The Fair Tax Discussion

The FairTax Book

FairTax:
The Truth:

I use the Amazon Link Generator

My initial and consistent response to the majority of criticisms is - Please read the books for better answers than I can give. I hope my explanations help to clarify some things. I appreciate the comments and welcome any more questions.
------------------------------
In response to MarkDC in the Duel module above:
If you base validity of a system upon "absurdities", then the balance clearly falls upon the side of the FairTax. Nothing is more absurd than our current system of taxation.

The government "paying its own taxes" is addressed in more detail in FairTax: The Truth. The federal government consumes goods and services just like anyone else. Not paying taxes on these gives the government an unfair advantage over private industries making those businesses essentially subsudize their competition.
If the government can't be a taxpayer to itself then it seems that it should not now tax the wages of it's own employees. Is that not the same concept of "writing the check to itself." I'm sure there are many instances of the government paying it's own taxes already.

"A better way is to have all income types pay the same rates." This is EXACTLY what the FairTax does... bro. It rewards hard work and good business decisions by taxing consumption irrespective of wealth.

------------------------------
Response to affiliateelitediscount in the Duel module above:
I'm not a legal scholar, but the common definition that I found of Capitation Tax is:

An assessment levied by the government upon a person at a fixed rate regardless of income or worth.

Since it is a tax upon the individual, and not upon merchandise, a capitation tax is frequently labeled a head tax. A poll tax is a capitation tax. (italics mine.)

Being a tax upon consumption, the FairTax is clearly, by definition, not a capitation tax.

Not understanding the minutia of arcane tax law doesn't preclude me from assuming that the repeal of the 16th amendment is not an argument against the FairTax, but possibly just about one aspect of its implemantation. If the 16th amendment "did not change or give any more power to the government regarding taxes then (sic) previously allowed", then what would be the point of repealing it?

If you read the books you'll see that the authors point out the fact that even the IRS' own help and support people don't know the correct answers a great deal of the time. Understanding the tax code "as it is written" therefor is one of the best arguments against it. It is not even understood by the people who are in charge of implementing it.

The rest of your comments actually provide excellent arguments for the FairTax as well.
** The FairTax shifts taxes away from "income or money one receives" taxing consumption rather than wealth.
** We clearly recognize the need to pay taxes. And the FairTax "levied across the board" would be precisely, again by definition, the fairest way. The FairTax was designed specifically with "understanding and clarity" as its underlying purpose.

------------------------------
"The Fair Tax proposes to shift taxes around, not reduce taxes one little bit (not even a little!). The Fair Tax proposal institutes welfare for all (prebates). Neither of these ideas is a net improvement. The federal government needs to reduce spending and we need to roll back taxes (and not replace them with a National Retail Sales Tax)."

Thane Eichenauer posted the comment above to the FairTax Book lens and I wanted to respond and explain why these common criticisms are inaccurate and invalid.

"The Fair Tax proposes to shift taxes around..." The only shifting of taxes by the FairTax is shifting it from taxing wealth to taxing consumption. A much more fair process. It doesn't modify the current tax system: it replaces it.
"...not reduce taxes one little bit (not even a little!)." The FairTax is not designed to reduce taxes. It is designed to fund the government at the current levels. It will reduce the tax burden most greatly for those with the lowest income levels and the middle class.
"The Fair Tax proposal institutes welfare for all (prebates)." The prebate untaxes all US citizens up to the level of purchasing the basic neccessities of life. ALL citizens; that's fair. And the prebate makes the FairTax progressive. The government should not have a claim to the first dollars spent in a household that go towards meeting the basic necessities for that houshold. Welfare is redistribution of wealth, ie siezing money from one group in order to give it to another.
"The federal government needs to reduce spending and we need to roll back taxes..." The FairTax is not meant to address either one of these areas. And this is plainly stated in all of the literature. Reducing government spending, as the authors say, is a different kettle of fish. Criticizing the FairTax for not reducing spending is like boycotting the Celtics for not beating the Patriots. It is just not a valid criticism.

FairTax Internet Seminar

Neal Boortz hosted a FREE internet seminar, or Webinar, on March 6 to answer your questions about the FairTax. Find out more by taking the FairTax Webinar now!