RANT: Consumption tax

.........................................................

I'm fed up with Bush's idiotic tax policies. Now they want to replace income tax with a national sales tax. They're spending out of control, taxing the wrong people, and Greenspan - who I used to greatly admire - has gotten all politic on us.


We in the state of Washington have had that for years. It doesn't work. In the last election all the candidates were talking about going back to an income tax.
Having a consumption tax instead of sales tax increases the operations costs for businesses across the board. This is particularly hard on small businesses as they don't have the huge gross income or investment reserves to support high these costs. I think most people agree that a thriving small business sector greatly improves the overall economy.
It hurts low income families the worst. Think of the family living paycheck to paycheck. They already don't pay income tax because they don't make enough. With a national consumption tax, everything now costs more. They aren't making more, and their kids still need milk to drink and paper for school. These tax free savings accounts aren't going to help nor incent because these folks didn't have the money to save in the first place - they're living paycheck to paycheck.
I don't know why it's so difficult to understand: If you want to have a prosperous country, make it really easy for your poor to become not poor. Then you have fewer poor and more not poor - isn't that the very definition of prosperity? With more people moving out of the low income brackets, you have more customers to boost your economy. Same for businesses - make it really easy for people to get small businesses off the ground & profitable.
Dang. Somehow I don't feel any better.

~ End Article and Begin Conversation ~

  • 1

    So I just picked up a book in the store and briefly thumbed through it. It was about abol­ish­ing the national income tax and replac­ing it with a point-of-consumer-sale-only sales tax. This tax would be on *every­thing* the con­sumer might pay for — food, clothes, doc­tor, etc. “But what about the poor peo­ple?” you ask. Their solu­tion was to guess how much sales tax a per­son would be expected to pay for basic ser­vices dur­ing the year, and pre­emp­tively send them a check for that amount. So, at the cash reg­is­ter, they pay as much as every­one else, but they have the money to pay the taxes. Of course, this pre­sumes the recip­i­ent is smart enough to save that money and use it to pay the taxes, instead of going out and buy­ing a new TV. It also pre­sumes the government’s guess is cor­rect (or at least “fair”).
    They also argued that since oper­a­tional costs for busi­nesses would go down (no more busi­ness income tax, no more inven­tory sales tax), they could also lower prices by approx­i­mately the same amount they’d go up because of the new sales tax. The end result is prod­uct would remain mostly the same price at the reg­is­ter, while everyone’s pay­checks would all go up (no more income with­hold­ing). The end result is at the end of the year, you still have the same amount of money (since it wasn’t with­held, but you paid this out­ra­geous sales tax instead) AND you don’t have to go insane fill­ing out your 1040.
    I think the idea is gen­er­ally very flawed — it assumes the high-income peo­ple will spend spend spend, mak­ing up for all the income tax they’re no longer pay­ing. Doesn’t seem likely. However, it appeals a great deal to folks who make a whole lot more than they spend, which account for a whole lot of peo­ple in this coun­try, so it stands a fair chance of being implemented.

~ Now It's Your Turn ~

Feel free to use <strong>, <em>, and <a href="">

[]