Comments: Some Arguments in Favor of a National Sales Tax

Publicola,
Another bonus, at the international level, would be a large influx of business seeking to base their operations in the U.S.. Currently the federal government actually penalizes companies who are headquartered in the U.S. by imposing corporate taxes on income generated from both foreign and domestic operations. While many countries only levy an income tax on the incomes actually generated in their territory. If I'm mistaken, please correct me. The U.S. is the largest consumer/economic power in the world, with a favorable tax scheme corporations should jump at the chance to relocate their H.Q.'s, and the related high level positions and income would be in-sourced to the U.S..
That's an economic plus, but more importantly the citizens would have a direct check on the growth of government. If individuals happen to think the government is to big (HELL YES IT IS), they can reduce their discretionary spending and starve it.
Saving money and retarding, perhaps reversing, the growth of the gov't, why is furhter discussion even necessary? Georgia congressman John Linder has advocated this plan for years; casting a vote for this man is nearly reason enough to move to GA.

Thanks for keeping this issue on the forefront,
Jasen

Posted by Jasen at August 17, 2004 09:54 PM

Somehow I have a problem with a tax scheme that raises the price of everything 20% and encourages hoarding. Besides, the first thing to get passed after the national sales tax would be a law adjusting the rates on certain favored or disfavored items.
Imagine food in a grocery store tax free "to help the poor" but food in a restaurant taxed at 30% (don't worry, it falls mostly on "the rich"). How about a complicated formula to figure the tax on cars, with many factors, jiggered annually to favor tiny sardine cans, and penalize SUVs. Or pickups. Or big sedans.
In no time at all I can see this being more complex than what we have now. I vote for a flat tax. Yes, this can be jiggered too, bu adjusting the threshold below which you don't pay it, but that could be fixed as "below the lowest quintile of earnings determined by the census or something" so the bottom 20% don't pay any.
The best part of any new tax code would be the part making it hard to amend so as to increase anyones tax burden.

Posted by Billll at August 19, 2004 09:24 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?