Don’t sleep on Ted Cruz. The next five weeks look very, very good for him.

[Jazzhead]

Yep. A 45% tariff on China is raising taxes on Chinese goods.

A 45% tariff on Chinese goods is counterproducive and absurd, if not outright dangerous.

However,  I don't dismiss the traditional idea of tariffs as a means of raising revenue.  What I reject is political tariffs, that single out specific countries we don't happen to like. 

What interests me, for example, is a modest VAT (say, 5 percent) on the value of imported goods or imported components,  regardless of the country of origin.   Then dedicate the proceeds to, say,  subsidizing health insurance for the working poor.  Let the VAT help American workers both by encouraging domestic manufacture (that would avoid the VAT),  and applying the proceeds to help reduce costs now bourne by working Americans.   The key things are to (i) keep the VAT simple and apolitical,  (ii) don't make the VAT so high as to discourage foreign trade or encourage retaliation, and (iii) specifically dedicate the proceeds to assist American workers and the companies that employ them.   

Tariffs are one of the acceptable means of raising revenue granted to the Federal government under the Constitution.   Let's use this traditional tool in a responsible way.     

[Bigun]

A 45% tariff on Chinese goods is counterproducive and absurd, if not outright dangerous.

However,  I don't dismiss the traditional idea of tariffs as a means of raising revenue.  What I reject is political tariffs, that single out specific countries we don't happen to like. 

What interests me, for example, is a modest VAT (say, 5 percent) on the value of imported goods or imported components,  regardless of the country of origin.   Then dedicate the proceeds to, say,  subsidizing health insurance for the working poor.  Let the VAT help American workers both by encouraging domestic manufacture (that would avoid the VAT),  and applying the proceeds to help reduce costs now bourne by working Americans.   The key things are to (i) keep the VAT simple and apolitical,  (ii) don't make the VAT so high as to discourage foreign trade or encourage retaliation, and (iii) specifically dedicate the proceeds to assist American workers and the companies that employ them.   

Tariffs are one of the acceptable means of raising revenue granted to the Federal government under the Constitution.   Let's use this traditional tool in a responsible way.

You had it right in the first sentence and should have stopped right there!  Protectionist tariffs are only justified for short term use in developing countries Outside of that they are ALWAYS counter productive and wind up being just another hidden tax on consumers!

What is desperately needed in this country right now is to throw the entire Marxist, class warfare inducing, progressive income tax system onto the ash heap of history and replace it with the kind of system our founders universally endorsed!  Taxes on articles of consumption only! If we simply did that the resulting economic boom would be many times larger than anyone alive today has ever seen and we would again be the economic leader of the world! China wouldn't stand a chance at trying to compete with us! 

http://fairtax.org
   

[Jazzhead]

What is desperately needed in this country right now is to throw the entire Marxist, class warfare inducing, progressive income tax system onto the ash heap of history and replace it with the kind of system our founders universally endorsed!
   

Well, that includes tariffs!   But I don't support "protectionist" tariffs, but rather a new breed - an apolitical tariff or VAT.   

(I'll have to comment on the Fair Tax  - a sort of national VAT - later when I have the time.)   

[Bigun]

Well, that includes tariffs!   But I don't support "protectionist" tariffs, but rather a new breed - an apolitical tariff or VAT.   

(I'll have to comment on the Fair Tax  - a sort of national VAT - later when I have the time.)

No the fairtax does not include tariffs! And NO european style VAT's PERIOD! That is what we have with the current Corporate income tax in everything but name!

[Jazzhead]

Philosophically,  I've always tended to favor taxing income than taxing consumption.   It just seems fairer to the poor.  Also, the states tend to tax consumption, so a national sales tax would crowd out state revenue sources, and probably force many states to institute or increase their income taxes.

That's one advantage of tariffs -  they don't crowd out the states, since only the national government can impose them.
   
Given the revenue needs of government,  you can't practically avoid taxing income.   But I'm in favor of something like Carson's or Steve Forbes' flat tax with limited or no deductions.   
 

[Bigun]

Philosophically,  I've always tended to favor taxing income than taxing consumption.   It just seems fairer to the poor.  Also, the states tend to tax consumption, so a national sales tax would crowd out state revenue sources, and probably force many states to institute or increase their sales taxes.

That's one advantage of tariffs -  they don't crowd out the states, since only the national government can impose them.
   
Given the revenue needs of government,  you can't practically avoid taxing income.   But I'm in favor of something like Carson's or Steve Forbes' flat tax with limited or no deductions.   
 

You are absolutely and totally uninformed on this subject! Educate yourself before you further embarrass yourself!

https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works-slideshow   http://fairtax.org/faq https://fairtax.org/research-library
 

[Jazzhead]

You are absolutely and totally uninformed on this subject! Educate yourself before you further embarrass yourself!

https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works-slideshow   http://fairtax.org/faq https://fairtax.org/research-library

 I corrected a typo in my post above that may have confused you.   However, I am far from uninformed.  PM me and I'll tell you what I do for a living.     

[Free Vulcan]

The problem with an import VAT is that our trade partners will likely interpret it as a tariff in disguise, not helping us.

I'd rather fund healthcare this way - no withholding of tax money by individulas, or quarterly tax payments to the govt by companies, till health insurance costs are paid first. Allow businesses to created tiered plans, HSA's, buy across state lines, etc.

There is no need for govt to take tax money in, in any way, to solve the healthcare issue beyond people who are uninsurable or have inadequate income. The Dems want govt solutions because they aren't serious about the problem, they just want something to control and leverage us.

[Jazzhead]

The problem with an import VAT is that our trade partners will likely interpret it as a tariff in disguise, not helping us.

Why do you assume that?  I'm advocating an apolitical VAT,  that doesn't distinguish among nations.  The value added by imported labor and materials is taxed at the same 5% whether from Japan or Sierra Leone.   

Perhaps the revenue from the VAT can be used to reduce or eliminate the corporate income tax.  In one fell swoop,  U.S. companies are more competitive,  leading to higher domestic employment.   

[Free Vulcan]

Why do you assume that?  I'm advocating an apolitical VAT,  that doesn't distinguish among nations.  The value added by imported labor and materials is taxed at the same 5% whether from Japan or Sierra Leone.   

Perhaps the revenue from the VAT can be used to reduce or eliminate the corporate income tax.  In one fell swoop,  U.S. companies are more competitive,  leading to higher domestic employment.   

Because I'm not so bigoted to think that China, Mexico, or any other major trading partner is going to look at it like we do. They will see it as a backdoor way of sneaking in a tariff, and they will raise theirs in response. And then it begins.

[Bigun]

Because I'm not so bigoted to think that China, Mexico, or any other major trading partner is going to look at it like we do. They will see it as a backdoor way of sneaking in a tariff, and they will raise theirs in response. And then it begins.

And it is STILL just another HIDDEN tax on consumers at it's base.

[Free Vulcan]

And it is STILL just another HIDDEN tax on consumers at it's base.

That also. We need reduce govt, havie a realistic regulatory framework, and get our taxes straightened out to be competitive in order to reduce business costs, not raise them on other countries and consumers to even things out.

[Bigun]

That also. We need reduce govt, havie a realistic regulatory framework, and get our taxes straightened out to be competitive in order to reduce business costs, not raise them on other countries and consumers to even things out.

Simply getting rid of the current corporate income tax, and all of it's attend compliance costs, would go a LONG way toward that!

[truth_seeker]

Okay. This is an election, to try out new stuff. So how about an added tax on women? (Surtax)

There are more of them, they live longer, and they have more money. 

[Jazzhead]

And it is STILL just another HIDDEN tax on consumers at it's base.

Which is precisely what the Fair tax is - a tax placed squarely on consumers.

[Bigun]

Which is precisely what the Fair tax is - a tax placed squarely on consumers.

But not hidden from them! Right out there where they can see it every time they purchase a new good or service! EVERYONE feels the pain!

[Frank Cannon]

"Fully socialize medicine" Quit making that BS up. ANOTHER hater  that has to lie from the beginning to make their point. SAD! This is not a HILLARY forum!

Donald Trump from a 60 Minutes interview from all the way back in 9-27-15....

Pelley: How do you fix it?

    Trump: There’s many different ways, by the way. Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, “No, no, the lower 25 percent that can’t afford private. But–”

    Pelley: Universal health care.

    Trump: I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.

    Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?

    Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably—

    Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?

    Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it. But we’re going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it’s going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything.

[Sanguine]

Which is precisely what the Fair tax is - a tax placed squarely on consumers.

So, we shouldn't see the taxes we pay?  Like automatically withheld income taxes or gas taxes? 

[Bigun]

So, we shouldn't see the taxes we pay?  Like automatically withheld income taxes or gas taxes?

What most people don't realize about the current income tax system is that amount of tax they see on their 1040 is only a portion of what they actually pay. Everything produced in this country today carries in it's price a portion of the corporate income tax, and the costs of compliance with it, that the producer pays.  THAT is the true reason almost all of our manufacturing has been forced out of this country. 

With the Fairtax in place you could start or expand a business in this country without having to spend even one second considering the tax implications of doing it! What do you think would happen then?

[Sanguine]

What most people don't realize about the current income tax system is that amount of tax they see on their 1040 is only a portion of what they actually pay. Everything produced in this country today carries in it's price a portion of the corporate income tax, and the costs of compliance with it, that the producer pays.  THAT is the true reason almost all of our manufacturing has been forced out of this country. 

With the Fairtax in place you could start or expand a business in this country without having to spend even one second considering the tax implications of doing it! What do you think would happen then?

I agree.  I think we should be painfully aware of every penny we send to local, state and federal governments.

[Bigun]

I agree.  I think we should be painfully aware of every penny we send to local, state and federal governments.

Until that is the case there is little hope of reining any of it in!

[MACVSOG68]

I agree.  I think we should be painfully aware of every penny we send to local, state and federal governments.

About $4.5 trillion is collected at all levels of government.  According to OECD, US total tax burden is around 26% of GDP, almost the lowest of all OECD countries.  Effective total tax rates for individuals and corporations are far lower than in any European country.  These countries depend on the income tax much less than the US and instead concentrate on VATs and other forms of production and consumption taxes.

[Bigun]

VATs are very  easy to hide from those who actually pay them.  A single point of retail sale only sales tax definitely is not!

And the OECD figure completely ignores compliance costs.

[MACVSOG68]

VATs are very  easy to hide from those who actually pay them.  A single point of retail sale only sales tax definitely is not!

And the OECD figure completely ignores compliance costs.

It ignores compliance costs for everyone.  I for one despise the US tax code, it's just that in its complexity lies the loopholes and credits that reduce the overall effective rates.  Corporations are very willing to pay the compliance costs in order to reap the benefits of those complexities. While I don't think the FairTax has a snowball's chance in hell unless there's a dramatic shift to the right in the House and Senate, I do believe we are moving toward a greatly simplified income tax structure. 

[truth_seeker]

I do believe we are moving toward a greatly simplified income tax structure.

That would be a huge surprise. This has been discussed for decades, and zero has been done.

Tax preparers, CPAs, Tax Avoidance investment vehicles, investment advisors, attorneys, tax havens, government tax collection employees, all would lobby against meaningful tax reform.