PDA

View Full Version : Good Idea or Bad Idea?


tiedeman
12-17-2004, 06:50 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131693,00.html

I broke it down for me, and I would actually save money, for example I would save approx $2,100 for the year compared to paying in the 15.3%. But of course I don't know if this would apply to small businesses though.

65hoss
12-17-2004, 07:46 AM
In my accounting classes in college we did research on National sales tax and a flat rate sales tax. These have been discussed for many years now. I really don't see them ever getting the balls to do either of these.

lawnman_scott
12-17-2004, 07:55 AM
Unless you make about $300,000 a year it is an idiotic plan. Look at what owning your onw home does for you as far as income taxes, or business use of the home. And we will still be paying fees, licenses, truck plates, ect that we can take off our taxes now.

tiedeman
12-17-2004, 08:18 AM
I do admit that it would be hard when you go shopping (a $50 item would now be $60+ with the taxes included) and I feel that it would decrease the amount of people spending money. I lived in Canada for a little over a year and if I remember correctly they had 3 sets of taxes in Ontario and two in Alberta. The refund checks (GST) that my wife received every quarter was really nice I though.

The upside of it is that you don't ever have to worry about payroll and the horrid April 15th date. The IRS would dissolve possibly saving the government some money.

J&R
12-17-2004, 08:24 AM
National sale tax would do. Stop the LCO that don't file tax or the drug dealer that pays no tax. It would stop the under the table money.

out4now
12-17-2004, 09:42 AM
A consumption tax would stop a lot of that. Sooner or latter you'd have to buy stuff that was taxed. For many items there would be used stuff that would fly under the radar but eventually that well would dry up as the increased demand for those items would raise price levels in used items to rates where people wouldn't be saving that much and would therfore just pay the taxes for new stuff.

lawnman_scott
12-17-2004, 11:59 AM
The upside of it is that you don't ever have to worry about payroll and the horrid April 15th date. The IRS would dissolve possibly saving the government some money.
Not a chance in hell of that. Who is going to collect the sales tax, and enforce it being paid. On the bright side, if you read bobby's thread about the plumber giving a discount for cash, it may be a bigger discount. Or are the politicians trying to make us beleive that services wont be taxed? Maybe not right away but down the road they will.

Norm Al
12-17-2004, 12:33 PM
tiedeman you would save a lot more than that amount,,,,,,you would save a ton in accounting costs and millions in lost sleep worrying about how much they are going to pound you for or worrying about getting audited!

Norm Al
12-17-2004, 12:34 PM
lawnscott the sales tax collectors are already in place and are used to collecting it!

lawnman_scott
12-17-2004, 05:59 PM
lawnscott the sales tax collectors are already in place and are used to collecting it!
How many federal sales tax collectors are there, and what are they doing now? And even if they give it a different name, it will still be the same as the IRS.

LHlandscaping
12-18-2004, 04:55 PM
24% is ridiculous!!! That would also loop all of us business owners into the same group as employees tax wise and forefeit any leadway we have. I say no way. If anthing we need to downsize the government by 1/3 to cut costs. For example start here in PA with these hippie state run organizations such as the Department of Agriculture.

jeffex
12-18-2004, 07:51 PM
It stinks if your a CPA! I am a believer in less government. If I had a retail business and was made responsible for collecting the national sales tax I would want my cut. A processing fee like the lottery does for thier outlets. It wouldn't be fair to make the retailers do the govs colletion for $00. I agree that the untapped underground economy would help pay a share then. I still want all the immigrant workers to help pay for social security.

the scaper
12-18-2004, 09:16 PM
I'm not completly convinced about the national tax but think it might be a good thing to take a serious look at. The collection would still be in our faces but wouldnt we have more of a insite at all times as to what we're going to owe at the end of the year (ie,simpler), kinda like a flat tax? I would think that the percentage would be the thing to keep an eye on , the percentage initialy settled on would be up for an increase by many as soon as it is inacted. And heres another thought for which I expect to catch a measure of flack for... why should the poor be exempted? If I only make a hundred bucks for the year why should I not have to still make a contribution to my country? Excluding of course those who are physically or mentaly impaired. I've had more than my share of beans, ketchup, spam, and raman noodles but I've always paid my share of taxes and would feel worthless if I didnt.

Kelly's Landscaping
12-19-2004, 01:38 AM
I want to see this a 51% vote would be required to cut taxes. But to raise them it should be a super majority 60% its far to easy to raise our taxes and that has to end If the republicans do nothing else they need to eliminate the ease in which liberals can raise taxes in congress. And what ever happened to smaller government. You guys want to balance the budget I can do it in 2 years with no tax increases. Itís very easy and way over due itís called a budget freeze no spending increases for the next 3 years no cost of living no nothing. No sacred cows either everything including social security on the table no spending increases and budget balances its self in no time.

jeffex
12-19-2004, 09:09 AM
I like the idea of a flat tax too! When it was first proposed I figured my taxes at the time and would have saved for the year. The fight for this will come when all the people who's livelyhood depends on the tax code being so vague lobby to keep their paychecks. I can't blame them. The politics of it are in place with Pres. Bush not needing to be re-elected and wanting to take the risk of changing the status quo. What the hell under our current system you could have 10 people do your taxes and have 10 different fugures.

lawnman_scott
12-19-2004, 11:08 AM
I'm not completly convinced about the national tax but think it might be a good thing to take a serious look at. The collection would still be in our faces but wouldnt we have more of a insite at all times as to what we're going to owe at the end of the year (ie,simpler), kinda like a flat tax? I would think that the percentage would be the thing to keep an eye on , the percentage initialy settled on would be up for an increase by many as soon as it is inacted. And heres another thought for which I expect to catch a measure of flack for... why should the poor be exempted? If I only make a hundred bucks for the year why should I not have to still make a contribution to my country? Excluding of course those who are physically or mentaly impaired. I've had more than my share of beans, ketchup, spam, and raman noodles but I've always paid my share of taxes and would feel worthless if I didnt.
So you paid the highest tax rate even by law you were in the lowest tax bracket at the time?

the scaper
12-19-2004, 12:34 PM
So you paid the highest tax rate even by law you were in the lowest tax bracket at the time?
I paid what the government deemed my share at that time, but I paid. I'm just saying that I dont think any able bodied soul should get a free ride.

Soupy
12-19-2004, 12:34 PM
Then we would see threads about how local LCO's are collecting the tax in cash and not claiming it.