Replace All Federal Taxes on Income with the Fair Tax Act , HR 25

The Political Basis for the FairTax

A few weeks ago, David Tuerck and I co-authored this opinion piece for American Thinker(http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/05/the_political_basis_for_the_...). David is head of the economics department of Suffolk University in Boston and has done much of the foundational research on the FairTax.

One purpose of this article is to advance the flat tax vs. Fairtax debate by addressing some of the concerns expressed by conservatives (e.g., The Wall Street Journal editorial board, Steve Forbes, Cato, National Review etc.) regarding the potential of the FairTax to become a political trap (such that we end up with both an income and a sales tax).

I intend to write another article soon to further the argument that the FairTax is a reform progressives should like, assuming they understand the nuances by which the FairTax would make our tax system more progressive (with respect to consumption and wealth).

I welcome your comments.

1 member likes this

Next Post >

Comment

You need to be a member of Fair Tax Nation to add comments!

Join Fair Tax Nation

Comment by Bill Rollyson on July 12, 2011 at 12:32pm: Robert,

Good article. Thank you!

Doug, this concern is usually not thought through or just a deflection by opponents. Ask them, what prevents Congress from adding a VAT or other consumption tax to the current system OR a flat income tax. Adding a VAT has been suggested by both Republicans and Democrats. Specifically, Mitch Daniels of Indiana suggested in an article that it should be considered, Nancy Pelosi has suggested we have both and Professor Michael Gravel of Yale has written a proposal and testified to Congress for both. Flat tax supporters have never been seen rushing to introduce an amendment stopping us from having both. It is only mentioned in conjunction with the FairTax and ignored as a possibility to get a flat income tax passed or as a later addition.

Only FairTax supporters are willing to take difficult action to ensure we don't have both.

Without citizens demanding adherence to a set of principals (enshrined in our Constitution), Government will find no limits. It is up to us and future generations to protect our freedoms even if successfully repealing the 16th amendment.

Comment by Douglas Fowler on June 13, 2011 at 5:12pm: Also, I completely agree with your point that liberals/progressives should love the Fair Tax. The main reason being that it is NOT a tax cut at all, but simply a different way to collect the taxes. In order to really get Democrats on board, I think the Prebate needs to be stressed. Something like:

"How would you like to receive a check for over $200 from the government every month?"

That's a message that would resonate with the dems IMO.

Comment by Douglas Fowler on June 13, 2011 at 1:24pm: While I understand the risk of being stuck with both the income tax AND a sales tax, I really think that is a risk we should be willing to take. Also, recent history has shown that reducing the income tax rates is not a difficult thing to do. Tax rates have consistently dropped after WW2. Sure, after Reagan it DRAMATICALLY dropped, but when you look at the top tax rate of 92% under Eisenhower, it's hard to argue that our congress has trouble reducing tax rates. One would hope that when the income tax is eliminated (even without the constitutional amendment being repealed to keep it from coming back), all those lobbyists who were pushing for lower taxes (and there is A LOT of them) will suddenly begin pushing to keep the income tax from coming back.

Just my two cents.