Saturday, October 18, 2008

Flat Tax

Okay...Lets talk about Flat Taxes. Would it benefit us? Would it help the economy? The government? The United States as a whole? I think so.

How would the ordinary people feel about being taxed .05% on every dollar earned, and .05% on every dollar spent. Hey; that's a no brainer. The common people would love it. If you earned $100.00 a day...$5.00 would go to taxes. Not 35% for a $500.00 week. (= $175.00 or a net earning of $325.00) It would total $25.00 in taxes for the whole week.

Now some people would say the government could not function on so little... BUT, AHA, The big earners would have to pay the same tax. The oil companies showing record profits every quarter for the past millinia would also have to kick in that same .05% Imagine the billions of dollars made by them in three months. Insurance companies, auto makers, everyone who made money in the United States. Including the CEOs of those companies. Then when they spent it on what ever...goodies, vacations, retreats, wine, persons of the opposite sex, and song...They have to pay another .05%.

State funding by prorated contribution, and the government share of public works funding. Geez, the oil companies alone post more profit than than the government reports as GNP for the nation. Whats up with that? I guess it has something to do with what they call net profit.

What is painfully obvious is that they don't pay their fair share of taxes. It's hidden under research and development costs. Its forgiven as tax shelters, and tax breaks to stimulate the economy. The biggest companies are not building new factories with their big profits. They are researching ways to reward themselves more greatly by saving money for themselves by shipping jobs to cheaper labor countries. Yet their biggest customer base is in the United States. Do we see anything wrong with that picture? Like eventual collapse of the economy?

R&D is a natural cost of doing business. Keep up or get swamped by the competition. It should not be in the tax shelter business. Big companies get a double whammy on savings because they report direct cost of R&D as an expense, and then get a tax break to do further. Huh?

A flat tax would eliminate that. Every dollar earned. A person buys a gallons of gas...Its five cents tax...Every gallon. The oil companies pay five cents for every dollar they generate. No hidden money. God! Think of that. The little guy gets by cheaper, and the big guy has to pay his share. We would generate more money than ever in taxes. The big guy would complain that the amount of his taxes was unfair, but the CEO of Exxon Mobil made over $44,000,000.00 last year. Gee, I would feel so sorry for that guy if he had to pay the same percentage as the guy making a hundred bucks a day.

Then we would also have to address the issue of punishment for tax cheats. Who is going to take the chance on cheating if it meant thirty years in prison with no chance for parole or clemency.
Most really wealthy people are at the age when that may mean the rest of their lives in jail. What young millionaire is going to risk the balance of his youth in jail for a dime a dollar. A nickle earned and a nickle spent.

Lets knock off the exemption for anything. While its a touchy feeling to approach churches and charities, my sense is that they should also pay taxes. Too many churches make way too much money, and too many charities give too little to the needy. If a church is too small, and say they can't afford it...well their tax bill would also be tiny. I wouldn't mind if a nickle of my charitable contribution went to taxes. I would at least have the knowledge that those crystal palace churches, and high earning charities were also paying. I'm sure to get some negative feeling from some folks about this. But its fair.

Lets fire the opponents and get back to FAIR

2 comments:

Tripping Buffalo Woman said...

Gee, this all sounds too sensible to really implementable. You and I both know that the government and the big corporations work in a shadowly world of 'back hall' agreements behind sunlighted opponent positions.

As I see it, this would SUNLIGHT both government and big business so we, the impoverished working voter, would know exactly what is happening.

Old Warrior...I stand with you on this position!

Cherokee Warrior Woman

Shawn McManus said...

Old Warrior,

Your math is a bit off. 0.05% is one nickel for every $100 (I would be OK with that too).

No exemptions for the Indian Nations either?

More thought needs to be given on the implementation of it too. Many investments have been made with the exemption programs in place. That may not be much of a problem for some companies but for those operating on thin margins, it is problematic.

I would like a flat tax but as discussed in your thread, there are two problems with it:

1. States would either have to levy their own taxes in order to operate or tax dollars would have to make a round trip to Washington D.C. and then back. How would those amounts be determined? Would it be based on population? Would the California government receive the same amount per capita as West Virginia? Of the two, I think it would be best to reduce the federal tax and have states levy taxes as they need.

2. The plan (and flat taxes in general) do nothing to discourage government waste. One massive problem now is that governments are over funded. Politicians see this and believe it their duty to spend it and when those projects have cost overruns, tax some more.

I like the idea but it still needs some baking. At the outset, it sounds a whole lot better than what we have now.