what was originally intended.

Now, the people buying the products are of course still paying taxes. As they pay for the profit that is taxable. But the corporation can not just "pass" the costs onto the consumer. Because they are still in competition price wise with other companies. And if they increase the price, they also increase the amount of taxes they have to pay.

The fairtax method doesn't include reducing government spending and so on. It's just a way to keep the current system going. If we went back to proper taxes, as I mentioned above then spending will also have to be cut dramatically. Another reason I doubt you will find Ron Paul supporting it.

I was in favor of the fairtax about 5 years ago, but now I'm not in favor of it. It's better than the IRS, but not really.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:03 PM
Here's a letter I found from Ron Paul on this.

Dear Mr. Burton:

Thank you for contacting my office regarding the FAIR TAX. I agree with you that massive tax reform is needed in this country. More specifically, I agree with the provisions of the FAIR TAX which repeal income, payroll, and estate taxes.

As you may know, it’s not easy for me to advocate any new tax! However, I certainly think a sales tax is better than an income tax- PROVIDED the income tax is truly eliminated. I would hate to see America end up with both a national sales tax and an income tax, much like socialist European countries.

However, the real key to tax reform is dramatically reduced spending by the federal government. Until the government spends far less, taxes (in whatever form) will remain too high. While I certainly support eliminating the income tax, I do not want to see it replaced with a high national sales tax which attempts to collect the same amount of revenue. Spending is the real problem.

Please understand that we share wide areas of agreement on tax issues. I will continue to consider the Americans for Fair Taxation plan. Proponents of real tax reform (whether they support a national sales tax, flat tax, or other plan) must unite in their efforts to eliminate the present unworkable income tax structure.


Ron Paul

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:06 PM
Just be careful they don't try to make it a "Value Add Tax", that would really suck. And we would still have income tax. The Fed's won't let go of that.

Fair doesn't come out of DC.


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:07 PM
Here is an article written by It says the % introduced is supposed to be 23%, which goes on top of the state sales taxes.

The Fair Tax Fraud

The national retail sales tax rate under the FairTax plan is 23 percent. That is on top of state sales taxes that are currently collected by forty-five states. That is on top of the sales tax that many cities and counties also collect. That is on top of the special taxes that exist on hotel rooms in most areas of the country. I suppose that a national retail sales tax would also apply to gasoline. There is no mention of the federal gas tax anywhere in the Fair Tax Act of 2005. No list of taxes that are supposed to be eliminated under the FairTax includes the federal gas tax. Does this mean that there will be an additional 23 percent tax on each gallon of gasoline?

The FairTax will make it easier for Congress to raise taxes. The initial rate of 23 percent is supposed to begin in 2007. For years after 2007, "the rate of tax is the combined Federal tax rate percentage." This combined percentage is the total of three things: the general revenue rate (stated to be 14.91 percent); the old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate; and the hospital insurance rate. This is all but saying that the rate will be adjusted every year. And it will be very easy for Congress to do so. To raise several billion dollars of additional revenue, all that will be necessary is for Congress to raise the tax rate by one percentage point by small adjustments in one or more of the three items that make up the combined percentage rate. It will be sold to the American people as "a penny for progress," or some other deceitful scheme.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:25 PM
reply to post by JamesTheScribe

At least they taught it in the schools I went too. Great posts, you have a good way of explaining things

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 09:58 PM
reply to post by jam321

Just couldn't resist.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:20 PM
Well good luck on this...

I wonder why they did not try this when BUSH was in????

GEE I wonder???


posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:24 PM

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by JamesTheScribe

Great explanation. The only thing I would add is to the first Rebuttal. Corporations and Companies do pay retail on supplies and services which would include the sales tax.

Another thing I see confused is that people actually believe that when they say Corporations don't pay taxes it means the Executives don't pay taxes on their huge incomes. They do and in fact the top 10% of wage earners pay most of the income tax.

Corporations do in fact pay taxes on profits. Exxon will end up paying about half its record profits in taxes. The MSM is a bit, shall we say hesitant to give that part of the equation

I'm crying for EEXON

I can't wait!

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 10:44 PM
reply to post by JamesTheScribe

Excellent and well written. My only objection is that Businesses should pay a form of tax at some level. Income tax, excise tax, etc. Though if America wanted to be competitive it would reduce that tax to approx 8% on profits. WTO would prohibit such a move though ..

Either way, 40 people is amazing to me to have endorsed this bill .. but it will fail, never be mentioned in MSM, and we will go on struggling our way through 1090, w-2, 2019 forms what ever else form of taxation.

One thing about National Sales Tax that I never really hear mentioned, is what would happen to States income? .. Many states use Sales tax as a huge part of their revenue, especially localities.

Perhaps we need a complete overhaul of our financial system .. from banks, taxes to the very way we look at money in general.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:31 PM
My congressman Jerry Moran is a good man, and I believe that a sales tax is the right kind of tax! Especially if you make it a tax on new goods only. This would stimulate a more stable market because then people would start noticing that the goods they've been buying have been inferior, and somewhere along the line everything became disposable. Heck after a few years even your car and computer are disposable. But I'm drifting off subject.

The only reason I mention my state rep. is because I've visited with the man at length and I sincerely believe his personal promise and vow to all in his district, that he would never put his name on a piece of legislature that would hurt fellow Kansans. He voted down the bailout money, both times even when the pressure was on him.

Consequently, I see Jerry's name on it and I have a little more faith in it.

posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 11:51 PM
Why would you pay the IRS in the first place? You don't have to. They just scare you and trick you into verbal contract bullcrap that makes you pay.

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 01:09 AM
what about the people on a fixed income or the poor? i know someone on social security disability,and gets 13,000 a year. try to live on that. then minus 100dollars a month for medical,and prescriptions. brings it down to about 11,000 a year.
take away 28%plus state tax AND NOW HE 'S GONNA HAVE TO LIVE UNDER A BRIDGE.
so what do you do if you're in that situation?

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 01:52 AM

Originally posted by n0tsympl
its grand idea but it's best left that way it would create more problems than it would solve ie communism...

That had come up in my mind as well. I think a flat tax is more simple and fair. I am all for removing Income Taxes. Why should we be taxed on what we earn? When we're already taxed on what we spend. Then taxed again on what we own (insurance taxes, services taxes, property taxes, etc...).

Many of the things we have are taxed multiple times, and it all goes to the same place. It isn't fair at all.

Our freedom is being taken away in front of our eyes. And we always have means to protest, and the economical cycle to prove whether it's right or wrong. So I say abolish it and take the risk. Our freedom is already governed.

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 02:21 AM

Originally posted by johnnyg5646
Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't this really screw poor people? If I make $500,000 a year and bought $100 worth of clothes and paid $7 in a federal tax, its not much to me. But if a person who makes $20,000 a year pays 7% (or whatever % it is) on items they need to survive, it could represent a larger chunk of their overall income than what they were initially losing to income tax. Depending on what expenses low income people have, this could take a serious toll on their ability to afford necessities.

In the mean time, since wealthy people would not be taxed on incomes from their investments, their wealth could sky rocket out of control. Since wealthy people have large amounts of capital and access to the best financial planners, they could insure a proper ratio of new spending to new income in order to grow their wealth more. This could potentially create an even greater shift in overall wealth towards those that are already wealthy.

Although, I could be looking at this wrong. I'm open to all criticisms of my statements

You're absolutely right that the rich wouldn't be taxed as much as a percentage of income for basic necessities. The kicker is that people with income that high don't generally get the bare necessities. This flat national sales tax would require the extremely rich to pay high taxes on all commodity items, whether it be a new yacht, gigantic entertainment center etc. As for the poorer people, they pay more for their basic necessities as a percentage of income anyways. The only difference would be that the tax comes from the items they buy instead of from their paycheck. This would also make things a little more equal because the system now is unequal in that wealthy people have access to better tax lawyers to ensure that they get as much of their money back as possible. With this system there are no loopholes to jump through. I absolutely support this idea. If only we had a national direct democracy and could set up some type of initiative

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in