Stephen Moore's genius idea: Replace the income tax with a national sales tax (1 Viewer)

< Previous | Next >
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #1

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/st...eplace-the-income-tax-with-national-sales-tax

Stephen Moore’s Big Idea: Replace federal income tax with national sales tax


Stephen Moore, a member of President Trump’s economic recovery task force and an economist at FreedomWorks, has a bold idea for how to reinvigorate the economy: abolish the federal income tax, and replace it with a national sales tax.

On the face of it, it may seem like a radical notion especially since essentially all Americans nowadays have grown up having a chunk of their income pulled out by the IRS every year. But Moore notes that the income tax is a relatively new invention in the U.S. -- having only been introduced in the early 20th century.

On the state level, having a sales tax and no income tax is hardly novel, with a number of states having exactly this set-up. But doing so nationally would mark a radical upheaval of the current tax system, and at a time when the U.S. is spending trillions of dollars on stimulus -- although Moore maintains it could raise more revenue than the current system.

Whether such an idea would find bipartisan support is uncertain -- presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden has called for increasing income taxes on high earners -- but Moore believes that, at a time when the economy needs stimulating, his plan would be “rocket fuel.”

Genius idea, on many fronts.

1. EVERYONE pays fair share, no questions asked. ONE percentage of EVERY income group. A homeless stewbum buys a bottle of cheap hooch for $3.00, he pays 30 cents in taxes. A doctor buys a $200,000 Mercedes S Class sedan, he pays $20,000. Poor, 30 cents. Rich $20,000. See the difference.

2. Jobs would FLOW like a river. Companies from overseas would FLOOD our shores with factories, not having to worry about the tax code? Hell, we'd NEED to give amnesty even to MS13 animals, just to have enough workers for the high paying jobs.

3. Revenues would SOAR, since they would be indexed to the economy, rather than Congress's power to use the tax code to buy favors.
 

efil4

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
294
Reaction score
399
Age
49
Location
Covington, LA
Offline
You dont know? cmon now. Did you even read that piece? you are cancelling out income tax in favor of a national sales tax. On just "products".

What constitutes a "product"?


Interesting thought. And it could swing both ways. Is someone's services a product? Truthfully, I was on my way out the door when I typed that response and hadn't given it a whole lot of thought. But you have a point. The article never mentioned "services" but on further reflection I see no reason to exclude them. Certainly businesses would be coming out WAY ahead in the long run, not having to pay all sorts of other taxes.
so if you go to the dentist for a root canal, and its $1000, its now $1170? Or when you go purchase insurance for your home, instead of $5000 its now $5100?

To add....if a business no longer pays taxes, where does the nation make up that lost revenue stream?

This idea on the surface makes sense, but when you break it down and find all the pitfalls, it quickly becomes a novel idea that wouldnt work all that well in the real world.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • Thread Starter
  • #20
OP

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline

Ms 13 really?

That is kinda funny.

How do you get from the tax code doesn't work evenly to ms13

Actually, I merely called MS 13 animals, (which they are.) I was not using them as an example of a fair source of revenue. They are a lower form of life in America than lab rats, (probably because lab rats at least contribute to medical research, whereas MS13 animals just contribute to crowded emergency rooms.)

Hey could we just stop with calling the homeless bums?

I'm pretty sure they aren't entrepreneurs. They aren't contributing much of anything to the national fabric. And most of them are on the streets out of choice.


Actually the vast majority of homeless are in need of mental health care. Referring to them as bums is not really helpful in getting to the actual problem.

And ALL of them would be paying their fair share of taxes under the National Sales Tax. I used them as an example of the bottom of the income ladder.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • Thread Starter
  • #21
OP

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
nope. you are getting knocked because of the lack of understanding you possess. its really that simple.
Why not just be honest? You're knocking me because you disagree with my conclusions. I have more understanding of this than you could ever imagine.
 

cuddlemonkey

Well-known monkey
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
935
Reaction score
1,036
Offline
Admittedly, there ARE some wealthy types who could be called "filthy" rich. A lot of them employ an entire INDUSTRY to avoid paying income taxes. Have a national sales tax and the the "filthy" rich just PAY THE TAX, same as those at the bottom. And they pay their FAIR SHARE according to how much they buy. (See my politically incorrect example of the doctor versus the homeless stewbum).
You must be a tax accountant. Those things never would have occurred to me. But it brings up a point someone else mentioned, about taxing services.

I'll guarantee you THIS: The LAST thing the achievers will do is try to avoid paying a national income tax by going the barter route. It's just not worth the effort, since the achievers will be saving a ton of money in taxes from other sources. They'll be happy to PAY that tax and be done with it. And in the process, they will also be happy to pass their tax savings along to the consumer.
So you are saying that people who currently work very hard to avoid paying taxes will be happy paying the tax once it becomes easier to avoid?
 

insidejob

Takes one to know one...
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
883
Reaction score
846
Location
Back in 70124
Offline
Stop with the stupid colors and just use the reply and quote features. I can't even read half of your responses because they're in black and I (and I think most people) use the dark mode for this board.
 

The moose

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
920
Reaction score
670
Age
51
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Or even better trade stock for Ferrari, art, or home.

You must be a tax accountant. Those things never would have occurred to me. But it brings up a point someone else mentioned, about taxing services.

I'll guarantee you THIS: The LAST thing the achievers will do is try to avoid paying a national income tax by going the barter route. It's just not worth the effort, since the achievers will be saving a ton of money in taxes from other sources. They'll be happy to PAY that tax and be done with it. And in the process, they will also be happy to pass their tax savings along to the consumer.


Then what would happen to all the non profits? No scam for golf games.

A non profit company BUYS THINGS and would pay the national sales tax. Right now, a non profit pays NO INCOME TAXES. So that creates another taxpayer. Why would that upset you?

What about Churches? They then pay tax like everyone else?

A church buys a new building and pays a sales tax on it. Buys candles, a church organ, etc. By the way, churches pay sales taxes anyway. So there's nothing new. THIS way churches wind up paying a national sales tax and the church haters who want to tax religion would be made happy.

So far, I'm seeing nothing but winners here.


This is a really stupid work around for the rich to not pay a fair share of taxes.

Right now, the achievers pay MORE than their fair share. A national sales tax IS THE FAIREST TAX. Everybody is taxed at the SAME percentage of what they buy. (See the example of the stewbum versus the Doctor. One pays 30 cents and the other pays $20,000. Tell me again what is unfair about that.)
Ok dude why oh why do the nation's CEOs get paid in stock options?

It is tax avoidance.

So the guys that get paid one dollar and get stock is all a beat paying tax scam. Income is taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains. So yes getting paid in stock is a tax avoidance.

So yes all of the great men in corporate America play the capital gains instead of income tax game a big fork you to all of us.

The greatest scam of all of that is the stock options pay also comes straight off the corporations tax bill as an expense. So that is also a huge tax avoidance. Because a company can only deduct only the first $1 million of a CEO's pay on its taxes but performance pay in stock options is the loophole. That my friend is all a scam to not pay tax.

If I were you I would be more worried about the zuckerbergs and the like not paying opposed to the poor guy needing mental health care.

And yes and the filthy can also not sell the stock to avoid the tax man and trade it for items, borrow against it, the options are almost unlimited the way you can fork the tax man with stock options
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • Thread Starter
  • #27
OP

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline

Ok dude why oh why do the nation's CEOs get paid in stock options?


Because of IDIOT Democrats who raise taxes because they are buying votes from class envy losers.


It is tax avoidance.

It is certainly legal, and very much moral. On the other hand, Al Sharpton owes MILLIONS in INCOME TAXES and nobody is complaining about his EVASION.

So the guys that get paid one dollar and get stock is all a beat paying tax scam. Income is taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains. So yes getting paid in stock is a tax avoidance.

Pretty much. Achievers aren't just going to bend over and allow Communists to take their hard earned money.

So yes all of the great men in corporate America play the capital gains instead of income tax game a big fork you to all of us.


You're making a WONDERFUL case for a national sales tax. Here, the achievers actually pay the same rate as the underachievers in the marketplace.


The greatest scam of all of that is the stock options pay also comes straight off the corporations tax bill as an expense. So that is also a huge tax avoidance. Because a company can only deduct only the first $1 million of a CEO's pay on its taxes but performance pay in stock options is the loophole. That my friend is all a scam to not pay tax.

A scam is illegal, (such as Democrats getting rich off lobbyists buying their votes.). There's NOTHING illegal about a company paying less money in taxes. Thing is, the achievers will pay MORE money in taxes through a National Sales Tax than the current scam system now. Right now, the achievers are spending tons of money in tax accountants to LEGALLY AVOID paying huge sums of taxes.

(You probably didn't know this, but the Reagan Tax Cuts brought an addition TRILLION DOLLAR to the US Treasury by the year 1989, mostly because with lower tax rates, the achievers believed it was cheaper to just pay the tax, rather than pay accountants to shelter the income, or SEND IT OVERSEAS. You wonder why Trump's tax cuts brought in more real manufacturing jobs than the last FOUR knuckleheads combined? Lower taxes attracted foreign money and more factories were built.)


If I were you I would be more worried about the zuckerbergs and the like not paying opposed to the poor guy needing mental health care.

In Stephen Moore's brilliant model BOTH groups pay their FAIR SHARE. And revenues would go THROUGH THE ROOF.


And yes and the filthy can also not sell the stock to avoid the tax man and trade it for items, borrow against it, the options are almost unlimited the way you can fork the tax man with stock options.


Actually, the national sales tax eliminates all that. It makes the achievers EQUAL with the poorest of the poor. They ALL pay their FAIR SHARE. Get rid of the income tax (which also means overturning the 16th Amendment) and those stock option deals disappear.

Bottom line, (which you apparently have not figured out yet) there will be those who work harder and smarter than others. The achievers for the most part put in the 90 hour weeks and build companies. The underachievers drop out of high school, learn about how to use a commercial fryer and generally make everybody else miserable with their whining and moaning.

And of course, there are those in between the two extremes. Stephen Moore's plan makes sure even the EXTREME ends of the income curve PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.
 

The moose

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
920
Reaction score
670
Age
51
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Ok dude why oh why do the nation's CEOs get paid in stock options?

Because of IDIOT Democrats who raise taxes because they are buying votes from class envy losers.

It is tax avoidance.

It is certainly legal, and very much moral. On the other hand, Al Sharpton owes MILLIONS in INCOME TAXES and nobody is complaining about his EVASION.

So the guys that get paid one dollar and get stock is all a beat paying tax scam. Income is taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains. So yes getting paid in stock is a tax avoidance.

Pretty much. Achievers aren't just going to bend over and allow Communists to take their hard earned money.

So yes all of the great men in corporate America play the capital gains instead of income tax game a big fork you to all of us.

You're making a WONDERFUL case for a national sales tax. Here, the achievers actually pay the same rate as the underachievers in the marketplace.

The greatest scam of all of that is the stock options pay also comes straight off the corporations tax bill as an expense. So that is also a huge tax avoidance. Because a company can only deduct only the first $1 million of a CEO's pay on its taxes but performance pay in stock options is the loophole. That my friend is all a scam to not pay tax.

A scam is illegal, (such as Democrats getting rich off lobbyists buying their votes.). There's NOTHING illegal about a company paying less money in taxes. Thing is, the achievers will pay MORE money in taxes through a National Sales Tax than the current scam system now. Right now, the achievers are spending tons of money in tax accountants to LEGALLY AVOID paying huge sums of taxes.

(You probably didn't know this, but the Reagan Tax Cuts brought an addition TRILLION DOLLAR to the US Treasury by the year 1989, mostly because with lower tax rates, the achievers believed it was cheaper to just pay the tax, rather than pay accountants to shelter the income, or SEND IT OVERSEAS. You wonder why Trump's tax cuts brought in more real manufacturing jobs than the last FOUR knuckleheads combined? Lower taxes attracted foreign money and more factories were built.)


If I were you I would be more worried about the zuckerbergs and the like not paying opposed to the poor guy needing mental health care.

In Stephen Moore's brilliant model BOTH groups pay their FAIR SHARE. And revenues would go THROUGH THE ROOF.


And yes and the filthy can also not sell the stock to avoid the tax man and trade it for items, borrow against it, the options are almost unlimited the way you can fork the tax man with stock options.

Actually, the national sales tax eliminates all that. It makes the achievers EQUAL with the poorest of the poor. They ALL pay their FAIR SHARE. Get rid of the income tax (which also means overturning the 16th Amendment) and those stock option deals disappear.

Bottom line, (which you apparently have not figured out yet) there will be those who work harder and smarter than others. The achievers for the most part put in the 90 hour weeks and build companies. The underachievers drop out of high school, learn about how to use a commercial fryer and generally make everybody else miserable with their whining and moaning.

And of course, there are those in between the two extremes. Stephen Moore's plan makes sure even the EXTREME ends of the income curve PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE.

You got to get some more of that kool aid!

With the people sick and unemployed not wanting to play the game anymore gotta drug them.

You certainly have a serious selective memory. Ronald Reagan was responsible for extreme tax cuts and that in turn made it profitable to be a corporate raider.

Corporate raiders killed industry in America because the tax burden on the gains was cut 50%.

So yes guys like Carl Icahn made a killing by killing the likes of TWA that employed thousands of Americans.

But that is ok you seem to live in fantasy land and complete denial of what the Ronald Reagan era truly did to us as a nation. That era killed major manufacturers by the thousands.
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,387
Location
Virginia
Offline
It's kind of a shame that what could be an interesting discussion on the relative merits of a national sales tax vs. an income tax is not really heading that way.
 

CoolBrees

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
346
Reaction score
715
Age
43
Location
Portland, Oregon
Offline
TravelingJim-

I don’t think there is a interesting conversation to be had honestly. The idea that we could replace the trillions we take in based off of earnings and substitute a 1% sales tax is ludicrous. It fails on its face. This thread didn’t devolve because people didn’t truly want to argue the merits. There are no merits outside of bankrupting the country.

if you think this would stop off shoring, It would move it into hyperdrive. Why the world would you have an operation here when you can just sell the product here for a penny on the dollar? Owning real estate would make no sense either. It takes the Incentive out of ownership for God sakes and moves it to credit. To avoid the tax.

I own a businesss and I would hightail it out of here if I don’t have to pay taxes. Just sub out all my work to developing countries and sell on Alibaba. No, income tax breaks on corporations doesn’t stimulate job growth. It stimulates stock buy backs and large equipment purchases that can be depreciated over 40 years. And sorry to spoil the ending but we don’t manufacture a whole lot of big things here anymore. Like air handlers. All this country does is assemble parts anymore.

but by all means I hope he comes back with magenta colored text with RANDOM capitalization and quotes from pedophiles to tell me I’m wrong

ETA- I was only responding to you in the first paragraph Jim. These rest is me Going off on the idea, not you
 

dtc

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
573
Reaction score
902
Age
52
Location
Florida
Offline
Yep that would work out great to screw the tax man with the barter system.
Now, you see, THIS is what makes this forum worth my time. NOW you're starting to think outside the box.


Oh wait you could trade chickens or stocks to beat the tax man.

We'd have to get into a time machine and travel back to the late 19th Century for that idea to work.

Oh snap the filthy rich already do that to beat the tax man.

Admittedly, there ARE some wealthy types who could be called "filthy" rich. A lot of them employ an entire INDUSTRY to avoid paying income taxes. Have a national sales tax and the the "filthy" rich just PAY THE TAX, same as those at the bottom. And they pay their FAIR SHARE according to how much they buy. (See my politically incorrect example of the doctor versus the homeless stewbum).

The real answer is the filthy need to pay the same share over finished done!

There is no better or fairer method than a national sales tax for the achievers to pay their FAIR SHARE, same as the underachievers.
There are certainly better and "fairer" ways of paying tax.

even if there were not, the plan you're discussing is completely unworkable unless you tax enough to cover the amount of income currently generated by the income tax.

Napkin math tells me you'd need to tax nearly 22% on every single transaction. Further, you'd burden small business with the responsibility of collection and payment to the government.

When it comes to the fair aspect, a flat tax on all income is completely regressive and I find that to be completely unfair. And that's before we come to the fact that those who make a comfortable living don't spend every dollar they earn so they would be paying a far lower effective tax rate.

In summary, unless you're willing to put a 25% sales tax on everything your proposal fails. And, it's an unfair and regressive tax that puts the burden of funding government more heavily on the young, poor, old and middle class.

In other countries they use a VAT. You might research it.
 

dtc

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
573
Reaction score
902
Age
52
Location
Florida
Offline
It's kind of a shame that what could be an interesting discussion on the relative merits of a national sales tax vs. an income tax is not really heading that way.
Once he's banned I'd be happy to provide as much info as anyone might like on how this could or would not work.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Fact Checkers News Feed

General News Feed

Top Bottom