A Taxation/Constitutional question.

[SebastianHolt]

Nobody can seem to find anything worth cutting -- not even DOGE could.

we need to cut pensions and welfare!

 

[SebastianHolt]

we need to convert our prisons into a work prison where prisoners pay off their debt and earn their keep

 

[HisArpy]

I provided the link, I expect you, of all people, to at least research it before rambling on in ignorance.

Dude, the Fair Tax is the same thing as the current tax program. It's just a name change with some minor fiddling with the brackets/deductions/credits. It will NOT reduce anyone's taxes. Not one cent.

Getting pissy because someone pointed it out only shows you're invested in the NAME not the outcome.

 

[HisArpy]

Yes, it would be legally possible. It's an indirect tax, similar to excise taxes, and those have been legal since the ratification of the Constitution. The only requirement would be that it be uniform throughout the United States. You couldn't constitutionally assess a 10% VAT in New York and a 5% one in South Carolina.

In today's lingo, it's called a tariff.

 

[HisArpy]

we need to cut pensions and welfare!

Those programs exist as a safety net to those who are unfortunate and find themselves unable to work because of disability or age.

we need to convert our prisons into a work prison where prisoners pay off their debt and earn their keep

This is a HORRIFIC idea. You do not give the power of revenue generation to those who have the power and authority to imprison anyone. Well, not unless you want the Sheriff of Nottingham to be a real person instead of fictional character.

 

[SebastianHolt]

Those programs exist as a safety net to those who are unfortunate and find themselves unable to work because of disability or age.



This is a HORRIFIC idea. You do not give the power of revenue generation to those who have the power and authority to imprison anyone. Well, not unless you want the Sheriff of Nottingham to be a real person instead of fictional character.

It's a brilliant idea; the current leaders lack the balls to do it. If someone is in prison, make them work.
Government workers do not need their pension; they have Social Security. Let's face it, if you want a cush job where you don't do any work, have no accountability, and are not responsible, then get a government job

 

[bijedi]

Can anybody answer the question: Would it be constitutionally allowable for a US Federal government to introduce a sales tax, for example, in the form of a Value added tax (VAT)?

Sales taxes such as VAT are generally the province of the separate states but is there any legal impediment to the Feds acting similarly.

I do not want to know whether a Federal Sales tax would be either a good or a bad thing, just whether it might be legally possible. Thanks.

Apparently, no one on this board can read.

To answer your question, yes. Congress can legislate a sales tax or value added tax.

Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 1:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 4:
No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

Since a sales tax or a value added tax would be an indirect tax, Congress could enact either or both and neither would be subject to apportionment.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Dude, the Fair Tax is the same thing as the current tax program. It's just a name change with some minor fiddling with the brackets/deductions/credits. It will NOT reduce anyone's taxes. Not one cent.

Getting pissy because someone pointed it out only shows you're invested in the NAME not the outcome.

It's not even close to the current program..........NOT CLOSE.

 

[Lazaran]

How about regulating compensation of the ultra rich / CEOs:

Search Assist

The U.S. does not regulate CEO compensation as strictly as some other nations due to different cultural perspectives on wealth accumulation, tax policies, and the belief in market-driven pay structures. This results in American CEOs often earning significantly more than their counterparts in Europe and other regions, where regulations may cap salaries relative to employee wages.



Food for thought…



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[HisArpy]

It's not even close to the current program..........NOT CLOSE.

It's the same thing at its core. You earn money, the government takes a portion of it based on a percentage table. A percentage table that is subject to change at the whim of Congress. Just like the current tax system.

You seem to think they're different but at the core, it's the same thing. Beyond that there are only 2 truly different tax schemes. One is socialism where the government takes 100% of what is earned and returns a percentage back to the worker. The second is something that's never been tried, a Constitutional tax whereby the Constitution sets the percentage of tax from earned income without deductions, credits, or offsets, and disallows all other forms of taxation regardless of type or name.

Other than those 2 alternatives, all tax schemes are exactly the same; you make, they take at whatever rate they want to set and hand out exemptions and benefits to those whose lobby pays the most into reelection campaigns. That you approve of one style of this type of taxation merely because you like the name changes nothing. They are all the same.

 

[HisArpy]

It's a brilliant idea; the current leaders lack the balls to do it. If someone is in prison, make them work.
Government workers do not need their pension; they have Social Security. Let's face it, if you want a cush job where you don't do any work, have no accountability, and are not responsible, then get a government job

This was the norm in the South during the 40's, 50's and 60's. A lot of innocent people were convicted and sent to prison just because the State needed revenue. That the counties got a kickback from the revenue earned didn't help at all. Not to mention all the innocents who died in prison because of the intolerable working and living conditions.

It was a horrible idea then, because it's totally corrupt from the onset, and it's an even worse idea now because we know better than to do it again.

 

[Rebel5soul]

It's the same thing at its core. You earn money, the government takes a portion of it based on a percentage table. A percentage table that is subject to change at the whim of Congress. Just like the current tax system.

You seem to think they're different but at the core, it's the same thing. Beyond that there are only 2 truly different tax schemes. One is socialism where the government takes 100% of what is earned and returns a percentage back to the worker. The second is something that's never been tried, a Constitutional tax whereby the Constitution sets the percentage of tax from earned income without deductions, credits, or offsets, and disallows all other forms of taxation regardless of type or name.

Other than those 2 alternatives, all tax schemes are exactly the same; you make, they take at whatever rate they want to set and hand out exemptions and benefits to those whose lobby pays the most into reelection campaigns. That you approve of one style of this type of taxation merely because you like the name changes nothing. They are all the same.

Again, read the damn link.

It does away with payroll taxes.
It does away with taxes on income.
It has a prebate cooked in to address the regressive aspects.
It is a sales tax pure and simple. If you don't buy anything, you don't pay any taxes.

 

[HisArpy]

Again, read the damn link.

It does away with payroll taxes.
It does away with taxes on income.
It has a prebate cooked in to address the regressive aspects.
It is a sales tax pure and simple. If you don't buy anything, you don't pay any taxes.

Sure. I believe you. Really, I do.

OTOH, what's in your plan that stops the gov from implementing income taxes? What's in your plan that prevents the gov from raising taxes any time they want to fund pork? Your "prebate" does nothing to stop this because it's a simple line item to remove.

Then there's the fact that right now some consumers in some states are already paying 12% in sales tax. Now add a Fed VAT (your plan by its true name) of 30% on top of that and ask yourself what that's going to do to the economy.

And do you really think there isn't going to be carve outs for certain goods like there is now? And, once you start excluding certain goods from tax, what's that going to do to the rate for other goods that are taxed?

Your plan is the same old plan by a different name. It comes with the same old problems and doesn't solve anything.

Which means we're left with those 2 other choices (because no government is going to go with the 3rd option of not taxing anything).

 

[AlexBailey]

The idea that I have to pay….the bank 3x the purchase price over 30 years ….

You have a mortgage with a 9.4 APR?

 

[Rebel5soul]

Sure. I believe you. Really, I do.

OTOH, what's in your plan that stops the gov from implementing income taxes? What's in your plan that prevents the gov from raising taxes any time they want to fund pork? Your "prebate" does nothing to stop this because it's a simple line item to remove.

Then there's the fact that right now some consumers in some states are already paying 12% in sales tax. Now add a Fed VAT (your plan by its true name) of 30% on top of that and ask yourself what that's going to do to the economy.

And do you really think there isn't going to be carve outs for certain goods like there is now? And, once you start excluding certain goods from tax, what's that going to do to the rate for other goods that are taxed?

Your plan is the same old plan by a different name. It comes with the same old problems and doesn't solve anything.

Which means we're left with those 2 other choices (because no government is going to go with the 3rd option of not taxing anything).

Blah, blah, blah, ba, blah.

All of those "what if's" have been answered. It's all in their website.

 

[HisArpy]

Blah, blah, blah, ba, blah.

All of those "what if's" have been answered. It's all in their website.

The game is rigged. You thinking it isn't doesn't change that observation.

 

[ishtat]

Yes, it would be legally possible. It's an indirect tax, similar to excise taxes, and those have been legal since the ratification of the Constitution. The only requirement would be that it be uniform throughout the United States. You couldn't constitutionally assess a 10% VAT in New York and a 5% one in South Carolina.

Thank you for your reply. I have asked this question before and yours is the first direct response I have received. Most people prefer to give their opinions on the unfairness of taxes generally; that is fair enough and some interesting comment has been made. My interest is because I think that some sort of 'inflation proof' Federal consumption tax is inevitable, regressive - certainly, unfair - certainly, but still inevitable.

Why? because since the Citizens United case, both major parties have become hugely dependent on big business to fund their election campaigns. They will avoid increases in income and profit taxes to ensure the corporate dollars keep flowing.

A VAT type of tax is cheap to collect and rises with every price increase. It has produced rivers of cash where introduced and it is inevitable that at some point in the medium term that the USA will succumb to the requirement to service its burgeoning debt and the miserable failure of all parties to reduce expenditure.

 

[BDA73]

Super Bowl players money taxed. Sam Darnold taxed until he lost money playing in SB. Is this a great country or what.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nf...r-bowl-winnings/ar-AA1W0qoH?ocid=BingNewsSerp

Is not 100% accurate. He is being taxed for the days working in the state of California which includes the week of the Super Bowl and the two other games played against the 49ers and the Rams. # of days worked in California over 365 and then multiply that by his total income for the year.

 

[Bray123]

Taxation is theft, plain and simple. People should be getting the government to remove taxes, not come up with new ones.

It never fails to amaze me on how people screech about mega wealthy businesses and corporations that get wealthy via consensual transactions with customers, but then turn around arguing how the government should take more money from people by force.

The only thing for you to do is to become a billionaire. Then you don't need to pay taxes.

 

[Sir_Timo_Volodok]

He is being taxed for the days working in the state of California which includes the week of the Super Bowl and the two other games played against the 49ers and the Rams. # of days worked in California over 365 and then multiply that by his total income for the year.

When I lived in Washington (no income tax) and worked remotely for an Oregon employer (income tax) I had to track the days I was physically in Oregon. Those were the days I got taxed. Oregon's formula is more convoluted, you're supposed to count the total days you actually worked, not including weekends, PTO, or other days off, then divide into that the number you were in Oregon. The resulting percentage is what you claim. So if you work 26 days in Oregon out of 260 total, your tax liability is 10%

I always claimed 365 days worked because it lowered the percentage of "in Oregon" days and I'm salaried anyway, I almost always end up "working" on the weekend, even if it's just to answer a few e-mails.

I would imagine for an NFL player they're doing practices and working out under the supervision of team personnel when it's not game day, and if that happens in California they're presumably counting those as working days.

My record for tax returns in one year was five. Federal, Louisiana, Minnesota, Oregon, and California. That was tedious af. Imagine a baseball player with 81 games on the road in dozens of different States...

 

[Wilson23]

we need to convert our prisons into a work prison where prisoners pay off their debt and earn their keep

You really ARE an idiot, aren't you?

 

[Holy_Seduction]

How shall be police, schools, infrastructrure, military etc be paid?

That’s a problem for the working class to resolve [i.e., to fund]. Will people never realize that taxation in any measure is an insult to the dignity inherent to wealth?!

 

[Holy_Seduction]

we need to convert our prisons into a work prison where prisoners pay off their debt and earn their keep

Correction: we need prison work as a source of free labor. We also need it to put downward pressure on the wages of workers producing essentially the same product outside the penal system.

 

[Venefica]

@Holy_Seduction

LOL, you are a troll.

 

[Holy_Seduction]

@Holy_Seduction

LOL, you are a troll.

You do understand the concept of sarcasm, I take it?

At any rate, I’ve been called worse.

Edit: Spelling.