April 15th is Tax Day. I hope you have all submitted your tax returns. In honor of this horrid day, I'd like to post an article by George Will which discusses a proposed tax reform bill in the US House of Representatives.
The bill, H.R. 25 was created by John Linder (R) from Georgia. The general gist of it is that he would abolish all taxes as we know them (including the IRS) and replace it with a 23% income tax.
Read the article and let me know what you think.
"Fair Tax Bill"
2 comments:
Two words: forget it. Consider:
1. How are 133 pages of tax code any less onerous than 55,000 pages?
The original Form 1040 released in 1914 was all of two pages long and the original tax code no more than about a dozen pages. Why must any income tax code be more complicated than that, especially if we are to assume that a reduction in tax burden is an indication that
government will contract the scope and rate of spending to within constitutionally prescribed limits (hah!)?
2. Imagine what a 23 percent sales tax would do to the economy. The answer is, more damage than marginal income tax rates of 11, 28, and 39 percent. The additional cost of
goods sold would do hideous damage to retail markets, considering the inherently regressive nature of sales taxes. More to the point, how likely is it that a national sales tax would result in the elimination of the income tax? Just ask the good citizens of the
European Union. Most important of all, who is to say that the den of thieves on Capitol Hill will stop at 23%? Remember, the original income tax imposed in 1913 was on no more than five percent of all income and even that was only imposed on about the wealthiest two percent of the nation. How long did that last?
The solution? Abolish all taxes except for indirect tariffs. This is the ONLY way to ensure that the federal monster will be sufficiently deprived of nourishment to stay within its constitutional limits. Again, I believe that will happen on the day when I'm struck on the head by falling pig excrement.
Besides, anyone with a functioning cerebrum knows better than to think that a faux "conservative" (I mean, the guy writes for the Washington Post, for God's sake. Come on!) like George "Brie and Champagne" Will has any interest whatsoever in bringing honesty and fiscal discipline to Rome-on-the-Potomac. What would he do to earn a living if that happened?
Welcome aboard, Liberranter.
Let me respond to some of your points:
1. I think the 133 could be seriously less "onerous" than 55,000. I might actually have the time to read 133 pages.
The original 1040 from 1914 was short, and you're right, it grew completely out of control. Hence this proposal.
I'm not sure if the point of the bill is to limit government spending (it'd be great if it did) but more to free up the billions of dollars we have to spend every year trying to figure out how much we owe.
2. You have some good points here. I think that if there ever were a national sales tax, it would cause some people to spend less, and thus hurt retail sales. But it would also give people more money initially. It would also create an incentive to save (something woefully few Americans do today). The part I like is I pay as little or as much tax as I like and I don't have to "file" taxes. To me, this equals freedom.
I totally agree with you that Congress and government in general do not have a great track record of restraint. Interesting.
Don't you think tariffs might hurt our economy, too? Basically all taxes hurt the consumer when you get right down to it. Indirect tariffs hurt Americans because it prevents American consumers from purchasing goods at their lowest, global price. With the money those consumers can save, they can use to buy other things, thus spurring the economy. I have to say I'm totally against tariffs.
I can't really comment on George Will. I read what he writes. Sometimes I agree; sometimes I disagree. I try to keep an open mind when I hear good ideas and not necessarily fault the messenger.
Post a Comment