Cain's 9-9-9 plan?

Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Hugh.

The devil is always in the details. Who determines what are necessities and what items are not? What will have the VAT tax or what will be exempt. If you exempt food or edible items from the tax, that is pretty much how most state sales tax work and most people understand that and can relate to that.



But then we wonder if all foods should be exempt? Should caviar be exempt? Should expensive cuts of meat or expensive seafood be exempt? They are not necessities, but they are food? What about pet foods? Will this type of tax cause greedy food suppliers to increase the cost of food? Is food and clothing a necessity? Will clothing and shoes be exempt? If so, will that include all the expensive designer brands? What about schools supplies?



Here in Texas we do have a tax exempt weekend in August where parents can buy schools supplies, clothing and shoes for the their kids and even adults. I could go on and on, but I think you get my point. We end up with some government official making unrealistic determinations as to what is a non-taxable necessity, and if they want more revenue, the list of tax exempt items begins to shrink.



Then we also have the issue of state and local sales taxes. The Federal government cannot control how the states and local sales taxes are applied and they may not agree with what should be exempt or the limits are. That is something that would either require a Constitutional amendment, or a state by state change. I just think the state and local governments have too much power and freedom to charge fees, increase taxes, and tax things that were never taxed before just to enhance revenue and continue the expansion of their power.



A simple flat income tax of about 9% to 12% with the first $10k or perhaps $15k of each individual's income is exempt. There are no other exemptions or exceptions. That is the simplest to manage and most cost effective. It certainly would justify reducing the size of the IRS since they would only need to verify income and most of that is done by computer, so the only audits would be based on hidden income like gambling, tips, and other cash transactions, which has always been an issue. It also still gives the IRS the ability to track illegal money and charge gangsters and drug dealers with Income Tax evasion if they don't pay their taxes.



The other issue is that currently incomes from Wages are taxed and additional 13% for Social Security and Medicare, while incomes from dividends, investments and annuities are not. Since these sources of income are mostly exclusive the wealthiest Americans they already have 13% savings over the average American worker. We need to collect Social Security and Medicare taxes on all sources of income, or we need to phase it out over a long time period so that we dont pull the rug out from those who are approaching retirement age.



These are just some of my random thoughts about taxes and why I favor a Flat Income Tax and eliminating all the exemptions and exeptions we have in our current tax laws.



Rich





















 
No offense, Richard, but I don't think you've really read or understand how the Fair Tax works.



A flat income tax is extremely regressive. That would never fly.
 
Definition of "Necessities" as it will apply to the "Fair" or "Flat" Tax:



Any exemption to any select group of individuals (rich or poor), that said ruling party deems necessary to get the vote of said exempt group, in the upcoming election. Additional, said exemption can never be repealed for fear that said ruling party may lose the vote of said exempt group, in the upcoming election.



:banghead:



 
Hugh,

No offense taken, as you are probably correct. Where I read about the "Fair Tax" plan was not as comprehensive as the information on www.fairtax.org that TrainTrac posted.



Yes indeed, the correct Fair Tax website has about 50 videos that answered most of my questions, however my cable internet service went down today and when it came back, was kind of slow so the short videos were constantly being interupted by long pauses while the download was buffering....:angry:



I think that Fair Tax may work better than a flat income tax, except for one issue that I have that I have not seen addressed in the 25-30 videos I have watched so far. I have not completed viewing all the 50 or so videos, but if you or TrainTrac have, you might know the answer to my two concerns?



I worked paid taxes on my earnings and saved money so I could retire without having to worry about taxes eating into my savings in later life. If this 23% fair tax is imposed I will be taxed again on my savings that I have already paid tax on. Will everyone who has money in savings that paid the income taxes be reembursed by the government for the 23% fair tax that they will not have to pay if the spend the money?



I am also retired military and get a taxable pension from the Army. I also am a combat disable vet with a 70% disability pension that is tax free, and I am currently collecting Social Security and on Medicare which is non-taxable. Will my Social Security, and VA disability pension be increased by 23% to offset their current tax free status. Perhaps they can all be handled by the "So called" Pre-Bate, but I am not sure the government even has enough money to to pay everyone for their tax paid savings and other tax free payments?



I also have to question the transition from Income Tax to a National Sales Tax?? Scam artist will abound with schemes to get you bigger or faster Pre-Bates only to want to steal your social security info and get your Pre-Bate??? Heck even the IRS and government have been exploited by people claiming tax refunds for dead people or people they stole their social security numbers from???



The plan sounds good, but the transition may be a nightmare.



...Rich
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good question regarding savings. I honestly don't know if that's been specifically addressed, or I don't remember. If I find a moment, I'll see if I find anything.



Just keep in mind that I am only in support of the Fair Tax as a much better tax code than the current tax code(s)^1,000. I realize it wouldn't be perfect and there would surely be unforeseen problems. I think it would be more fair and generate more revenue, though.



A transition would suck, but I see no better alternative. Our current tax system is awful and only getting worse. It's also obvious that no tax code could ever provide the insatiable thirst for money our government has acquired. I'll take a new tax code or legislation enforcing a balanced national budget and I could still consider the '0'teens a successful political decade. Both and I'd be overwhelmed with hope for the future.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just buy the Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz...it clearly shows how the plan works...There is also a secondary book Neal put out to clarify it even better....Herman Cain 2012, I don't care how many women Gloria Allred parades out there with these "Claims"... Herman is my #1 pick to get america back on track!!!

The liberals Gave Bill Clinton, Anthony Wiener, John Edwards and JFK a pass...why not Herman? LOL
 
Bud, the president has very little to do with taxes, he is only one of 3 votes necessary for change.



The other 2 votes are not a given.



Oh, and now (as the discussion gets deeper and deeper into details and "feelings") you see why I doubt the term "fair". Even 10 people on this board can't agree on "fair" so how are 300 million going to ever decide whats "fair"?
 
I agree that the Fair Tax does seem to work good on paper. It is obviously fairer and would generate more consistent revenue with very little overhead.



My only concern now seems to be what to about the many people like me who have already paid income taxes on their savings so that they are not taxed again when they spend the money under the Fair Tax plan. I would also like to know how the Fair Tax plan will accomodate people who have tax-free income like Social Security and VA disability pensions?



Perhaps I can find a way to email the author of the Fair Tax, Neal Boortz, and see if he has consider these issues?



OK, so if this Fair Tax is such a good plan, why have no politicians embraced the plan and tried to introduce it in Congress? I'm thinking that none will want to takes someone elses plan without adding their own changes so they can call it their own plan? So how can we get this plan or a similar Fair Tax plan in front of our law makers? Perhaps this is a good question to push in front of all Presidential, Senate and Congressional candidates as part of a peoples movement to let them know we want a Fair Tax.



...Rich





 
Richard L,



Boortz and company wrote a whole big book on the subject. If interested, I suggest reading it.



FairTax is a good plan. Caine's 9-9-9 is simply a variation on the plan, IMHO. You are probably right that few running for office will just take any plan as-is, but instead will want to mold and shape one or come up with their own. That's all NIH (not invented here) syndrome in action.



There is a HUGE FairTax push out there. A lot can be gleaned from www.fairtax.org.



As far as Fair Tax plan accomodating people who have tax free income, I'm not sure how that is a question. As a tax on sales, not income, the issue of whether or not income is tax-free is moot. Under the Fair Tax plan ALL income is tax free.



I think the two major things keeping FairTax from becoming reality is:



a. Our government has too much vested in the current taxing system (IRS, 100s of thousands of workers, an industry of millions employed that have their professon linked to the current system, etc)



b. The current system is just confusing enough and with just enough loopholes and special cases that the rich can and do work the system, the poor pay little, and the guy in the middle pays a LOT (and feels it the most). I'm not saying the rich don't pay, I'm just saying they don't feel it like those under them. As such, the government is well served by a confusing system that has essentially turned the working class into indentured servants.



I don't think it is non-support of the people holding this back.



I'd rather pay taxed on consumption, then if I want to pay less taxes I consume less, barter more, etc. I think the government simply cannot allow that... no real control of the people and ability to ramp up tax dollars to ginormous heights. Most people want to and have to (due to work ethic) work. Not everyone has to spend, to the level they do anyways.



TJR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TJR,

I agree with you 100% I would also prefer to pay taxes on consumption than income. I also suspect that the Government does not want to loose it's control of the tax accelorator with the ability to ramp up the taxes on a whim.



As for exiting tax free income, they could just raise the income by 23% to match the Fair Tax on any purchases.



That still does not address existing savings where income taxes were already paid when the money was earned. Having to pay taxes again when that money is spent is certainly not Fair to me, or to the hundreds of thousands of other Americans with tax paid savings. I would suggest that the banks and savings institutions provide each person with a statement as proof of the average daily balance for the previous year and the government simply issue a Pre-Bate check for a 23% tax offset....At least that's what I think would be fair..:grin:



...Rich











 
Richard L,



Yes, the government COULD simply increase the rates of the FairTax, but I think with such a simple system most of the people in the US would fight against it. Today, different portions of the tax laws are changed, repealled, added, and it is all so confusing that its hard to say or even figure out exactly how changes affect one personally.



If there is only one lever, the tax rate, and the govt goes messing with it, the people will revolt. Occupy Wall St would them become Occupy PA Ave.



As far as having to pay money, again, on previously earned and taxed monies if there ever is a switch over to FairTax maybe there will be some grandfathering. Probably not. I don't think I would really care either way. I already live in a state with a sales tax, so its not that big a hit...and most of the money I spend (like most Americans) I just earned in the past few weeks, months anyway.



TJR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hate to sound like a broken record, but read the books that I linked above. Here are the Amazon links again:



Amazon.com links:

<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Fair-Tax-Book-Saying-Goodbye/dp/0060875496/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1320431511&sr=8-1">The Fair Tax Book: Saying Goodbye to the Income Tax and the IRS</A>



<A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz/dp/B0027CSNOO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1320431511&sr=8-2">FairTax: The Truth: Answering the Critics</A>



They answer pretty much all of the questions that have been raised in this thread about the Fair Tax.



Most of the answers can also be found here: <A HREF="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq">Fair Tax FAQ</A>.



This is not a new concept. It's been around for a number of years, and over $20 million has been spent on research for the Fair Tax; with a number of studies and papers having been commissioned and published. They can be found here: <A HREF="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_research">Fair Tax research papers</A>



Richard L said:

OK, so if this Fair Tax is such a good plan, why have no politicians embraced the plan and tried to introduce it in Congress?



Actually, it's been introduced in both houses of Congress every year for the last several years. Here are the current bills:



House: <A HREF="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:HR00025:mad:@@P">H.R.25</A>



Senate: <A HREF="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:s.00013:">S.13</A>



Richard L said:

I also suspect that the Government does not want to loose it's control of the tax accelorator with the ability to ramp up the taxes on a whim.



TJR said:

If there is only one lever, the tax rate, and the govt goes messing with it, the people will revolt. Occupy Wall St would them become Occupy PA Ave.



Both of you hit the nail on the head. The largest opposition to the Fair Tax comes from K Street lobbyists and most career politicians because passage of the Fair Tax would result in a tremendous shift in power from Washington to the American People, and that scares them. Why do you think that Karl Marx advocated for a heavy progressive, graduated income tax in his Communist Manifesto? It gives the central gov't a huge amount of power over citizens.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Richard, as I mentioned, I don't know specifically how to address your concern but without going back over and reading (I don't have time currently) I think the taxes would be offset by doing away with all the other taxes you would be paying with your savings. The Fair Tax is predicated on doing away with all other federal taxes. I don't know the math and can't list all the taxes a retiree pays, but I would imagine it would equal out. You don't currently go entirely untaxed on retirement savings anyway.



I think the more people actually look at this and read about it, the more they will favor it.
 
TrainTrac,

Thanks for the links, however I have gone to the www.fairtax.org website and started watching the videos and while they are informative they don't really have a quick way to search out the answers to my questions without watch each video, and that seems to me a slow process that tends to slow down my internet connection. The more videos I watch the slower the bufffer fill. Frankly, some of them sound more like a commercial than a proposal?



I only asked that if you have read the book you would probably know the answers to my questions. Waiting for the book to arrive aggrevates my impatient nature, and why buy a book if the information is available online.



...Rich
 
Rich,



Did you check out the FAQ page link that I posted above? If you don't have the patience to await a video download or a book arrival, then hopefully the FAQ will provide you with a quicker method of answering your questions regarding the Fair Tax.



I have indeed read the books, and I and others in this thread have tried to provide answers to some of your questions. Most of my answers were sourced right from the Fair Tax Web Site's FAQ page or elsewhere on the site. I support the Fair Tax, but don't claim to be a subject matter expert, so that's why I provided other sources of information for your questions. If it's something in which you might have a genuine interest, then I would urge you to take the time to seek out the information and answers from credible sources like the web site and/or books.



As for the videos seeming like commercials, why wouldn't they? The objective is to "sell" the citizenry on the benefits of the Fair Tax, thus generating grass roots support for its passage.
 
TrainTrac,

I did use your FAQ link and found it much easier to find the answer to my questions, but find it puzzling??



This is a direct answer from the Fair Tax websites FAQ section and really does not answer the question I asked regarding people who have paid taxes on savings (be they seniors or not) will have to pay additional taxes under the Fair Tax plan. How the Fair Tax helps Seniors??? I think NOT!



How does the FairTax help seniors who have paid taxes on their retirement savings or invested in Roth IRAs?



Simply put, the FairTax is a revenue-neutral proposal, raising no more money than does the current system. The FairTax only changes where the money is raised, not the amount.



Additionally, some erroneously believe that people who have invested in Roth IRAs will never pay taxes on this money again. They may not know it, but they are paying corporate income taxes, employer payroll taxes, plus the associated compliance costs that are hidden in the price of every retail purchase they make. Under the FairTax, these hidden taxes are driven out of retail prices. And note, they can determine the amount of tax they pay through their own lifestyle choices.



Furthermore, used goods are not taxed because they have already been taxed once -- when they were new. Therefore senior citizens, like all Americans, do not lose purchasing power, but gain it instead. Moreover, the FairTax preserves the purchasing power of Social Security benefits, and seniors receive a monthly prebate so they dont pay taxes on the purchase of necessities. Tax-deferred investments get a one-time windfall. Savings invested in any long-term, income-generating asset such as a stock, real estate, or a long-term bond that cant be called, increase substantially in value. Finally, complex estate planning is an artifact of an earlier age.



Where the money is raised IS the issue. Savings made under the existing Income Tax system will again be taxed on the consumer side as a consumption tax in the Fair Tax plan.



Yes, people believe that once they have paid taxes on their earnings or savings they do not expect to pay again at least not at that high of a rate?



I agree that we all pay some corporate income and payroll taxes as part of the price of purchased goods, but it is not necessarily 23% of the sales cost.



An employee making $10 and hour to operate a machine that stamps out 1000 widgets an hour and the company sells each widget for $1. That price includes the raw materials, labor, taxes and overhead of the production pricess as well as a profit for the manufacturer. If we assume that the employer pays 23% in taxes, at 1000 units per hour that only amounts to $10 per 1000 units in labor and thus the employer paid portion of taxes is only adding about 2.3 cents per unit in employee income and payroll taxes. Under the 23% Fair Tax, I would have to pay about $121 for that same widget. That's $1.00 minus the 2.3 cents of the old income and payroll tax, and now add on the 23% Fair Tax. That is not More Buying Power !!



Also, their implication that we already pay 23% in corporate payroll and payroll tax is not true. Income tax and payroll taxes are only added to the cost to produce each item, and certainly not necessarily 23% of the selling price. That would require that 23 cent of income and labor goes into every $1.00 of product they sell and that is just not factual or accurate.



Their reference to Used Goods not being taxed is not even a part of this discussion, so I am not sure why they bring it up??



They say we gain purchasing power with the Fair Tax, but again, that is not true for savings that have been earned under the old Income tax systemThey have lost nearly 23% of their value when the Fair Tax is implemented. The Pre-Bate only eliminates that taxes for the necessities of life, but does nothing for those who saved money and paid the taxes, and now want to spend the money and enjoy it in their later life...Under the Fair Tax their savings would again be taxed when they pay for that cruise to Europe, or that new car, or retirement home, that they have been saving for years.



The following statement they make does nothing to clarify the issue of existing savings and investments:



Tax-deferred investments get a one-time windfall. Savings invested in any long-term, income-generating asset such as a stock, real estate, or a long-term bond that cant be called, increase substantially in value. Finally, complex estate planning is an artifact of an earlier age.



No explaination of this One time Windfall?? It sounds like they are confusing pre-tax savings with post-tax savings?? The give no explaination of how long term bonds or saving "substantially increase in value"? And that Estate planning is an artifact of an earlier age??? That seems like this Fair Tax plan brushes aside seniors and others on a fixed income, and seems to be a great deal geared for young people who are in their income creating prime of life.



.Rich

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was interested in Cain, but events of the past week, namely his responses to the sexual harassment stuff, has made me drop him completely. He's a putz.
 
Mark,

I totally agree with you. That's why I wanted more info on his 9-9-9 tax plan. Everyplace I went presented a biased view without actually stating Cain's actual plan, just there interpretation of it.



I would like to think that the Far Tax plan has some promise, but there I do have some issues with some aspects of the plan and their lack of indepth explainations or clarifications. Most of what I read about the Fair Tax is very well geared to young working people who are at or near the income peaks and the closer you get to retirement it seems to ignore the issue of our growing senior population. Since most of the population is at or approching 50 years old, they represent one of the largest voting blocks in the country. That's pretty much why politicians are so reluctant make Social Security or Medicare cuts for fear of the back lash from the seniors. That also be why the Fair Tax has not gone any further than it has.



It may be a good plan for everyone, and most of it sounds great. However when it comes to dealing with senior who have already paid income taxes on their savings, and are now faced with the prospects of paying another 23% in taxes again when they spend the money is not what they are looking for.



...Rich
 
Top