Seriously, what's wrong with reducing the corporate tax rate to 15% (or less)?

[cybrsage]

The people with most of the money need to support the system that provided a means for their gains. The system now allows executives/board members to get filthy rich while their very companies go bankrupt (from the very choices the executives and boards make) along with their country. Pay more taxes now....or enjoy the demise of a civil society later.

You also use the system that provided a means for your gains. So that means you want yourself to pay the same rates they do, since your logic says so, right?

Civil society will not collapse...there have been far worse wealth concentrations in the past and society did not collapse.

 

[a777pilot]

If you only tax consumption, your economy will move underground.

There's already a 'grey market' which avoids only some taxes. Imagine if paying cash / no receipt meant you didn't pay any tax at all.

In my system that would not happen.

It would be fun.

Even drug dealers would be taxed and most assuredly jailed for not paying their lawful taxes of the "product" they bought.

Remember it is a tax on sales.....consumption......and.....tranfer of wealth/money. The duty to keep records is that of the individual.

 

[a777pilot]

Tax consumption is the stupidest idea ever. It is just a way to screw the middle-class.

Rich people will save/invest a large amount of their money.

Poor will recieve rebates from the government.

Who gets screwed? :hmm:

Rich people will save/invest a large amount of their money.

Good for them, but it sort of depends on what these rich invest in, now doesn't it?

If the buy a company.....they pay a tax.

If the buy bonds.....they pay a tax.

If they buy common stock.....they pay a tax.

If they move their funds out of country....they pay a tax.

Sounds like they are really getting away with something now doesn't it? LOL!

 

[a777pilot]

The rich will no longer buy their big houses, exotic cars, fine foods, and nice clothing? They will start living like the poor?

LOL!

Exactly.

 

[cybrsage]

In my system that would not happen.

It would be fun.

Even drug dealers would be taxed and most assuredly jailed for not paying their lawful taxes of the "product" they bought.

Remember it is a tax on sales.....consumption......and.....tranfer of wealth/money. The duty to keep records is that of the individual.

You would never get taxes on the illegally sold items - but drug dealers buy cars, houses, watches, clothing, etc. So do prostitutes, etc. The income cannot be taxed on illegally sold items, but the spending of that money can be.

 

[a777pilot]

If there was a general 50% consumption tax, then I'm sure people would find a way to get out of some of it. The state can be outsmarted in many cases no matter what it does.

50%!?

Are you crazy? It would be more like 10% or 12% at the most. I would hope the top figure would be more like 8%.

Not only do I want to change what we tax but I want to lower the total tax bill on the American public.

 

[a777pilot]

You would never get taxes on the illegally sold items - but drug dealers buy cars, houses, watches, clothing, etc. So do prostitutes, etc. The income cannot be taxed on illegally sold items, but the spending of that money can be.

That's the whole idea. I don't want to tax profits or income from any source. I just want to tax the spending or consumption.

I could however, put drug dealers out of business by asking them to show prove that they paid the legal tax on their "product". If they can't show where they did pay that tax, I would fine them and put them in jail for tax evasion.

 

[nehalem256]

Good for them, but it sort of depends on what these rich invest in, now doesn't it?

If the buy a company.....they pay a tax.

If the buy bonds.....they pay a tax.

If they buy common stock.....they pay a tax.

If they move their funds out of country....they pay a tax.

Sounds like they are really getting away with something now doesn't it? LOL!

So wait, now we are not just taxing consumption, but saving money?

And how does moving funds out of the country constitute consumption?

And if we tax both consumption and saving money how does that differ from an income tax?

 

[a777pilot]

So wait, now we are not just taxing consumption, but saving money?

And how does moving funds out of the country constitute consumption?

And if we tax both consumption and saving money how does that differ from an income tax?

Any wealth that stays in the USA is safe from income tax. Move it out of the country and you owe a tax.

I only want to tax sales/consumption/transfer of wealth/money. No where have I said I want to tax savings. Show me where I did. Can't be done. Savings is the basis for capitol to be invested to promote growth. That is a good thing.

 

[nehalem256]

Any wealth that stays in the USA is safe from income tax. Move it out of the country and you owe a tax.

I only want to tax sales/consumption/transfer of wealth/money. No where have I said I want to tax savings. Show me where I did. Can't be done. Savings is the basis for capitol to be invested to promote growth. That is a good thing.

You said you wanted to tax the purchase of bonds and stock.

Are you suggesting people will start saving their money in their mattress?

 

[a777pilot]

You said you wanted to tax the purchase of bonds and stock.

Are you suggesting people will start saving their money in their mattress?

Since when is buying stocks and bonds savings? That would be like buying drugs as an exercise in savings. Savings is when capitol is created. Putting your money under the mattress is OK but stupid. Put your savings in a bank savings account or a Savings and Loan. There is a difference between savings and investments.

 

[nehalem256]

Since when is buying stocks and bonds savings? That would be like buying drugs as an exercise in savings. Savings is when capitol is created. Putting your money under the mattress is OK but stupid. Put your savings in a bank savings account or a Savings and Loan. There is a difference between savings and investments.

Except for the little fact that savings accounts pay below the rate of inflation in interest. So its not saving, its losing.

 

[alent1234]

Since when is buying stocks and bonds savings? That would be like buying drugs as an exercise in savings. Savings is when capitol is created. Putting your money under the mattress is OK but stupid. Put your savings in a bank savings account or a Savings and Loan. There is a difference between savings and investments.

if it weren't for IPO's no new companies would be created

 

[a777pilot]

if it weren't for IPO's no new companies would be created

IPO's are great. Love new and growing companies. But in my system that is an investment and a tax for the purchase of that investment ought be taxed. All profits from that investment ought not be taxed.

If you don't like the return on a passbook savings account, then don't put your money there. In vest your money and pay a tax on it. You do have choices in my system.

 

[3chordcharlie]

In my system that would not happen.

It would be fun.

Even drug dealers would be taxed and most assuredly jailed for not paying their lawful taxes of the "product" they bought.

Remember it is a tax on sales.....consumption......and.....tranfer of wealth/money. The duty to keep records is that of the individual.

Your system magically fixes both cash-only transactions, and in-kind bartering?

Sounds good, but how does it do that?

 

[cybrsage]

That's the whole idea. I don't want to tax profits or income from any source. I just want to tax the spending or consumption.

I could however, put drug dealers out of business by asking them to show prove that they paid the legal tax on their "product". If they can't show where they did pay that tax, I would fine them and put them in jail for tax evasion.

A well known mobster went to jail for the same thing.

 

[cybrsage]

Your system magically fixes both cash-only transactions, and in-kind bartering?

Sounds good, but how does it do that?

It would not, but cash purchases from any legitimate source (sears, best buy, etc) would have the tax added as the company would fear not adding it.

Person to person private transactions which do not require a notary or title transfer or such already go tax free on the income, and it is nigh impossible to stop, so not taxing the purchase is no big deal.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Good luck on that. Cars, food, electricity, gas, on and on. Almost all items you buy on a regular basis cannot move "underground".

Some things are very hard to move underground.

Food isn't necessarily one of them - as a side-benefit, people might start eating healthier.

But you do know why even a slice of pizza often costs less if you pay cash, right?

 

[3chordcharlie]

It would not, but cash purchases from any legitimate source (sears, best buy, etc) would have the tax added as the company would fear not adding it.

Person to person private transactions which do not require a notary or title transfer or such already go tax free on the income, and it is nigh impossible to stop, so not taxing the purchase is no big deal.

There is pretty significant potential for more cash sales and in-kind bartering, particularly of services, some construction, etc. I build you a shed, you re-wire my house, and when the inspector shows up to approve it, we have all the receipts for materials, and we both 'did it ourselves'.

Increase the discount (lack of taxes) and you will increase the behaviour.

We had a tax realignment that raised taxes on some services from 5% to 13% a few years ago. The increase in people asking if there was a 'cash price' for services was a whole lot more than +8%

From the business side, 13% isn't enough to be worth the risk of getting in trouble, keeping two sets of books, etc, but I'm sure it is for some, and if taxes are redrawn so they ALL fall on consumption, the pay-off for cheating will be pretty high, and 'all in one basket'.