With a national sales tax instead of income tax every one would pay their fair share. There wouldn’t be poop holes for million and billionaires. If they don’t want to pay taxes don’t splurge on that new yacht. If middle class doesn’t wanna pay taxes don’t buy that new car. Everyone pays their fair share this way.
In europe thay pay upto 27% depending on the country …on top of their income taxes …thats the reason people come to US to shop
I agree, but I would like to add:
Advertised prices should always include the sales tax! If the product says 2.99 in the isle then it should be 2.99 at the register. If you want the .19 in tax just tell me it costs 3.18 in the isle.
Necessities should not be taxed.
Housing, utilities, food, automobiles.
Set a specific flat income tax based on GDP per capita.
Taxes should be distributed based on where they’re collected.
All taxes collected should be distributed first to the county they were collected, then the state, then federal.
Example:
As a Texas household making under $100k I pay 22% in Federal tax. Then I pay 8.25% in in my county. I see about 78% of my income, then an additional 8.25% of that I lose on purchases, making my final spending amount about 71.6% of my earnings. ($71,600)
If i save 10% per year, that’s $7,100, leaving $64,440 to be budgeted between 12 months leaving me $5,370 monthly
Make flat taxes 7-7-7.
I now see 100% of my earnings, and chose what i spend my money on.
I now put 10% ($10,000) in savings, leaving $90,000 to spend how i choose. If i take taxes right off the top, that’s 21% off 90,000, or $18,900, leaving me $71,100 split between 12 months for $5,925 as a monthly budget. And that’s on the low side, as my Biggest expenditures would no longer be taxed.
At this tax rate I keep at least $500 more per month. The county, State, and Fed each get $6,300 annually. There are 65,686 household in my county. Based on my county numbers specifically that’s $413,817,661 each governmental level, per year.
Texas brought in $70B in property taxes as a whole. The state has 252 counties. Sales tax at 7% for 252 counties based on my county’s data per household income would be $105,109,686,092 just at the state level.
I now only pay for what i buy, my county gets more for what we need, my state gets more for what we need, and the Feds get what they need.
Your argument touches on a key economic principle regarding corporate taxation and an alternative perspective on federal tax policy. Here are some thoughts on the ideas you’ve presented:
-
Corporate Taxes as Pass-Through Costs
• You’re correct that corporate taxes are often passed on to consumers through higher prices, as businesses typically factor tax costs into pricing. This means that, in practice, the tax burden often ends up with consumers. By the same token, corporate tax increases can also impact wages, employment, and investment decisions, which ultimately affect individuals. The concept of “no true corporate tax” is rooted in this understanding, as corporations essentially act as intermediaries in the tax chain.
-
Transparency and Accountability Through a Sales Tax
• Moving to a federal sales tax system could create greater transparency, making it clear to taxpayers exactly how much they are contributing and where their money is going. Similar to how local governments disclose sales tax percentages for specific purposes, a national sales tax could require Congress to outline its allocations, helping hold politicians accountable. Voters would have a clearer view of what they’re paying for and how tax funds are spent, which might foster more responsible spending.
-
Broadening the Tax Base
• A national sales tax would capture revenue from all economic participants, including those working in the underground economy or those who don’t report income to the IRS. With a consumption-based tax, anyone making purchases—regardless of legal status or source of income—would contribute to tax revenue, potentially broadening the base and reducing the tax burden on reported incomes.
-
Democratic Control Over Tax Rates
• Allowing the public to vote on tax rates introduces a new level of democratic engagement, giving citizens a direct say in fiscal policy. This could require politicians to justify increases by outlining specific benefits, creating a feedback loop between public interest and taxation. However, this system would require careful structuring to avoid destabilizing revenue fluctuations or underfunding essential programs.
-
Potential Challenges
• Regressive Impact on Lower-Income Individuals: Sales taxes are inherently regressive, meaning they take a larger percentage of income from lower earners. To address this, some proposals suggest exemptions or rebates on essential items, though this would add complexity.
• Transition from Income Tax to Sales Tax: Moving from the current system to a national sales tax would require a massive overhaul of federal tax policy and administration. There would need to be provisions to avoid double-taxing income already subjected to sales taxes.
• Government Revenue Stability: Sales tax revenues fluctuate more than income tax revenues, as they depend on consumption. This variability might pose challenges in maintaining consistent funding for long-term projects, especially during economic downturns.
Final Thoughts
Your proposal emphasizes transparency, accountability, and fairness by broadening the tax base and directly involving citizens in tax decisions. While transitioning to a national sales tax system would be complex, it’s an approach that aligns with the principles of a limited and accountable government. It would likely stimulate significant debate on how best to balance revenue needs with a fair, equitable tax structure that meets national standards.
I vote Yes with rate increase limits!
1 Like
No sales tax just import and export tariffs
I don’t agree with simply putting a blanket sales tax on all goods to replace an unconstitutional taxation practice to begin with. It will become bloated. It will become another thing for businesses to have to keep up with… it will come with liabilty and an agency to keep up with penalties etc… God no. It is just all around no good.
Tarrifs will already supplement the deficit from abolishing the slave tax that is income tax. Couple this with significant reductions in agencies practicing government overreach and other spending and we simply will not need it.
Import Tarrifs, export subsidies!
When i heard about this site i came her to propose this same thing. A national sales tax would remove the need for any income tax and it wouldn’t need to be very much.
something like a 2% tax on all goods, and an additional 10% on vices (alcohol, tobacco, vapes, and marihuana if it ever becomes legal nationally.)
We are already taxed on almost everything we purchase, anything we sell. Taxed on property etc etc etc. Our country relies heavily on imports. I am more in favor of polishing the income tax system, and in favor of tariffs. These other countries want to sell their products to us and will continue doing so. Charging them tariffs to bring their goods into the US monetize a huge amount to offset the income tax system.
I love the idea of a National Sales Tax. If you want to pay fewer taxes, make fewer purchases. I think that an additional benefit (aside from improved purchasing power and more money in our pockets) is that I believe that an argument can be made that it also spurs saving, as well as investing, both of which are great for the economy.
1 Like
The government shouldn’t be the morality police or be in the business of picking winners and losers. Vices are a sign of freedom, embrace them even if you don’t agree with them.
You just created issues that don’t exist to support your narrative. Go back and re-read the first proposal.
Business already maintains a POS system for sales tax. We’re not creating the wheel.
Tariffs were great before the social welfare state (Social Security Administration) WIC, Section 8 housing, and Welfare were created. You can’t solely tariff your way out of that boondoggle.
Thank you. IMHO the positives far outweigh the negatives. The difficulty in implementing such a system would be easy with proper motivation (the wants), of course, the bureaucratic state would argue about “complexity” and “fairness” (on the part of those with less income) but it would mostly be a lie, the system simply has a case of the DWs (the don’t wants).
“Essentials” are easy, there would be no tax on food or labor.
This would be bad, i accept a tax when selling and making profit although i think the percentage of said tax should be lower. But sales tax on buying would stock would cripple small players such as myself
Disagree. Overall sales taxes change across municipalities. Cities, counties, and States have different sales tax rates. Making a company target its ad campaign to specific local municipalities is an unnecessary burden. People should know what their specific tax rate is, in their local, and purchase accordingly.
Under my plan food and labor would not have a sales tax.
Check out this proposal dealing with low income earners. I found it inspired.
https://discourse.dev.poweranalytics.com/t/fairtax/
A national sales tax on non-essential items. Food and clothing should not be taxable. I have never agreed with the practice of taxing our income and then taxing every purchase we make. That is double taxation. We are living taxation without representation currently as our tax dollars are being sent overseas without our input. We the People should have some say in where our money is spent.
Also, disband the IRS and create a new entity with a singular purpose of ensuring those who sell goods and services are paying the appropriate sales tax to the government.
1 Like