H.R. 4646 the \"Trojan Horse Tax.\"

[VonVulcan]

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xp ... ab=summary

Thoughts?

[null0010]

Is there any data anywhere that would show that this would be a suitable replacement for the individual income tax?

[AlphaDoG]

That is neither a house resolution, nor a senate resolution. That is some bs that counts for nothing.

[Will Robinson]

I don't know the details of that plan but it does say it is an additional tax and the income tax would be removed some years later.
I just want to point out, like a lifeguard who just spotted a great white in the baby pool, that any new tax that doesn't come with an automatic and immediate repeal of an existing tax is never going to be anything other than an additional tax!

Just look at all the toll roads and toll bridges that were supposed to be temporarily put in place just until the road or bridge was built... those roads and bridges are long since paid for and the toll booths have never been removed. In fact the \"income tax\" was supposed to be temporary if I remember correctly.

[null0010]

That is neither a house resolution, nor a senate resolution. That is some bs that counts for nothing.

Um,

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h4646:

[flip]

H.R.4646
Title: Debt Free America Act

ROFL. I like cherry koolaid the best.

[AlphaDoG]

That is neither a house resolution, nor a senate resolution. That is some bs that counts for nothing.

Um,

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d111:h4646:

Well well I suppose I was in error. Looks to be a VAT in the making.

[Heretic]

(b) Purposes- The purpose of section 3 of this Act is to establish a fee on most transactions. Such fee--
(1) is different than a sales tax in that a sales tax is charged only on sales to the final consumer and the transaction fee would apply to intermediate users as well as end users,
(2) is different than a value added tax (VAT), commonly used in European and other countries, in that a VAT is imposed only on a portion of a transaction’s value (roughly the difference between an item’s selling price and it’s cost) and the transaction fee would apply to the entire amount of the transaction, and
(3) is intended to raise sufficient revenue to eliminate the national debt, which was $10.6 trillion in January 2009, during a period of 7 years and to phase out the income tax on individuals.

I still think it's a vat

[fliptw]

The bill is going to lengths to not refer to it as a national sales tax. I like how they try to throw VAT around to try to misdirect people.

[AlphaDoG]

(b) Purposes- The purpose of section 3 of this Act is to establish a fee on most transactions. Such fee--
(1) is different than a sales tax in that a sales tax is charged only on sales to the final consumer and the transaction fee would apply to intermediate users as well as end users,
(2) is different than a value added tax (VAT), commonly used in European and other countries, in that a VAT is imposed only on a portion of a transaction’s value (roughly the difference between an item’s selling price and it’s cost) and the transaction fee would apply to the entire amount of the transaction, and
(3) is intended to raise sufficient revenue to eliminate the national debt, which was $10.6 trillion in January 2009, during a period of 7 years and to phase out the income tax on individuals.

I still think it's a vat

Yea, it's a VAT, and do you think they actually intend on phasing out the income tax on individuals?

[null0010]

First of all, this is only in committee. Second, we all know nonsense like this is wildly unpopular and is very unlikely to pass.

[Will Robinson]

First of all, this is only in committee. Second, we all know nonsense like this is wildly unpopular and is very unlikely to pass.

And yet we've seen stuff come out of committee and be rammed down our throats with comments such as "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it." all the while the congressmen who vote on it don't know themselves what is in it!

The lame duck congress will resume their final days in power and try to pass this kind of stuff in that same fashion. A new tax is their only hope to fund this wonderful transition the President is forcing on us. Of course they don't believe that the economy won't sustain the transition because none of them have a clue about how the real people and real businesses are run. They live and work in this magical place where they can simply print more money, where they can pump printed money into a market to artificially keep it from falling in the month before an election, where they can just add or raise a tax to supplement their spending...etc. etc. but all those things are going to bring the economy crashing down on our backs because the rest of the world, including our own big producers will drop out of our markets and go into survival mode.

They don't think in terms of our economy and it's ups and downs because they have no real fear of total collapse. To them the economy will always bounce back and they are correct to some degree because it will but with what cost to us civilians?!? That cost isn't ever paid by their kind so they think only in terms of their next election cycle and their party's survival.
No one with any sense will hire or invest in america right now with this current group at the switch.

[null0010]

I'd still like to see some data on the effectiveness of this measure. Would it be a suitable replacement for the income tax? Would it bring in more or less than an income tax?

I'm looking myself, but most of what I see on Google is incoherent \"I hate taxes\" rage.

[null0010]

The most informative page I've found so far has been this snopes page:

Some members of Congress have what might be termed "hobby horse" issues: concepts about which they introduce legislation in Congress after Congress, although their bills never come close to passing, or even clear committee to be put to votes in the first place. The hobby horse of Representative Chaka Fattah of Pennsylvania is the notion of eliminating all federal taxes on individuals and corporations and replacing them with a revenue-generating system based on transaction fees (a concept he originally called the "Transform America Transaction Fee" and now refers to as the "Debt Free America Act").

In 2004 Rep. Fattah presented a bill calling on Congress to fund a study regarding the replacement of the federal tax code with a transaction fee-based system H.R. 3759, he introduced a similar bill in 2005(H.R. 1601, again in 2007 (H.R. 2130), and again in 2009 (H.R. 1703). None of these bills was ever put to a vote, and only one of them had so much as a single co-sponsor.

[Will Robinson]

I'd still like to see some data on the effectiveness of this measure. Would it be a suitable replacement for the income tax? Would it bring in more or less than an income tax?

I'm looking myself, but most of what I see on Google is incoherent "I hate taxes" rage.

The comments I've read about the VAT use here has been in the context of adding it to the aresenal not dropping anything.
The current administration and democrat congress have resolved themselves to taking the hit this election cycle and maybe next one as well but in the mean time they plan to have enacted as much of their agenda as possible.
The damage from that won't really hit us until after they are gone and they can come back into the majority on the tail end of republicans ineptly dealing with the mess the exiting democrats have created.

Once they get back in the framework for their new america will still be there...healthcare...banking and corporate regulation, taxation up the butt....cap and trade environmental crap, etc. etc.

They hope to run on the offer to fix what the repubs screwed up even though it was really their crap that pushed us over the cliff because that is the kind of stupid ★■◆● we voters let them do.
They have so much contempt for us that they don't even try to hide it. Thanks in large part to a mainstream media that decided to join a team instead of expose the activities of both teams.

[null0010]

By \"they,\" you of course mean Chaka Fattah and only Chaka Fattah.

[Heretic]

The most informative page I've found so far has been this snopes page:

Pretty sad that the actual bill is less informative than rumors about the bill.

[Will Robinson]

By "they," you of course mean Chaka Fattah and only Chaka Fattah.

No, the second sentence establishes the subject: "The current administration and democrat congress", so the subsequent use of "they" refers to the subject.

In the last sentence when I mention the contempt "they" have it can apply equally to both parties.

This plan I'm talking about didn't originate in my suspicious mind. It is something many members of the democrat party are in conflict about since there are a number of moderate democrats who represent a constituency that is pissed off at the current democrat leadership and the crap they are pulling. Some democrats don't want the Obama/Pelosi/Reid team to break the system as much as they can to embed their social agenda and by doing so using those moderate democrats as sacrificial lambs to the coming election day slaughter.

The current democrat leadership will tell you they are 'taking one for the team'. They want you to think 'the team' is America but it isn't. The team to them is the democrat party.

[Lothar]

First of all, this is only in committee. Second, we all know nonsense like this is wildly unpopular and is very unlikely to pass. :roll:

I'm inclined to agree, at least for now.

Who else remembers the scaremongering about 5 years ago about a national draft? Everyone was all "OMG Bush wants to draft you" because there was a draft bill in committee. When the fever pitch got high enough, eventually somebody in the administration put out a challenge to the Democrats (!) who had sponsored the bill to put the thing to a vote so it could get shot down. It went down I think 98-1 in the Senate.

At present, I feel the same way about what I've seen about the VAT. There's some scaremongering, but nothing substantial enough to really comment on. If it came up for a vote right now, it'd go down in flames big time. Wake me when they've got something more substantial written and the committee actually plans to vote on it.

[null0010]

Wake me when they've got something more substantial written and the committee actually plans to vote on it.

IAWTC