NationStates Jolt Archive

dont know if this has been a topic yet..but i have been thinking alot on a 10% national sales tax..just like to get opinions on this..

basically i am thinking i like the idea..but i am not fully sold..
give me some help here ...thanx

Why would we add such a large new tax?

You mean as a replacement for the income tax, or just a tax hike for the hell of it?

A Sales Tax would replace the income tax.

It's a great alternative to income taxes, but it needn't be so high.

It's a great alternative to income taxes, but it needn't be so high.

yes as a replacement..as i see it, it could close up loopholes rich people are always accused of exploiting...i mean if say a company buys a private jet for the company there would be no write offs just a tax on the purchase..what would a reasonable level be..considering there would still be a state tax on the sale price also

A Sales Tax would replace the income tax.
yay, lets penalize the poor from not being able to get stuff imported from other coutnries

yay, lets penalize the poor from not being able to get stuff imported from other coutnries

The poor have equal access to Wal-Mart. ;)

yay, lets penalize the poor from not being able to get stuff imported from other coutnries

how is this penalizing the poor?..they wouldn't be so poor if they didn't have to pay a 24% income tax..and they dont have to own a 60,000 dollar escalade ..they could purchase within their means..which would be higher without a hefty income tax

how is this penalizing the poor?..they wouldn't be so poor if they didn't have to pay a 24% income tax..and they dont have to own a 60,000 dollar escalade ..they could purchase within their means..which would be higher without a hefty income tax

Poor with kids spend a large percentage of income straightaway... and the poor don't pay any federal income tax right now as it is, so it'd be an increase on them.

Tax dollars, not people!
An excellent way to graduate the taxes: according to money spent. Exempt items like food and utilities and you have an ideal tax plan IMO.
However, I believe that this tax should be levied by the states and the federal government should be "kicked up to" according to the state's population and use of federal resources. AKA "apportioned" according to constitutional constraints. This should be the only tax that citizens should have to pay.

Actually, a sales tax would be advantageous to the poor.

It's very easy to waive taxes on staples like Rent, Food, electricity, etc. I think it's an option worth considering.

Actually, a sales tax would be advantageous to the poor.

It's very easy to waive taxes on staples like Rent, Food, electricity, etc. I think it's an option worth considering.

Yeah, but if we're going to load up on exemptions, then we've eliminated the benefits of not filing income tax returns.. besides creating more welfare red tape.

If the ultimate goal is to stand the poor up, go with a reverse income tax.

Yeah, but if we're going to load up on exemptions, then we've eliminated the benefits of not filing income tax returns.. besides creating more welfare red tape.

If the ultimate goal is to stand the poor up, go with a reverse income tax.

State sales taxes are loaded with exemptions anyway. Besides, what could trip red tape better than eliminating income tax filings every year from every citizen with a job?

Actually, a sales tax would be advantageous to the poor.

It's very easy to waive taxes on staples like Rent, Food, electricity, etc. I think it's an option worth considering.

yeah i couldn't see taxing food or other staples.

Yeah, but if we're going to load up on exemptions, then we've eliminated the benefits of not filing income tax returns.. besides creating more welfare red tape.

If the ultimate goal is to stand the poor up, go with a reverse income tax.
dont we already sorta have that with welfare programs

State sales taxes are loaded with exemptions anyway. Besides, what could trip red tape better than eliminating income tax filings every year from every citizen with a job?

A 12-18% reverse income tax, eliminating sales tax entirely. Screw the FTB. ;)

I haven't given much thought to the actual topic, but I believe in essence the rich should be taxed more than the poor. Whether or not a national sales tax works towards that, I don't know...I'll be reading this thread and doing some research of my own.

to mee the real reason for a national sales tax would be to tax everyone squarely based on their level of spending

how is this penalizing the poor?..they wouldn't be so poor if they didn't have to pay a 24% income tax..and they dont have to own a 60,000 dollar escalade ..they could purchase within their means..which would be higher without a hefty income tax
and this children is an excellent specimen of homo-ignoramus

I haven't given much thought to the actual topic, but I believe in essence the rich should be taxed more than the poor. Whether or not a national sales tax works towards that, I don't know...I'll be reading this thread and doing some research of my own.
i think this would actually tax the rich more..and more fairly than it is done now...based on what the rich actually buy..an expensive car..more tax..an economical cheaper car less tax... it would offer less ways to squirm outa paying taxes

i think this would actually tax the rich more..and more fairly than it is done now...based on what the rich actually buy..an expensive car..more tax..an economical cheaper car less tax... it would offer less ways to squirm outa paying taxes
where the hell do you think rich people buy stuff from?

and this children is an excellent specimen of homo-ignoramus
and this my friends is a dumb ass who rather than talk has to resort to name-calling and insults... are you too stupid to come up with a point or do you just get your rocks off insulting people ...come on both hands on the keyboard..what didn't your momma love you enough...j

where the hell do you think rich people buy stuff from?
uh ...the store

dont we already sorta have that with welfare programs

A reverse income tax would be a uniform base sum, varying only by state of residence and number of children.. it could replace the current welfare system, and reduce cost and fraud, without discouraging spending or encouraging unreported/black market sales, while lowering the income tax overall.

A national sales tax is a bad idea.

The poor spend a much higher percentage of their income so they would be taxed at a much higher level than the wealthy.

Also, if you tax spending people will spend less and less spending is the worst possible thing you can do to the economy.

A reverse income tax would be a uniform base sum, varying only by state of residence and number of children.. it could replace the current welfare system, and reduce cost and fraud, without discouraging spending or encouraging unreported/black market sales, while lowering the income taxes overall.
i hadn't really thought on the black market much...but unreported sales would have to the resposibility of the merchant..if the law came down on them heavily it might discourage them some

A national sales tax is a bad idea.

The poor spend a much higher percentage of their income so they would be taxed at a much higher level than the wealthy.

Also, if you tax spending people will spend less and less spending is the worst possible thing you can do to the economy.

i dont think people will stop spending.. americans want stuff..if their income was not taxed they would have more to spend with...face it kids will always want stuff..teens will always want stuff..adults will always want stuff..we are a nation of consumers and i dont think that will change

A national sales tax is a bad idea.

The poor spend a much higher percentage of their income so they would be taxed at a much higher level than the wealthy.

Also, if you tax spending people will spend less and less spending is the worst possible thing you can do to the economy.

WHich is why you waive items like rent, food, utilities and such which the poor tend to spend much of their money on.

You can also waive taxes on a certain portion of an item. Such as: The first $20,000 of a car. Or the first $75 of clothing. Or the first $100,000 of a house or the first $1,000 of a mortgage payment.

and this my friends is a dumb ass who rather than talk has to resort to name-calling and insults... are you too stupid to come up with a point or do you just get your rocks off insulting people ...come on both hands on the keyboard..what didn't your momma love you enough...j
when you prove you are informed or at least intelligent enough to commense an intelligent conversation on the subject, then i will oblige

when you prove you are informed or at least intelligent enough to commense an intelligent conversation on the subject, then i will oblige

Give us a break. You don't know the meaning of the word 'debate'.

when you prove you are informed or at least intelligent enough to commense an intelligent conversation on the subject, then i will oblige
I STARTED THIS THREAD TO BECOME MORE INFORMED NOT TO HAVE UNSOCIALIZED SHUT-INS LIKE YOURSELF TRY TO INSULT ME..YOU CAN OBLIGE ME BY SHUTTING THE HELL UP, GOING BACK TO YOUR BATHROOM AND EATING ALL THE MEDICINE IN THERE AT ONE TIME..THANX

You think you look mad with all caps beat this:

[I AGREE THAT WITH A TAX REBATE BASED ON LIVING STANDARDS A NATIONAL SALES TAX MAY WORK, I AM STILL PRETTY SURE IT WILL LOWER SPENDING MOST GOODS ARE ELASTIC AND DEMAND WOULD RESPOND TO HIGHER PRICES.

and this my friends is a dumb ass who rather than talk has to resort to name-calling and insults... are you too stupid to come up with a point or do you just get your rocks off insulting people ...come on both hands on the keyboard..what didn't your momma love you enough...j
No, CS was right, you made a quite ignorant comment.

Not even someone earning $100,000 pays a net tax of 24%. I won't even comment on the rest. I am a conservative - but I will eat up anyone who posts ignorance as fact. Ignorance hurts the cause.

A national sales tax on luxury items is a fantastic idea, especially if it is in addition to a progressive income tax.

Also, there should be steep national sales taxes on new vehicles with poor gas mileage (for personal use, no reason to hurt the trucking industry).

The day when the purchaser of a cadillac escalade or a hummer H2 owes the govenment $100,000 or $150,000 in taxes will be a great day for america.

No, CS was right, you made a quite ignorant comment.

Not even someone earning $100,000 pays a net tax of 24%. I won't even comment on the rest. I am a conservative - but I will eat up anyone who posts ignorance as fact. Ignorance hurts the cause.


i do not earn nearly that and i pay 24% unless i get overtime and then it is more like 30%...i cannot afford tax code loopholes like the rich...with a straight tax on goods bought the rich may be less likely to exploit the code to avoid their share of the taxes..and if the rich went by the code they would be paying closer to 70%..which none do so the system as it stands is flawed in their favor

i do not earn nearly that and i pay 24% unless i get overtime and then it is more like 30%...i cannot afford tax code loopholes like the rich...with a straight tax on goods bought the rich may be less likely to exploit the code to avoid their share of the taxes..and if the rich went by the code they would be paying closer to 70%..which none do so the system as it stands is flawed in their favor

The problem is that the rich spend a tiny proportion of their income compared to the middle class and the poor.

In essence, a national sales tax is just like a flat income tax, it falls most heavily on the poor, then the middle class, and very lightly on the rich.

The word for a tax that hurts the weakest people to benefit the strongest is "sadistic."

A national sales tax is a bad idea - both as a replacement to income tax as well as a stand-alone.

First, it ignores that about 45% of taxes are not paid by individuals but by business.

Also, and remember - I am a conservative - it would unfairly shift the tax burden towards the lower and middle class.

For the top 5% of taxpayers they could never spend all of their income in a year. Or even half. That means they pay less tax - and considering they pay 50% of income tax revenues that would be a bad thing.

The low income and poor would not be affected, they pay no tax now and would probably fall under any exemption limits of a sales tax.

The middle class would get HAMMERED. Period.


As far as a stand alone - I don't think the government has the right to ask for more taxes until they reign in spending first. There has never been a year when the US government spent less than the year before. Never. Bush has been a spending whore and Kerry looks to be worse. I would like to see congress and executive pay scales set to reflect spending: If government spending is reduced (or at least contained within the cost of living adjusted for population growth) they earn more, if if goes into deficit they get less. A quick and dramatic reduction in pork would follow.

Until then all we can do is limit the pool of money they have to play with and hope they learn to control themselves. Imagine how much more waste there would be if we gave them more money!

The problem is that the rich spend a tiny proportion of their income compared to the middle class and the poor.

In essence, a national sales tax is just like a flat income tax, it falls most heavily on the poor, then the middle class, and very lightly on the rich.

The word for a tax that hurts the weakest people to benefit the strongest is "sadistic."
yes but that small percentage they spend is probably 50 fold the large percent that i spend ..especially on luxury items..so even if you tax my 70% and their 10% (%'s of income) then you would still be getting 50 time the tax outta them then you would be from me

i do not earn nearly that and i pay 24% unless i get overtime and then it is more like 30%...i cannot afford tax code loopholes like the rich...with a straight tax on goods bought the rich may be less likely to exploit the code to avoid their share of the taxes..and if the rich went by the code they would be paying closer to 70%..which none do so the system as it stands is flawed in their favor
You are including social security and state taxes in your formula, and probably not considering your refund at the end of the year. Even at that your figure is high. Possibly you are including your insurance and retirement savings as well. Will all of that then yes, your paycheck could be 30% less, but it is not all income tax.

I think a 5-6% Sales Tax would be more reasonable,but then again that's my idea :)

I think a 5-6% Sales Tax would be more reasonable,but then again that's my idea :)
The congressional advocates of the plan are estimating a 25% tax or so. 5% is less than most state sales taxes. You couldn't even pay for the national parks for that.

You are including social security and state taxes in your formula, and probably not considering your refund at the end of the year. Even at that your figure is high. Possibly you are including your insurance and retirement savings as well. Will all of that then yes, your paycheck could be 30% less, but it is not all income tax.

i will do the figures in a minute..but the 30% is only on my overtime hours..
and i have paid instead of recieved a rebate every year that i have filed except one..that year i got 4.25 back..i do claim 2 exemptions but i would rather pay than have the gov't hold my money without interest for a whole year

yes but that small percentage they spend is probably 50 fold the large percent that i spend ..especially on luxury items..so even if you tax my 70% and their 10% (%'s of income) then you would still be getting 50 time the tax outta them then you would be from me


Would be nice, but that isnt the case in real life.