Is the Flat Tax flatlined?

[Guns Guns Guns]

Is the Flat Tax flattened?

​

​

"Anyone who is less than very wealthy should be opposed to it as well.​

If you think it's a good idea, try this: Pull out last year's tax returns. Find the total income line. If you made contributions to a retirement plan, cafe plan or had medical insurance deducted pre-tax at work, add those back to the total income. Now, take 25% of that number. Compare that to the Total Tax line on your return, before any credits. ​

​

​

If you're like most taxpayers, it will be quite a bit more than you're paying now. And if it isn't, then congratulations, you're wealthy.​

FYI, a flat tax would have to be levied at about 25% to raise the same revenue that our current graduated income tax does. The current system caps out at 35%. The wealthy would get a massive tax break in most cases, except for those for whom the majority of their income comes from long-term capital gains. When you shift the burden from one group, you must either cut services or move the burden to another group. ​

If the wealthy get a break, the working poor and middle class must take up the slack. The poor wout be tossed into the streets, the middle class would become the new working poor and the wealthy laugh all the way to the bank. What's fair about that??​

And forget the so-called "Fair Tax." It's the most unfair of all, a massively high -- 30%! -- sales tax on everything.

On top of your current state income tax. ​

​

​

​

Buy a $200,000 house and pay $60,000 tax! ​

​

​

​

Or a $20,000 car and pay $6,000 (plus whatever your state fees are now) to get tags for it! ​

​

​

​

There's an extremely good reason that it's been dead in committee since it was introduced: It has zero chance of ever being passed. ​

​

​

​

It sits there so some politicians can use it for their personal gain, i.e. getting re-elected by saying they're trying to "fix the system."​

​

​

​

​

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071120180206AA0BD99​

​

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Is the Flat Tax flattened?

​

​

"Anyone who is less than very wealthy should be opposed to it as well.​

If you think it's a good idea, try this: Pull out last year's tax returns. Find the total income line. If you made contributions to a retirement plan, cafe plan or had medical insurance deducted pre-tax at work, add those back to the total income. Now, take 25% of that number. Compare that to the Total Tax line on your return, before any credits. ​

​

​

If you're like most taxpayers, it will be quite a bit more than you're paying now. And if it isn't, then congratulations, you're wealthy.​

FYI, a flat tax would have to be levied at about 25% to raise the same revenue that our current graduated income tax does. The current system caps out at 35%. The wealthy would get a massive tax break in most cases, except for those for whom the majority of their income comes from long-term capital gains. When you shift the burden from one group, you must either cut services or move the burden to another group. ​

If the wealthy get a break, the working poor and middle class must take up the slack. The poor wout be tossed into the streets, the middle class would become the new working poor and the wealthy laugh all the way to the bank. What's fair about that??​

And forget the so-called "Fair Tax." It's the most unfair of all, a massively high -- 30%! -- sales tax on everything.

On top of your current state income tax. ​

​

​

​

Buy a $200,000 house and pay $60,000 tax! ​

​

​

​

Or a $20,000 car and pay $6,000 (plus whatever your state fees are now) to get tags for it! ​

​

​

​

There's an extremely good reason that it's been dead in committee since it was introduced: It has zero chance of ever being passed. ​

​

​

​

It sits there so some politicians can use it for their personal gain, i.e. getting re-elected by saying they're trying to "fix the system."​

​

​

​

​

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071120180206AA0BD99​

​

Thanks for showing us you once again have little idea with regards to the topic you are trying to discuss. The very fact that you linked us to some anonymous message board posters shows how little you understand.

Flat Tax with standard deduction
It is time for this country to become fiscally responsible. The national debt has increased every fiscal year since 1960. What has happened to the responsibility of the two parties? Both like to point the blame at the other, but in reality neither have been responsible fiscally. It is time for a change. Let’s begin with our tax code. It should be simple enough that the average person can understand it. It should not be filled with thousands of loopholes and deductions. Let us push for the flat tax with a standard deduction and nothing more.

Start with a standard deduction of $30k (adjusted for inflation annually) for each adult and then tax every dollar over that $30k at 20%. This is simple, easy to understand, fair and progressive. It protects the low-income individuals and couples from paying federal income taxes. It provides the middle-income families a lower effective tax rate than the wealthy. This plan would encompass ALL income, including earned income, capital gains and dividend income.

A person making $30k pays an effective rate of 0%.

A person making $50k pays an effective rate of 8%.

A person making $100k pays an effective rate of 14%.

A person making $200k pays en effective rate of 17%.

A person making $1mm pays an effective rate of 19.4%

Everyone has the same deduction and takes it. Which causes the effective tax rate to increase the more you make.

To reduce the national debt I would propose we add an additional temporary bracket to the flat tax. Every dollar over $1 million (again adjusted for inflation annually) would be taxed at 30% rather than 20%. The additional 10% would be mandated to pay down the debt.

It is our responsibility to pay our own way and not dump trillions of dollars of debt on future generations. We need to begin electing leaders that are fiscally responsible. The future of our nation depends upon it. We are our own worst enemy. It will be our ever-increasing debt that leads to our demise. We must act now.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"Americans love the idea that a flat-tax return would allow them to file on a postcard. Problem is, that's nonsense for the 35% to 40% of filers who fill out Schedules C, D and E.

Based on my analysis and on 22 years of tax experience, a flat tax would eliminate no more than five of the 192 federal tax forms and schedules.

Gone would be Schedule A for itemized deductions and Schedule B for interest and dividend income.

But taxpayers would still have to fill out Schedule C (for self-employed profit and loss statements), Schedule D (for capital gains and losses on sales of real estate and business property) and Schedule E (for rental income and expenses, as well as income from partnerships, estates and trusts).

Under a flat tax, fewer than 15% of tax filers--those who fill out the long form and Schedule A or B--would end up with returns significantly simpler than the ones they'll file on April 15.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag/moneymag_archive/1996/03/01/210161/index.htm

Ok.... so you found an individual CPA who thinks tax forms will remain as complex.

1) You found an idiot.... congrats on that
2) Your post has NOTHING to do with the effectiveness of the flat tax with standard deduction proposal I put forth.

That said, if there are NO other deductions, no other loopholes in the tax code, then tax forms in general would indeed be far less cumbersome. It is not surprising that a CPA would try to diminish the benefits of such a system as it would likely eliminate the bulk of his clients.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Troll, the Flat Tax is flat, not because everyone would pay the exact same rate, but because everyone would be taxed based upon their total gross income, and not based upon each of the graduated tax brackets that they fall under (i.e., 0% on first 20k, 31% on final bracket of income, etc.). This would actually generate more revenues, as the wealthy would actually be paying more in taxes.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"As a practical matter, the final level of personal exemption as well as the tax rate percentage would be set by Congress, and would also then be subject to periodic review (read: change).

So? They can make changes to the tax rates NOW as well. They can make changes to the personal exemption amount now as well. We WANT them to be able to make these changes to adapt to the economic conditions as needed. The changes you WON'T see with the flat tax that you DO SEE with the current system is the non-stop loopholes and deductions the idiots in DC keep granting. Which is why we currently have over 70k pages in the tax code.

The personal exemptions were obviously added to the Flat Tax proposals to avoid being labeled as a regressive taxation scheme. Even with the personal exemptions, some critics still regard the flat 17% rate as being much higher for some taxpayers than the current level of personal exemptions and the 10% lowest bracket under the existing tax code.

1) The personal exemption is added to protect the low income families and it makes the system progressive. Clearly you were not clever enough to comprehend the effective tax rate examples that I spelled out for you.
2) If they removed the personal exemption it would not be REGRESSIVE... it would be FLAT.

More importantly, who thinks that Congress will leave a Flat Tax alone once it's passed? I certainly don't. The one, single tax rate could also be changed (read: raised) by any future Congress, and eventually become just like the existing tax code it replaced. I have absolutely no confidence in Congress' ability to refrain from tinkering with a flat tax rate. They will also be able to tinker with what is exempted from the definition of income, the personal exemptions, etc.

Again, this is simply nonsense from you. Congress can and does make changes to the current system too. So nothing changes in that regard. The difference is that with a ONE page tax code, we are going to be able to SEE the changes they make. Their only options would be to change the flat tax rate or the standard deduction amount. They would not be able to change anything else if the flat tax w/standard deduction plan is implemented properly. As for the income that counts, clearly you once again are displaying a reading comprehension problem. As stated, ALL income would be taxed regardless of source.

A 17% or 19% flat tax rate could result in a massive tax cut for high-income taxpayers. In fact, Steve Forbes was criticized for touting the Flat Tax during his presidential run because he would have been one of the main beneficiaries of the tax savings.”

Not if it is implemented properly. Again.... READ the plan I put forth. It RAISES the amount the wealthy pay.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

For some reason our lil troll can't speak for himself, instead he gets weak blogs and keeps reposting them as if they mean something.

Dear lil TROLL.... try discussing the ACTUAL PLAN I PUT ON THIS SITE rather than 'other plans' that may/may not accomplish what mine does. Try thinking for yourself dear lil troll.

 

[NOVA]

A Brief Guide to the Flat Tax
Published on July 7, 2005 by Daniel Mitchell, Ph.D. Backgrounder #1866

There is widespread consensus that the current tax system is a complicated failure that hinders the nation's growth while allowing the politically well-connected to manipulate the system to get special breaks that are not available to average workers and businesses. This is stimulating a great deal of interest in shifting to a simple and fair flat tax. For instance, President George W. Bush has appointed the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform to recommend options for fundamental tax reform,[1] the Department of the Treasury has produced extensive analysis of the flat tax and other reform options,[2] and lawmakers on Capitol Hill are exploring various ways to reform the tax code.

The United States should move quickly to reform its tax system. In a competitive global economy, jobs and capital flow to jurisdictions with better tax law. Traditionally, this process of "tax competition" has benefited the United States, but there is growing evidence that America is falling behind. Nations around the world are lowering tax rates and reforming their tax systems. Indeed, nine countries that were part of the former Soviet Bloc have adopted versions of the flat tax.[3] These pro-growth reforms are yielding impressive results and are a road map for U.S. policymakers.

What Is a Flat Tax?

Unlike the current system, a flat tax is simple, fair, and good for growth. Instead of the 893 forms required by the current system,[4] a flat tax would use only two postcard-sized forms: one for labor income and the other for business and capital income. Unlike the current system, which discriminates based on the source, use, and level of income, a flat tax treats all taxpayers equally, fulfilling the "equal justice under law" principle etched above the main entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building. And unlike the current system, which punishes people for contributing to the nation's wealth, a flat tax would lower marginal tax rates and eliminate the tax bias against saving and investment, thus ensuring better economic performance in a competitive global economy.

There have been several flat tax proposals over the years, all of them based on the pathbreaking proposal developed by two Hoover Institution economists.[5] While no two plans are identical, they all share common features that fix the major flaws of the current Internal Revenue Code. Simplicity and fairness are also natural consequences of these component features of tax reform.

These major features of a flat tax are:

A Single Flat Rate.
Elimination of Special Preferences.
No Double Taxation of Saving and Investment.
Territorial Taxation.
Family-Friendly.
Consumption-Based.

How a Flat Tax Would Work for Individual Taxpayers

Compared to the current system, a flat tax is extremely simple. Households pay tax on their labor income using a 10-line individual postcard. (See Form 1 in Figure 1.) They do not need to worry about reporting dividends, interest, and other forms of business/capital income. Those forms of income are taxed at the business level, thus obviating any need to tax them at the individual level since that would violate the principle of no double taxation.

The individual postcard is so simple that a third-grader could file a family's tax return in about five minutes. Each household would report wage, salary, and pension income on Line 1, which should be easily available from W-2 forms. Using Lines 2-5, the household then would calculate its personal allowance, which is based on family size. The personal allowance on Line 5 is then subtracted from Line 1 to determine taxable income. This amount is reported on Line 6. The amount of tax is calculated on Line 7. This amount is then compared to the amount of tax withheld on Line 8, which then leaves either a tax payment (Line 9) or a refund (Line 10).

How a Flat Tax Would Work for Businesses

Like the individual postcard form, the business postcard form is very simple. (See Form 2 in Figure 1.) All businesses, from Microsoft to a hot dog stand, would play by the same rules. There no longer would be separate tax rules for partnerships, sole proprietorships, S corporations and regular corporations. All business operations in America, whether owned by a U.S. company or owned by a foreign company, would pay tax on the income that they earn in the United States.

Sample Flat Tax Forms

All business taxpayers would put their total receipts on Line 1. They would then add together their labor costs, their input costs, and their investment costs on Lines 2 and 3. These costs are subtracted from gross receipts to determine taxable income on Line 4. Line 5 is the amount of tax that is due. Lines 6-10 exist in case a company either had losses from previous years and now has an opportunity to offset taxable income or has losses this year and needs to "carry them forward" to the next tax year.

The Advantages of a Flat Tax

There are two principal arguments for a flat tax-growth and fairness. Many economists are attracted to the idea because the current tax system, with its high rates and discriminatory taxation of saving and investment, reduces growth, destroys jobs, and lowers incomes. A flat tax would not eliminate the damaging impact of taxes altogether, but by dramatically lowering rates and ending the tax code's bias against saving and investment, it would boost the economy's performance when compared with the present tax code.

However, the most persuasive feature of a flat tax for many Americans is its fairness. The complicated documents, instruction manuals, and numerous forms that taxpayers struggle to decipher every April would be replaced by a brief set of instructions and two simple postcards. This radical reform appeals to citizens who not only resent the time and expense consumed by filing their own tax forms, but also suspect that the existing maze of credits, deductions, and exemptions gives a special advantage to those who wield political power and can afford expert tax advisers.

If enacted, a flat tax would yield major benefits to the nation, including:

Faster Economic Growth.

Instant Wealth Creation.

Simplicity.

Fairness.

An End to Micromanaging and Political Favoritism.

Increased Civil Liberties. ails of each taxpayer's financial assets.[10]

Global Competitiveness.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2005/07/a-brief-guide-to-the-flat-tax

 

[Minister of Truth]

I think at this point, criticisms of the current tax code go beyond being "too complex." With the 17,000 pages and 5.5 million words which currently comprise the US Tax Code, I'd call it criticizing a quagmire.

 

[NOVA]

This Halbert clown has no more insight into the tax system than any other taxpayer....his opinions are just that , his opinions.....

and as such, they have no more validity than any other opinion on the tax system.....

the fact is....the present tax system is nothing but a sham and a scam to drive social schemes in a particular direction.....
the old carrot and stick, reward and punishment to further social programs of those in power at any point in time.....

And its further undeniable proof, that the citizens have lost control of their government.....something should not happen in a democratic society....

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

A progressive tax without deductions would be just as simple to file as a flat tax without them. And you can make the flat tax just as complicated by adding them in. The actual number of rates has practically nothing to do with the complexity of our tax code.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I think at this point, criticisms of the current tax code go beyond being "too complex." With the 17,000 pages and 5.5 million words which currently comprise the US Tax Code, I'd call it criticizing a quagmire.

fyi.... the tax code, plus tax regulations, plus IRS rulings exceeds 71,000 pages as of the end of 2010

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

To reduce the national debt I would propose we add an additional temporary bracket to the flat tax. Every dollar over $1 million (again adjusted for inflation annually) would be taxed at 30% rather than 20%. The additional 10% would be mandated to pay down the debt.

Yeah, but you've got to have broad political consensus for deficit reduction. Otherwise, one party throws the other out of power, and everythings out of whack. And you have to ensure that the money isn't seen by congress as just additional free money. Which is how it's going to see it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

A progressive tax without deductions would be just as simple to file as a flat tax without them. And you can make the flat tax just as complicated by adding them in. The actual number of rates has practically nothing to do with the complexity of our tax code.

True.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

www.i'malwaysrightbutcan'tthinkformyself.com

yours truly,

legion

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

In New York, Lieutenant Governor Ravitch proposed a broad spending reform that would have stabilized state finances. It including a great deal of spending cuts, and 2 billion a year in optional temporary borrowing if the legislature decided it needed it. The senate then rejected the entire plan because of the borrowing, and proceeded to balance the budget by a series of gimmicks that essentially amounted to borrowing (like selling public assets to private companies for a one-time profit, and then having to pay rent on them forever-more). The Assembly proceeded to add 2 billion in borrowing to their budget, and then ignore everything else.

That's how democracy works in America. A temporary deficit reduction tax works only if you can convince everyone else that that's what it's there for.

 

[NOVA]

The flat tax makes a false claim of greater simplicity. For most people who work for wages, pay by withholding, and fill out 1040A or 1040EZ the income tax is already simple.


It's complicated for self-employed people because they have to keep track of their business expenses, but that won't change under a flat tax.


It's complicated for higher income people, some of whom derive income from investments as well as work, because they want to take advantage of all the loopholes written into the law that ensure that they pay considerably less in taxes than the rate schedule might suggest.


When legislation actually comes to the floor of Congress, special interests are going to try to get the lower flat rate without sacrificing their tax preferences that they worked so hard to get enacted in the first place.


atline.jpg[/CENTER]

[/COLOR]

Thats nonsense....you have no clue what any final law would even look like...don't talk so fuckin' stupid....

for most practical purposes, their would be no, or very little "deductions" as we know them today....tax would be imposed on ALL income , regardless of its origin....no loopholes, no special treatment for some that didn't' apply to all.....thats the whole purpose of a flat tax......