Your ideal tax structure…what is it?

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Your ideal tax structure…what is it?

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:54 pm

I’m aware that this is a site mostly made up of conservatives, but that’s the sort of response I’m looking for. What is the ideal tax structure/code/whatever, in your opinion? Flat tax across the board, lower taxes for everyone, etc. Tell me what and why.
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri


Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:34 pm

A flat personal tax rate with a high standard deduction and very few other deductions. This is a progressive tax system that does not discourage making more money and minimizes the value and ability of cheating.

Say we go with a 20% tax rate above $30k, the effective tax rate would be the folllowing.

Below $30k - 0% (No tax liability)
$40k - 5%
$60k - 10%
$120k - 15%

I would also like to eliminate the corporate income tax. I would be fine with allocating the income to each of the shareholders. If a company had income of $5 per share, then you report $5 per share on your personal income tax return. IRAs, pensions, etc, would still be tax exempt. Foreign shareholders pay income tax without a deduction.

I like the concept of the fair tax and some of the other ideas, but I think the headaches of changing the basic system to great. A simple system like this would raise the money necessary in a fair way. It would not require a tremendous waste of money on lawyers and accountants to avoid taxes. It would encourage and not discourage investment in the U.S. like the high corporate tax rates currently do.

I would also like to see a "deficit penalty" built into the tax code. Say we add a 5% deficit penalty to everyones tax rate, which will be refunded the next year if there is a surplus in the Federal budget. That way every single tax payer has a vested interest in balancing the budget, which is defined based on the 20% rate and not the 25% that is collected. If they do, then everybody gets 20% of the taxes they paid the year before back as a refund. If they run a deficit, then it comes directly out of your refund check and not some unknown person in the future.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16040
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:41 pm

See, taxes are one area where I consider myself conservative (and a reason I’m still not 100% certain I’m voting for Obama). I would love to see a flat tax rate, it is more “fair” and it doesn’t discourage going over a certain line with your income. The only problem (and I think you mentioned this also) would be the hassle of trying to decide what’s fair. Lowering taxes on the upper end takes quite a bit of money away from the government, so they logical way to make this money up seems to be raising the taxes for those with lesser incomes. What was your solution to making up the lost government income that is lost by lowering taxes on the wealthy? I might have just missed it.
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:03 pm

Generally speaking lowering the tax rate, does not lower government revenue, especially at the high end. They simply pay lawyers and accounts to get around paying taxes. A lower tax rate lowers the value of getting out of paying taxes, so they simply pay the taxes and not the lawyers and accountants. Also, simplifying the tax code (less deductions) makes it harder to cheat.

Reducing the corporate tax rate would result in a huge influx of capital investments in the U.S. which would result in a huge flood of tax revenue to the government.

However, the base rate would be set such that the projected income under the new system is the same as the old. Whether it's 15% or 18% or 22%, I don't know.

I would suggest the way to implement the system would be freeze the current tax code and anybody that wants to continue filing under the current system can keep doing that. If you want to file under the new system, you can do that, but once you do that then you must always file under the new system.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16040
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby rmh » Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:09 pm

Problem with a flat tax is that it's regressive. Lower income folks pay a higher percentage of their income for necessities, a loaf of bread is the same price for someone making $30K/year as it is for someone making $230K. A flat tax works the same way. The guy at 30 has less left over.
Would you get rid of the interest and taxes deduction for your residence?
2013 Totals
1 2003 Ford Focus (harvested by a 6 point whitetail)
1 1991 Chevy Lumina (harvested by a PT Cruiser)
rmh
hunter
 
Posts: 1702
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2007 3:50 pm
Location: On the Chesapeake

Postby seastreet » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:47 pm

I personally like the FairTax. It's a consumption tax that would encourage a boom in business and personal savings. Prices on end consumer goods and services would not change, but businesses would eliminate all embedded taxes passed up the line to the consumer, and then replaced with the FairTax.

For more details, see... http://www.fairtax.org
Glimmerjim wrote: I may be slow but I'm dumb!
User avatar
seastreet
hunter
 
Posts: 1686
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:56 pm
Location: Downeast, NC

Postby semo88 » Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Interesting. Even if I were a full-fledged supporter, I don’t think I’d wear on of those ballcaps around :biggrin: .
semo88
hunter
 
Posts: 704
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 6:11 pm
Location: Missouri

Postby goodkarmarising » Tue Oct 07, 2008 8:35 pm

x
Last edited by goodkarmarising on Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
goodkarmarising
hunter
 
Posts: 10874
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:57 am
Location: Leavenworth, KS and all thru MO

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:22 am

rmh wrote:Problem with a flat tax is that it's regressive. Lower income folks pay a higher percentage of their income for necessities, a loaf of bread is the same price for someone making $30K/year as it is for someone making $230K. A flat tax works the same way. The guy at 30 has less left over.
Would you get rid of the interest and taxes deduction for your residence?
I'm not sure what your point is. Of course, the guy with $30k has less left over. He makes less. Should he have the same left over as the guy making $100k. I don't get your point. You don't think someone can survive on $30k that is income tax free (still pay social security because we don't want to make that a bigger welfare program then it already is).

If you are talking about the fair tax (consumption tax) plan that is fairly popular. Everybody is rebated the tax they pay on the minimum necessities, so they are effectively paying no tax below a certain income level. I like this plan as well. It's probably a much better plan. However, I think the headache of transitioning would be greater and if the will to change the system actually existed, we could more easily radically simplify the income tax system. Of course, that wouldn't prevent it from evolving back into the current mess.

I would get rid of virtually ever deduction. That includes for your house. However, as I said, you could continue to file under the old code, if that was to your benefit. Therefore, nobody would be worse off as a result of going to the new system. You figure it out the old way and the new way and which ever one is less that is what you owe. The caveat being that once you file under the new simple code, you must use that code forever. Eventually, the old code would go away.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16040
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Postby Rat Creek » Wed Oct 08, 2008 1:05 pm

I like either the fair tax or flat tax, though I prefer the fair tax.

And I would eliminate all deductions. If you have a boat load of kids…your responsibility. Huge mortgage…good luck with that. If you are a saver…all the better for you.

Prepare for the cold water now. This has no chance because the elites in Washington use the tax code to drum up votes (hate the rich stuff) and for social engineering. It is their primary weapon. It plays on our lowest feelings of envy.

If a candidate stated they would tax the top earners at 90% or more, or heck just execute the top 1% of earners, a lot of people would love that, even though it won’t do a thing for the lower and middle classes. It plays to human nature’s dark side of envy.
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 4387
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests