I have run across the Automatic Payment Transfer Tax web cite. This is a more inclusive form of tax than I envisioned. It places the fee on both ends of the transaction. This leads to a smaller rate overall. However, it does tax lateral moves of money within individual and company accounts, and rolls all state and federal taxes into one unit.
I agree completely with the concept on a Federal Level. However, I still wish for states to have autonomy over their own form of taxation. If a state chooses this form of taxation, then they will choose it. And I do see a valid argument for use taxes and excise taxes on items society see as harmful or disruptive to the general welfare of the public. Or even in the case of fuel use taxes to maintain road infrastructure.
The one advantage of this system over what I envisioned is that it would be even harder for limits and exclusions to be included at a later date. Therefore, it is a more stable form of taxation. My version would have a shelf life that would have to be maintained or it would lose it effectiveness in time.
My overall goal in writing the CUT Tax has been the elimination of favoritism or targeting of groups by the Federal Tax Code. All taxes should be blind and effect everyone equally. Our government was originally designed to minimize the power for the government to determine winners and losers, we need a system that maintains that spirit, not consolidates power for it's own ends.
The other problem with the extremely small rate is that it creates an unrealistic assumption on the public that raising the tax does not hurt them, how would it hurt business? Therefore, the rate must be at least substantial enough to register in their life before they can think of the effects on the whole of the system. And visible enough to trace it's effects in the marketplace.
I agree completely with the concept on a Federal Level. However, I still wish for states to have autonomy over their own form of taxation. If a state chooses this form of taxation, then they will choose it. And I do see a valid argument for use taxes and excise taxes on items society see as harmful or disruptive to the general welfare of the public. Or even in the case of fuel use taxes to maintain road infrastructure.
The one advantage of this system over what I envisioned is that it would be even harder for limits and exclusions to be included at a later date. Therefore, it is a more stable form of taxation. My version would have a shelf life that would have to be maintained or it would lose it effectiveness in time.
My overall goal in writing the CUT Tax has been the elimination of favoritism or targeting of groups by the Federal Tax Code. All taxes should be blind and effect everyone equally. Our government was originally designed to minimize the power for the government to determine winners and losers, we need a system that maintains that spirit, not consolidates power for it's own ends.
The other problem with the extremely small rate is that it creates an unrealistic assumption on the public that raising the tax does not hurt them, how would it hurt business? Therefore, the rate must be at least substantial enough to register in their life before they can think of the effects on the whole of the system. And visible enough to trace it's effects in the marketplace.
No comments:
Post a Comment