• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Fed Sales Tax?

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
In Europe they call this a Value Added Tax and it is built into the price of pretty much everything you can buy.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
I think the rate is high, but more fair overall.
The problem is it becomes a hidden tax because it is built into the retail price of the item.

When I'm in the EU or UK you pay the price on the sticker. But here in the US we pay the price + the added sales tax. So we look at the receipt and we see the actual tax amount AND we see the price of the item. Tax is added. When it is hidden and built into the price it is easier for the politicians to increase it and we won't really notice as it creeps up.

So a 15% tax becomes 17% and then 20% and then 30% . . . and all we see is that the retailer is charging us more, and more and more.

But really the politicians are charging us more, and more and more.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
The problem is it becomes a hidden tax because it is built into the retail price of the item.

When I'm in the EU or UK you pay the price on the sticker. But here in the US we pay the price + the added sales tax. So we look at the receipt and we see the actual tax amount AND we see the price of the item. Tax is added. When it is hidden and built into the price it is easier for the politicians to increase it and we won't really notice as it creeps up.

So a 15% tax becomes 17% and then 20% and then 30% . . . and all we see is that the retailer is charging us more, and more and more.

But really the politicians are charging us more, and more and more.
Truth be told there already exists such "hidden" federal taxes in just about everything we buy here. Business do not pay taxes. They collect them from employees and customers for the government.
The 50% Social security they pay on your wages is actually right of the back of the employee's efforts. The employer doesn't "contribute" for you, they just give what they could give you to the government.

Luxury taxes and excise taxes on jewelry, liquor, tobacco products and expensive vehicles, all added to costing, and collected for the gubmit.

Giving it a different name, and yet hiding it inside the cost of producing goods and services, is still deceitful theft by a money hungry government that has become far too large for our own good.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
No argument from me on your points. But there has been talk, over several recent years, of adopting a VAT style tax on top of all the other hidden taxes. We pay excise tax on luxury goods like automobile tires. There are many points of hidden collection. There are business licenses, that add to the cost of doing business. There are occupational licenses that raise the cost of acquiring jobs. There are regulations installed by unelected bureaucrats on how property is used, worker regulations, commercial driving, etc etc etc, all of which are 'taxes' hidden into the prices of goods. So this would simply make it worse.
 

chowderman

Well-known member
one proposal was a 30% VAT - but eliminating all income and other Federal taxes.
I'd point out that European countries all pay a VAT (% varies by country) and they all still have income taxes - most high, some outrageously high.

a VAT applied to everything for everybody will never be sold as "fair" - it's impact on low income is significantly more than higher income persons - i.e. a "regressive" tax....
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
The problem is it becomes a hidden tax because it is built into the retail price of the item.

When I'm in the EU or UK you pay the price on the sticker. But here in the US we pay the price + the added sales tax. So we look at the receipt and we see the actual tax amount AND we see the price of the item. Tax is added. When it is hidden and built into the price it is easier for the politicians to increase it and we won't really notice as it creeps up.

So a 15% tax becomes 17% and then 20% and then 30% . . . and all we see is that the retailer is charging us more, and more and more.

But really the politicians are charging us more, and more and more.
it would have to transparent and the rate couldn't change. It is more fair and cost effective overall
no more IRS
a small rate such as 15% would do it, when everyone is paying it, not just the top 5% of the country.
It even gets, drug dealers, under the table workers etc. Anyone spending retail would have to contribute.
If everything is locked in and transparent, it would be the best tax system.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Or a basic flat tax, you make $100.00 you send in $15.00, thats it. no deductions filing or anything else.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
No argument from me on your points. But there has been talk, over several recent years, of adopting a VAT style tax on top of all the other hidden taxes. We pay excise tax on luxury goods like automobile tires. There are many points of hidden collection. There are business licenses, that add to the cost of doing business. There are occupational licenses that raise the cost of acquiring jobs. There are regulations installed by unelected bureaucrats on how property is used, worker regulations, commercial driving, etc etc etc, all of which are 'taxes' hidden into the prices of goods. So this would simply make it worse.
At least the King of England named the tax and taxes which brought about the Revolution.

License fees are not taxes per say. They are collected to support the regulatory apparatus involved via their inception. The purpose being to fund the new regulatory body without burden to the taxpayer.
Luxury taxes on liquor and tobacco are known via the stamp on the bottle and packages. The consumer knows.

Still, they are burdensome and often rather deceitful. Putting a fancy new name on it to justify the existence doesn't really change that.

I often tell people our overall tax burden on the average working family is close to 60% of what they for their labours. With two income households, that is a lot of money going to our governments.

So now you know why women in the sixties and seventies were shamed into joining the work force instead of raising our children.

And yet, 30 years later, our government says it's not enough. My question,,,,: What is?

And, when will that ever happen?
 
Last edited:

EastTexFrank

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
In the UK, VAT is presently at 20% but ....

"A value-added tax (VAT), known in some countries as a goods and services tax (GST), is a type of tax that is assessed incrementally. It is levied on the price of a product or service at each stage of production, distribution, or sale to the end consumer."

As you can see, the VAT is not just a flat 20% tax to the end user. They can be paying for that 20% tax on every stage of the production and that adds up to a damned sight more that 20% on the final item.
 

chowderman

Well-known member
"full" VAT is not imposed at every stage. it is imposed on the _added_ value at each stage.
there are many web sites that explain how it is calculated, with examples.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
"full" VAT is not imposed at every stage. it is imposed on the _added_ value at each stage.
there are many web sites that explain how it is calculated, with examples.
I guess that would depend on some appointed bureaucrat's definition of what determines a value added "stage" would it not?

How many know our founding fledgling government's original method of generating revenues?

Whiskey taxes and import duties. Since we now import more than we export, and in fact import what we used to produce ourselves, would it not make sense to look at reviving that system before place a burden on domestic producers?

Whilst this would not eliminate current taxes based on wages and property values, it would not place more burden on domestic manufacturers. At the same time making domestic producers more competitive.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Where did VAT tax get mentioned in the video? Its a national sales tax not a VAT tax. If the national sales tax replaced the current IRS tax system and was set at a realistic percentage that could not be changed, it would be a great thing in my book.
 

EastTexFrank

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Where did VAT tax get mentioned in the video? Its a national sales tax not a VAT tax. If the national sales tax replaced the current IRS tax system and was set at a realistic percentage that could not be changed, it would be a great thing in my book.

In the UK, VAT replaced the national sales tax when the country joined the European Union. It was initially set at 10% but was almost immediately changed to 8% on most items and 12-1/2% on luxury items such as gasoline, tobacco and such. It now stands at 20%.

I don't disagree with you if it was an either-or choice, VAT or income tax, but it is usually not. It is usually VAT/sales tax in addition to income tax.

I think that a VAT/national sales tax replacing income tax could be a VERY good thing if certain restrictions were placed on it.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
In the UK, VAT replaced the national sales tax when the country joined the European Union. It was initially set at 10% but was almost immediately changed to 8% on most items and 12-1/2% on luxury items such as gasoline, tobacco and such. It now stands at 20%.

I don't disagree with you if it was an either-or choice, VAT or income tax, but it is usually not. It is usually VAT/sales tax in addition to income tax.

I think that a VAT/national sales tax replacing income tax could be a VERY good thing if certain restrictions were placed on it.
Yep thats the whole trick, is making sure there is not some language in the law that allows a bait and switch situation later on, where it gets supported at a rational rate then a couple years down the road it starts to incrementally increase year over year.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Yep thats the whole trick, is making sure there is not some language in the law that allows a bait and switch situation later on, where it gets supported at a rational rate then a couple years down the road it starts to incrementally increase year over year.
What would be a "rational rate?"

Isn't it about time we Americans stop accepting such terminology "logic" with the application of more tax burdens?
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
What would be a "rational rate?"

Isn't it about time we Americans stop accepting such terminology "logic" with the application of more tax burdens?
I think if everyone was paying, not just the top 20% it could be done with a flat 10% income tax. Or even less with a national sales tax. Think about how much $$$10% of everything sold in the In the US annually would be with everyone paying. You could only game the system on a very small scale, like a \\barter or trade. It would force illegals, drug dealers etc. to pony up. Its already been said though it would have to be a locked in rate that can not be changed for any reason.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
I think if everyone was paying, not just the top 20% it could be done with a flat 10% income tax. Or even less with a national sales tax. Think about how much $$$10% of everything sold in the In the US annually would be with everyone paying. You could only game the system on a very small scale, like a \\barter or trade. It would force illegals, drug dealers etc. to pony up. Its already been said though it would have to be a locked in rate that can not be changed for any reason.
Sales tax brings black markets.

Income tax. Level percentage. It's should never be the rich should pay their fair share. That number is too plastic and illusionary.
No one who earns a living should get off scott free. Not the poor and most certainly not the rich. And there should be no court or Congress exposed tax returns unless all lawmakers publish theirs.

I wanna know how the House Speaker who earns $295k a year can amass $19 million in 20 years.

BTW, I'm selling a car soon for which Ten years ago paid $15K. It is now worth $12 K. Biden swants me to pay income taxes on what I recovered. Worse, it is a collctor car and may be worth as much as $20K. Despite me putting more than $5 K into the car I may still have to pay an income tax.

Like capital gains on real estate that just cost more because of inflation. Totally wrong.
 
Last edited:

Drifli

Active member
Sales tax brings black markets.

Income tax. Level percentage. It's should never be the rich should pay their fair share. That number is too plastic and illusionary.
No one who earns a living should get off scott free. Not the poor and most certainly not the rich. And there should be no court or Congress exposed tax returns unless all lawmakers publish theirs.

I wanna know how the House Speaker who earns $295k a year can amass $19 million in 20 years.

BTW, I'm selling a car soon for which Ten years ago paid $15K. It is now worth $12 K. Biden swants me to pay income taxes on what I recovered. Worse, it is a collctor car and may be worth as much as $20K. Despite me putting more than $5 K into the car I may still have to pay an income tax.

Like capital gains on real estate that just cost more because of inflation. Totally wrong.
Im assuming you’re talking about crazy Nancy, her husband is a very successful VC and RE investor.

Tax has always been due on profits from car sales, nothing changed.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
Sales tax brings black markets.

Income tax. Level percentage. It's should never be the rich should pay their fair share. That number is too plastic and illusionary.
No one who earns a living should get off scott free. Not the poor and most certainly not the rich. And there should be no court or Congress exposed tax returns unless all lawmakers publish theirs.

I wanna know how the House Speaker who earns $295k a year can amass $19 million in 20 years.

BTW, I'm selling a car soon for which Ten years ago paid $15K. It is now worth $12 K. Biden swants me to pay income taxes on what I recovered. Worse, it is a collctor car and may be worth as much as $20K. Despite me putting more than $5 K into the car I may still have to pay an income tax.

Like capital gains on real estate that just cost more because of inflation. Totally wrong.
Yes the current tax system sucks. It favors super rich corporations and low income. 50% of folks don't pay any tax and a good portion of those get a pretty good refund without ever paying taxes, its called the earned income tax credit. I did some math and it seems a 20% sales tax would closely match the amount of money collected by the IRS in 2021. It would also encourage saving instead of spending every nickel on stupid shit. It makes it equal.
 

Drifli

Active member
Yes the current tax system sucks. It favors super rich corporations and low income. 50% of folks don't pay any tax and a good portion of those get a pretty good refund without ever paying taxes, its called the earned income tax credit. I did some math and it seems a 20% sales tax would closely match the amount of money collected by the IRS in 2021. It would also encourage saving instead of spending every nickel on stupid shit. It makes it equal.
Please share this math with us.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
GDP in 2021 was 21 trillion, IRS collected around 4 trillion, pretty simple math.
 

Drifli

Active member
The problem is 20% doesn’t work for our government, we continue to see the debt ceiling issues year after year. Obviously if Republicans are successful with ending Social security and Medicare the 20% would be plenty.
 

m1west

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
The problem is 20% doesn’t work for our government, we continue to see the debt ceiling issues year after year. Obviously if Republicans are successful with ending Social security and Medicare the 20% would be plenty.
Those are all valid points that need to be addressed or very soon we will resemble Venezuela.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Yes the current tax system sucks. It favors super rich corporations and low income. 50% of folks don't pay any tax and a good portion of those get a pretty good refund without ever paying taxes, its called the earned income tax credit. I did some math and it seems a 20% sales tax would closely match the amount of money collected by the IRS in 2021. It would also encourage saving instead of spending every nickel on stupid shit. It makes it equal.
You miss my point. My fault as I wasn't clear.

The current tax system is so complicated and weighted we the people have no idea what the so called rich are paying. Our info comes from a complacent media.
Much like our voting system we need a tax system we all can see.

Drifti has a point. In truth we don't really know if the rich are favored or how much.

True Democracy would demand it.


Im assuming you’re talking about crazy Nancy, her husband is a very successful VC and RE investor.

Tax has always been due on profits from car sales, nothing changed.
Curiously funny how those numbers led you to Pelosi. Actually, I'm talking about any of our so-called representatives. Many of whom use their insider info to make profitable investments. Self-serving SOB's who were given our trust.

They screwed the system for years. The people did not F!ck up the system. Why would we screw ourselves?
 
Top