The tax poll

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: charrison
1. Remove all corperate income taxes. Removing this would would be a boom for this country.

explain.

2. Remove the personal income tax. The current implentation is costly and a great invasion of personal privacy. Does the goverment really need to know how much make and where you work. Remember that it was originally designed so that the top few percent would have to pay a few percent to the fed. Look at where we are now.

Income tax is one of the cheapest, easiest, and least intrusive of taxes, especially when compared to property taxes or the hidden costs of sales taxes.

Just dont know if I buy that considering the infrastructure required to process and validate the returns. I would think a sales tax would be the easiest way to do this because it is charged and collected up front and on the books immediately.

Personally I would say get rid of personal income tax and increase sales tax. This is a consumption tax and will target people who do the most consuming. But it doesnt hurt people who decide to save their money and put it into the stock, bank, bond markets.

I say get rid of the estate tax as I really believe it hurts middle income people more than it does the rich. Until they raised the ceiling to 1.5 million I believe it used to be 360,000 dollars. Many people in the middle income bracket retired and died with more in assets than 360,000 and the govt raped them for 50% of it over that threshhold, effectively keeping their loved ones in their bracket.

the estate tax was somewhere around 5 million last time i checked. i know that a decade ago my grandfathers estate wasn't touched by it, and his estate wasn't small.

 

[miketheidiot]

nm

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Genx87
What you said has nothing to do with efficiency, Genx87. Good job dancing around the subject instead of dealing with it. Lets actually look at the issue.

The IRS itself has just under a $10 billion/year budget. The US has a ~$2.2 trillion yearly budget. Thus 0.45% of federal funds go to IRS tax collection. $10 billion is a significant number, but eliminating it will have a near negligible impact on the federal budget. It just isn't a major waste compared to the other wastes. Basically they collect two numbers: how much the employer said you got and how much you said you got. Then there are a few people checking those numbers. It isn't too complicated.

But what would it cost to replace the IRS? I really don't know. But think about the possibilities.

(1) Sales tax. What would it cost for the IRS to keep track and process a trillion+ transactions each year? I don't know. At one penny per transaction for paperwork, you end up costing as much if not more than the IRS. Is one penny too high or too low? I don't have the numbers. But it doesn't seem too unreasonable. Some national sales tax plans are quite complex. For example, some still require the IRS to keep track of income so they can return sales tax to the poor. You basically have all the IRS expenses plus the sales tax expenses. Other plans are less complex and just pay each person a monthly check. What does it cost to print/mail 3 billion checks a year? What does it cost to keep records of every person and every business and every transaction (is it food or clothing or other non-taxed goods)? Add in costs to enforce collection (do you trust the businesses, what about all the new black markets that develop?). I just can't see this being much less than $10 billion.

(2) Property type taxes. What would it cost for the IRS to assess each and every property? This would have to be done periodically, probably every 2-3 years. An accurate assessment takes hours and runs in the hundreds for just a simple building. Will this be cheaper than $10 billion? I don't know. Probably not much cheaper if it were.

(3) User fees. Toll booths everywhere (since the federal government DOES pay for roads) - that would certainly cost a lot. An added layer of government for education use fees. How do we fee for military protection? Do we charge user fees for NO hurricane cleanup? How do we delegate these fees, and make certain that everyone pays them? Talk about a lot of work, and money to collect it on every use. Would it be cheaper than $10 billion? I don't know. Do you have any estimates?

I'd say you're off-base and over-simplifying here. Let's re-look.

As I already said, the IRS passes off the cost of the income tax onto the taxpayer. In reality, it is MUCH more complicated that you make it out to be. A large percentage of America is either self-employed, a business owner, or otherwise has complicated taxes for some reason or another. Not everyone is a W-2 wage-earner doing the short form.

(1) Sales taxes are collected like property taxes. A penny a transaction is FAR too high. All that is required is a computerized record of the sales transaction (which every store already has as a part of doing business). Done. Most states in the country already have a sales tax system in place.

(2) Property-type taxes are already collected in every locality in the US. I mean every. I challenge someone to come up with a single county in the US that does not already have a property tax system in place.

(3) Strawman. Road user fees are already collected via an at-the-pump gas tax. Toll booths not required.

you talk about the implicit cost of sales tax but ignore the implicit costs of property, sales, and user fees. interesting

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
then clean up the tax code. Quick fix.

Clean up how? With a flat tax or a poll tax? The tax code became complex because it is unfair. Of course, that just compounded the problem, but any effort to "clean it up" will simply return it to its original state of arbitrary unfairness.

paying for the benefit you recieve? very fair imo.

And what about NOT paying for the benefit you receive? Almost half of America does that right now. Are you saying you consider it fair that some receive without contributing?

if he isn't selling then the market is by definition not meeting his price. the land is worth more to him in its derelict state than the money and goods being offered in exchange.

Ridiculously naive. Some people won't sell regardless of what they are offered, and won't improve deferred property even if they were paid to do so (and of course vice versa, some people sell for too little and over-improve). This is why appraised real estate market prices are never determined by just a single sales transaction, but by at least 3.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
you talk about the implicit cost of sales tax but ignore the implicit costs of property, sales, and user fees. interesting

I did talk about those costs. Read again.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
then clean up the tax code. Quick fix.

Clean up how? With a flat tax or a poll tax? The tax code became complex because it is unfair. Of course, that just compounded the problem, but any effort to "clean it up" will simply return it to its original state of arbitrary unfairness.

flat rates, no deductions except for saving plans and dependants.

paying for the benefit you recieve? very fair imo.

And what about NOT paying for the benefit you receive? Almost half of America does that right now. Are you saying you consider it fair that some receive without contributing?

in some cases, yes. The owner of the store benefits when the user drives down the road to buy his merchandise. Thats why its called a public good, because everyone (or at least many) benefits from it by one person using it.

if he isn't selling then the market is by definition not meeting his price. the land is worth more to him in its derelict state than the money and goods being offered in exchange.

Ridiculously naive. Some people won't sell regardless of what they are offered, and won't improve deferred property even if they were paid to do so (and of course vice versa, some people sell for too little and over-improve). This is why appraised real estate market prices are never determined by just a single sales transaction, but by at least 3.

then thats their choice. the free market at work without government intervention.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
you talk about the implicit cost of sales tax but ignore the implicit costs of property, sales, and user fees. interesting

I did talk about those costs. Read again.

looks like you ignored them to me.

(2) Property-type taxes are already collected in every locality in the US. I mean every. I challenge someone to come up with a single county in the US that does not already have a property tax system in place.

You want and rave like a fool about the cost of administering the income tax (most of which is implicit) as a reason to get rid of it, but you ignore the assessments, reassessment, lawsuits (which due happen) and every thing that goes inot collecting the property tax.

You basically said : "the income tax is really expensive to impliment, so we should go to the property tax", whle ignoring the fact that the property tax is extremely expensive as well.

 

[Vic]

I said more than just that the income tax is expensive to implement, I also said it was unfair. And it is subject to rampant abuse. In fact, the entire system of the income tax has become how politicians use it to sway votes. Tax redistribution here, tax cut there, tax break here, special deduction there, etc.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Vic
(1) Sales taxes are collected like property taxes. A penny a transaction is FAR too high. All that is required is a computerized record of the sales transaction (which every store already has as a part of doing business). Done. Most states in the country already have a sales tax system in place.

You have the differences of the state tax and the federal tax to keep track of. And the cost of the monthly rebate checks. Add the cost of adding tax to companies that don't tax (but probably should such as internet companies). Add the cost of still having the IRS for some of the sales tax plans to give exemptions to the low income, etc. It may be less than $10 billion, but not by much and in the overall picture that is still meaningless to the federal outlays.

(2) Property-type taxes are already collected in every locality in the US. I mean every. I challenge someone to come up with a single county in the US that does not already have a property tax system in place.

Come up with one that isn't under constant challenge. Does the federal government just use the disputed state numbers? What about the constant lawsuits that they are overvalued (I could easilly forsee nearly a million challenges per year + reassessments + legal fees)? What does that cost? Remember this is my favorite type of tax - I WANT more property type taxes. But it does have an associated cost. And you still have to enforce it. Many people don't have escrot accounts on all property.

(3) Strawman. Road user fees are already collected via an at-the-pump gas tax. Toll booths not required.

Gas tax can pay for the entire federal government?

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Genx87

The government today announced that it is changing its emblem from an Eagle to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

That is sig material right there 😉

I can't take credit for that, it came in an email today. 🙂

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
i'm kind of surprised that so many people think income tax is less of a burden on growth than the property tax. Between corporate and persoanl income taxes its leading 18 to 6.

Property tax is good for growt. It forces people to put there land to work. Use it or lose it.

thats equivilent to saying that the income tax forces people to work more to have the same level of income. (and saying implicitly that that is a good thing)

income tax is good for growth. It forces people to work more and think creatively for new ways to make money. Work or starve.

Dead people are not good for the growth so your comparision is fundimentially wroung. A property tax prevents property from being ignored. Of course as with any tax to high of a rate is bad.

 

[smack Down]

WTF is it with the rights love of sales tax. Well i guess it is more hating the poor and middle class. It is the easy tax for people to dodge. Raise your if you live in a state that collects sales tax and have, purchased something by mail/internet with out paying tax. Compared to income tax it is bad for economic growth.

For raising the amount of money goverment "needs" income tax is the best.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: charrison
1. Remove all corperate income taxes. Removing this would would be a boom for this country.

explain.

2. Remove the personal income tax. The current implentation is costly and a great invasion of personal privacy. Does the goverment really need to know how much make and where you work. Remember that it was originally designed so that the top few percent would have to pay a few percent to the fed. Look at where we are now.

Income tax is one of the cheapest, easiest, and least intrusive of taxes, especially when compared to property taxes or the hidden costs of sales taxes.

Just dont know if I buy that considering the infrastructure required to process and validate the returns. I would think a sales tax would be the easiest way to do this because it is charged and collected up front and on the books immediately.

Personally I would say get rid of personal income tax and increase sales tax. This is a consumption tax and will target people who do the most consuming. But it doesnt hurt people who decide to save their money and put it into the stock, bank, bond markets.

I say get rid of the estate tax as I really believe it hurts middle income people more than it does the rich. Until they raised the ceiling to 1.5 million I believe it used to be 360,000 dollars. Many people in the middle income bracket retired and died with more in assets than 360,000 and the govt raped them for 50% of it over that threshhold, effectively keeping their loved ones in their bracket.

the estate tax was somewhere around 5 million last time i checked. i know that a decade ago my grandfathers estate wasn't touched by it, and his estate wasn't small.

Right now it sits at 1.5 million and will revert to 1 million in 2011. Under Clinton they raised the cap from 360,000 to 1.5 million. I can look it up but I am 99.9% sure it has never been 5 million and the new cap is very recent.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: smack Down
WTF is it with the rights love of sales tax. Well i guess it is more hating the poor and middle class. It is the easy tax for people to dodge. Raise your if you live in a state that collects sales tax and have, purchased something by mail/internet with out paying tax. Compared to income tax it is bad for economic growth.

For raising the amount of money goverment "needs" income tax is the best.

Actually you should change that. For raising the amount of money govt "desires" income tax is the easiest way to rape the tax payers.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dullard
Gas tax can pay for the entire federal government?

Oh come now. When did this argument become about having a single source of taxation? No single source can ever be truly effective or fair, and (in case you didn't notice) I was never arguing in favor of a single source, just the forms I most prefer and believe would be most effective.

IMO, gas taxes should pay for the roads, user fees for most services, property taxes for the schools, and sales tax for everything else.

As to the federal government argument, I am not a federalist. IMO most of what the federal government does now and most of what the federal government collects now in taxes should be reverted back to the states. Hell, even "blue state" Oregon gets more than a third of its funding from the federal government. What's the sense in that except for wealth redistribution?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Right now it sits at 1.5 million and will revert to 1 million in 2011. Under Clinton they raised the cap from 360,000 to 1.5 million. I can look it up but I am 99.9% sure it has never been 5 million and the new cap is very recent.

Source
$1 million -> $3.5 million -> $1 million

But also from that source "Each person also gets a lifetime gift exemption of $1 million". So you could gift each person in your family $1 million and therefore have an estate worth far more than $3.5 million still have no tax.

And in 2001 before it began its rise, up to 2% of deaths triggered some form of estate tax. I hardly call 2% the middle class.

Is there a farm exemption too?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Vic
IMO, gas taxes should pay for the roads, user fees for most services, property taxes for the schools, and sales tax for everything else.

I was trying to get at the cheapest possible tax collection method. Having a combination of those three would certainly not be the cheapest. Probably far above the $10 billion from the IRS. I agree that one source is bad, and therefore we won't be able to beat the low cost of the IRS. But I was just trying to point out that the IRS expense is insignificant in the overall federal outlays.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Vic
IMO, gas taxes should pay for the roads, user fees for most services, property taxes for the schools, and sales tax for everything else.

I was trying to get at the cheapest possible tax collection method. Having a combination of those three would certainly not be the cheapest. Probably far above the $10 billion from the IRS. I agree that one source is bad, and therefore we won't be able to beat the low cost of the IRS. But I was just trying to point out that the IRS expense is insignificant in the overall federal outlays.

Once again, you are ignoring the fact that the huge expense and burden of income tax collection is placed on the taxpayers, and not on the IRS.

The gas tax is collected like a sales tax (except per unit rather than per cost). Cost of collection is minimal, as calculating the tax is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

User fees are simple. Pay at gate. Pay at time of service. Etc.

Sales tax is just like the gas tax but per cost. Gross sales times tax rate equal tax amount. Gross sales is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

Property tax because it is the absolute fairest way to pay for schools and provides excellent benefits to the public good.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Vic
I said more than just that the income tax is expensive to implement, I also said it was unfair. And it is subject to rampant abuse. In fact, the entire system of the income tax has become how politicians use it to sway votes. Tax redistribution here, tax cut there, tax break here, special deduction there, etc.

and you think any other form of tax would be any different? Wasn't someone lecturing someone else for being niave a few posts ago?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
i'm kind of surprised that so many people think income tax is less of a burden on growth than the property tax. Between corporate and persoanl income taxes its leading 18 to 6.

Property tax is good for growt. It forces people to put there land to work. Use it or lose it.

thats equivilent to saying that the income tax forces people to work more to have the same level of income. (and saying implicitly that that is a good thing)

income tax is good for growth. It forces people to work more and think creatively for new ways to make money. Work or starve.

Dead people are not good for the growth so your comparision is fundimentially wroung. A property tax prevents property from being ignored. Of course as with any tax to high of a rate is bad.

huh?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Vic
IMO, gas taxes should pay for the roads, user fees for most services, property taxes for the schools, and sales tax for everything else.

I was trying to get at the cheapest possible tax collection method. Having a combination of those three would certainly not be the cheapest. Probably far above the $10 billion from the IRS. I agree that one source is bad, and therefore we won't be able to beat the low cost of the IRS. But I was just trying to point out that the IRS expense is insignificant in the overall federal outlays.

Once again, you are ignoring the fact that the huge expense and burden of income tax collection is placed on the taxpayers, and not on the IRS.

The gas tax is collected like a sales tax (except per unit rather than per cost). Cost of collection is minimal, as calculating the tax is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

User fees are simple. Pay at gate. Pay at time of service. Etc.

Sales tax is just like the gas tax but per cost. Gross sales times tax rate equal tax amount. Gross sales is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

Property tax because it is the absolute fairest way to pay for schools and provides excellent benefits to the public good.

Income is also already calculated. It is writen write on the bottom of my pay check.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
i'm kind of surprised that so many people think income tax is less of a burden on growth than the property tax. Between corporate and persoanl income taxes its leading 18 to 6.

Property tax is good for growt. It forces people to put there land to work. Use it or lose it.

thats equivilent to saying that the income tax forces people to work more to have the same level of income. (and saying implicitly that that is a good thing)

income tax is good for growth. It forces people to work more and think creatively for new ways to make money. Work or starve.

Dead people are not good for the growth so your comparision is fundimentially wroung. A property tax prevents property from being ignored. Of course as with any tax to high of a rate is bad.

huh?

When people starve to death it doesn't provided growth unlike when property is seized due to not paying taxes.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Vic
I said more than just that the income tax is expensive to implement, I also said it was unfair. And it is subject to rampant abuse. In fact, the entire system of the income tax has become how politicians use it to sway votes. Tax redistribution here, tax cut there, tax break here, special deduction there, etc.

and you think any other form of tax would be any different? Wasn't someone lecturing someone else for being niave a few posts ago?

Yes, it is different. Income and so-called "sin" taxes are unique in their potential for abuse in a democracy. This is due to the fact that the taxes are collected unevenly and the largest burden of the taxation is always placed on a voting minority. So the average voter thinks, "Raise my neighbors' taxes and not my own? Sure!!" This is because the average person sees the opportunity to screw his neighbor and jumps at it without stopping to consider if the tax is really necessary.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Vic
I said more than just that the income tax is expensive to implement, I also said it was unfair. And it is subject to rampant abuse. In fact, the entire system of the income tax has become how politicians use it to sway votes. Tax redistribution here, tax cut there, tax break here, special deduction there, etc.

and you think any other form of tax would be any different? Wasn't someone lecturing someone else for being niave a few posts ago?

Yes, it is different. Income and so-called "sin" taxes are unique in their potential for abuse in a democracy. This is due to the fact that the taxes are collected unevenly and the largest burden of the taxation is always placed on a voting minority. So the average voter thinks, "Raise my neighbors' taxes and not my own? Sure!!" This is because the average person sees the opportunity to screw his neighbor and jumps at it without stopping to consider if the tax is really necessary.

I could screw my neighbors with any tax. Just make it have brackets. If land is worth more the 2 million dollars make the rate twice as high. If an item is worth more then 10K lets go with 50% sales tax.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Vic
IMO, gas taxes should pay for the roads, user fees for most services, property taxes for the schools, and sales tax for everything else.

I was trying to get at the cheapest possible tax collection method. Having a combination of those three would certainly not be the cheapest. Probably far above the $10 billion from the IRS. I agree that one source is bad, and therefore we won't be able to beat the low cost of the IRS. But I was just trying to point out that the IRS expense is insignificant in the overall federal outlays.

Once again, you are ignoring the fact that the huge expense and burden of income tax collection is placed on the taxpayers, and not on the IRS.

The gas tax is collected like a sales tax (except per unit rather than per cost). Cost of collection is minimal, as calculating the tax is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

User fees are simple. Pay at gate. Pay at time of service. Etc.

Sales tax is just like the gas tax but per cost. Gross sales times tax rate equal tax amount. Gross sales is already a part of normal business accounting, i.e. something that businesses already do regardless of the tax.

Property tax because it is the absolute fairest way to pay for schools and provides excellent benefits to the public good.

Income is also already calculated. It is writen write on the bottom of my pay check.

Congratulations. Most taxpayers in the US don't use the short form. And almost half are self-employed (or are business owners, partners, investors, stockowners, property owners, and/or have similarly complicated taxes). This is why (for the 10 gajillioneth time) it costs the taxpayers more than 200 billion dollars every year to calculate their income taxes. Have you ever seen a self-employed person's income tax return? The average size is about 30 pages long, and I have seen some over 100 pages. I think that beats your 1 page 9 line short form. Now thank you and shut up.