1,470 people who made more than $1 million in 2009 paid $0 in federal income tax.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're describing the income tax when you talk about incomprehensibility. However, since we levied tariffs and completely funded our government with tariffs for more than 150 years, I don't think its constitutionality is in question. But you never know. I think the tariff system could be made simpler, but I'm not totally convinced it's necessary.

I think the FairTax would be such a boon to our economy, foreign competition would be negligible. But let's implement the FairTax, and if it becomes a problem, it will be much easier to solve than reforming (for the nth time) our monstrous income tax system. Even if tariffs were needed, and even if they were complicated, they could not possibly be more complicated or unfair than our current income tax system.

And thank you for a thoughtful, reasoned response. That's unusual here.

Personally, I would make out like a bandit with the FairTax, so from a greedy perspective I would be inclined to agree. Really, my main concern is the deflective nature of the organization that is proposing it, not the principle of a consumption tax. Perhaps thinking it through and at least answering some questions before ammending the Constitution would be the smart move. It would make me feel better about it anyway.

Tariffs are certainly constitutional. Sifting through personal items, taking inventory of those personal items we purchased, and storing that data on government databases (in order to collect the tariff), certainly screams of an invasion of privacy lawsuit, imho.

[Laz]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

Tarrif, tax, whatever you want to call it, the government still does not have the ability to determine the cost of the item. If you are suggesting a tariff be placed on all T-shirts with a smiley face on them to be x.xx amount, and a seperate tariff be created for every item in the world, it would take millions of pages of documents to support those tariffs and no gov employee could comprehend. Then you would have the expenses involved of having customs open every single package, appraise all the items, code them into an acct system, repackage, issue a tax bill, collect the tax, and so on and so on. Personally, I don't think the government could do all that in an efficient manner to collect $1.73 on a $7.50 smiley face T-shirt.

And I'm not sure if all that would be constitutional either, I could see a right to privacy issue being raised very quickly.

Remember that items imported for resale have no tax since the tax is incurred on the sale to the end user. People will not pay shipping from a foreign country to save a couple of bucks so most of these issues are not going to matter.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by Laz

Leave it up to the recipient to provide the documentation and pay the tax before the item clears customs. Yes there will be some fraud but not enough to matter.

That is just one option. I am sure there are other solutions that can also work. Bottom line this is not a barrier.

Pay the tax to who? Under the FairTax their is no IRS anymore to collect taxes from individuals.

[bladtinzu]

With so much waste and free spending going on in D.C. it doesn't matter what they do untill they tighten up the purse strings on this bunch of inept spend happy drolls...

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by Laz

Remember that items imported for resale have no tax since the tax is incurred on the sale to the end user. People will not pay shipping from a foreign country to save a couple of bucks so most of these issues are not going to matter.

I know, however, if I can buy a rolex that costs $20,000 and spend $49.95 on shipping to avoid a $4,600 tax, where do you think the wealthy are going to purchase their next Rolex?

[waverunner234]

READING ALL OF THIS

I'M JUST LAUGHING .............................

NO ONE HAS A CLUE OF HOW TO MANAGE TAX

[CuteOldGuy]

Explain it to us, O Wise Wave!

And NWA, almost everyone would make out like a bandit under the FairTax. It would be tremendous for our economy.

[CJ7]

entitlement spending would go up with a fair tax and revenue would go down ..

[waverunner234]

I'm sorry COG, not on a public forum.

[nwarounder]

Originally Posted by waverunner234

I'm sorry COG, not on a public forum.

You are weary of discussing how the federal government should tax the people on a public forum?

[Laz]

Originally Posted by nwarounder

I know, however, if I can buy a rolex that costs $20,000 and spend $49.95 on shipping to avoid a $4,600 tax, where do you think the wealthy are going to purchase their next Rolex?

True but those will not be high volume items and a handful of irs guys can transfer to customs to deal with this. Place the burden of documentation on the buyer and simply hold the item until the taxes are paid so that he can get it. The volume will be low since the headache involved in that will make it easier to buy locally. Yes, some people will try to bypass the system but it will not be a large volume and the penalty for getting caught will make it unattractive.

[bladtinzu]

Originally Posted by CJ7

entitlement spending would go up with a fair tax and revenue would go down ..

No shit.. I would see more people in line at the grocery store carrying Coach bags, with nails done, talking on an Iphone, paying with a food stamp card and having the bag guy load up their new Escalade..

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by CJ7

entitlement spending would go up with a fair tax and revenue would go down ..

Explain please.

[waverunner234]

Originally Posted by bladtinzu

No shit.. I would see more people in line at the grocery store carrying Coach bags, with nails done, talking on an Iphone, paying with a food stamp card and having the bag guy load up their new Escalade..

Or better, have it all delivered at home via internet service.

[CuteOldGuy]

You people obviously have no idea what you're talking about. C'mon, Wave! Enlighten us with your wisdumb.