It seems to me that passing the FairTax Plan (FTP) should be our highest priority, and save the effort to repeal the 16th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, save it for after we reform our tax collecting methods! I can think of two good reasons.
Passing the FairTax is our highest priority. Repealing the 16th is built into the FairTax. This is directly from the bill:
TITLE IV--SUNSET OF SALES TAX IF SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT REPEALED
SEC. 401. ELIMINATION OF SALES TAX IF SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT REPEALED.
If the Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
is not repealed before the end of the 7-year period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this Act, then all provisions of, and
amendments made by, this Act shall not apply to any use or consumption
in any year beginning after December 31 of the calendar year in which
or with which such period ends, except that the Sales Tax Bureau of the
Department of the Treasury shall not be terminated until 6 months after
such December 31.
Basically we will have up to 7 years to worry about getting the 16th repealed after the FairTax is enacted. But it has been said that once our States have a taste of this FairTax freedom, it will be repealed almost immediately.
Thanks for the text and your comments, Robert. My point is that repeal of the 16th amendment is not essential at this time, let's fix the absurd IRS tax "code" first, get the economy and tax "policy" on track, then finesse our efforts with repeal of the 16th amendment. Why complicate the picture now, especially when we are having such a hard time getting support for the bill? Let's go for reform by simply passing the FairTax, taking out the repeal provision (that may happen in conference committee anyway). Am I making sense? Repeal seems to me a philosophical and rather purist position, I am simply crying out for a sensible tax revenue collection system. I like the phrase "progressive national sales tax". Thanks, again, for your thoughtful remarks.
Yes, you are making sense, but the repeal provision is there for the protection of our rights and, I believe, should remain in place. Leaving it in won't hurt anything because it does not force any immediate actions. But taking it out could be detrimental, in the unlikely case the States don't get their act together in the following 7 years.
Besides, tinkering with the FairTax now will just lead to a more complicated system. I think if we get the FairTax passed as written we will all be better off.
I appreciate your willingness to open a discussion on FairTax Nation, I hope you will continue to do so and I hope others will chime in with their thoughts as well. Thank you!
What happens if the 16th is not repealed and we have a consumption tax in place. Do we then get to pay both income tax and sales tax? That would not do.
I agree, Ann, that would not do. If you will scroll up and read the quote I posted in my original response, you will understand exactly what happens if the 16th is not repealed within the proposed time frame.
I wonder how hard it would be to repeal an amendment that was never ratified. Couldn't they just declare it null and void?
Ann, it is great to see you here.
The 16th was properly ratified in 1913. What most people don't realize is that in 1913 there were only 48 states, so when (I believe it was) Georgia signed the ratification they were the 36th state to sign, making the required 3/4.
I just verified that the 36th state to sign was Delaware on February 3, 1913; not Georgia. Sorry.
Thanks Jordan...I'm going to pass this information along to some of my FairTax Supporters!!!
There is actually a separate bill to repeal the 16th Amendment. Vote to support it on PopVox. I support H.J.Res. 16: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 16th Amendment because I want to be rid of that 70,000 page boat anchor known as the income tax. The simplest, fairest, most transparent tax would be the FairTax. Wouldn't you like to see what American resourcefulness could do for the economy if we stopped penalizing success?
The sunset language in HR25 was added a few years back as a sop to all those who opposed the FairTax because they thought it might lead to concurrent income and consumption taxes.