Abolish Tax Code and IRS?

[Richard]

An interesting position.

Wanna guess who'll get audited this year? Hint - it won't be Ms Kelley.

Richard's $.02

Rep. Steve King and the I.R.S.
Sewell Chan, NYT, 23 Feb 2010

Representative Steven A. King, Republican of Iowa, has drawn criticism in recent days after news reports indicated that he expressed “empathy” for Andrew Joseph Stack III, the disgruntled computer engineer who crashed a small plane into an office building last week, killing himself and an employee of the Internal Revenue Service. Mr. Stack left behind a rambling suicide note that expressed anger at the I.R.S., which had 190 employees in the building.

Colleen M. Kelley, the president of the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents I.R.S. workers, issued a statement on Tuesday calling on Mr. King to apologize. Ms. Kelley said in the statement:

This senseless act of violence cost an innocent man — a dedicated public servant and veteran — his life. Vernon Hunter’s family is mourning a husband, father and grandfather and IRS employees are mourning a leader, friend and colleague. Representative King’s comments are inappropriate and show an appalling lack of compassion over his death, as well as a lack of respect for the lives of federal employees nationwide.

Representative King should retract and apologize for his ill-conceived statements concerning the tragic event that took place in Austin and pledge, as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, to do everything he can to ensure that the safety of federal employees remains one of our government’s highest priorities.

Mr. King has not denied the remarks — which were apparently made at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Saturday.

He said in a statement:

As a founder of a small business who has endured I.R.S. audits, I understand the deep frustration with the I.R.S. In the early days, my company could not run without me on the job. I once had to shut it down just to be in the room with the I.R.S. I did not get a fair shake, but I channeled my frustration the American way and ran for office. Americans looking for an outlet for their frustration should join me in calling on Congress to pass a national sales tax and abolish the current federal tax code and the I.R.S.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...and-the-i-r-s/

[LarryW]

There's something seriously wrong with our system that the rants and raves of the shock-jocks (both right and left) cover up. It's like white noise; it's the strange smell in the back of a taxi that the twelve pine tree scent lozenges around the mirror won't cover up. Short of a widespread calamity the problem is going to remain and will continue to wreak havoc. Our tax system is out of step with the capability and needs of our economy. Been like that for years. Unfortunately, there are probably a lot more Andrew Joseph Stack, III's and Steven A. King's, just waiting.

[JAGO]

Thanks Richard.

People would be a lot less frustrated with the federal government if all (we) federal employees were required to do the following:

1. Provide our name and employee ID number to citizen/taxpayers we are dealing with. NO hiding.

2. Provide our individual desk telephone number to people we are dealing with.

3. Return telephone calls to people who call us.

4. Telephone people who receive our written communications, to explain, answer their questions, and discuss avenues available should they disagree.

The American people are frustrated with the IRS. They are frustrated with the VA. They have issues with Immigration. They can't understand Civilian Personnel Offices.

It's like the federal government has gone to CIF at Ft Bragg and recruited the children from all those GS-negative 3s's I encountered there and populated all of the "public facing entities" in the federal government with folks who seem to get a kick out of having the power to say "no".

The representative (King) could have chosen his words more carefully, IMO the union is full of $**t.

v/r
phil

[tonyz]

I agree with JAGO's comments - having been on both sides of this matter - inside the bureaucracy and later appearing before the same agency - I feel that direct dial telephone numbers for those inside an agency and the courtesy of a return call should be a required minimum.

While there are good folks inside the beast, many, too many, hide for an entire career.

Many, have mastered the art of "bureaucratese" - playing phone tag, sending unsigned correspondence, and while in a meeting of "decision makers" one learns quickly that all that needs be done to slow something down is to express "concern" whether real or imagined. Often, the matter is tabled and the meeting rescheduled months later after a "select blue ribbon" committee "studies" the matter at hand.

Unfortunately, much of our bureaucratic system is populated with sophists who provide the conclusion that the long time boss wants to hear - don't make waves is the mantra and don't make decisions.

Many, in the revenue area will eschew actual analysis and race to the inevitable conclusion..."no" or "taxable" because they believe it is their job to protect the fisc, not provide the "right" answer.

Rant over, back to trying to scratch out a living.

[Don]

For the longest time I have not thought about the tax code. Just looked at it as my duty as a citizen until I realized my required duty is quite a bit higher than others. My Dad would continually rant about how much he had to pay each year (BTW…he was a retired MSG with three kids and a stay at home Army-Wife, just to give some perspective on our social/economic status. We didn’t come from money).

In the current system you bust you’re a$$, become successful, and BAM…you are punished for your work. I mean, in comparison, my brother in law has not held down a job in over a decade where he has paid federal taxes. If he has…it is EXTREMELY minimal. He works as a day laborer, and gets his earning “under the table”. Every year though, he drags home $5000 in a tax refund. WTF??? How can you be refunded more than you paid?

Now, there are folks proposing an alternative to the current system, which is so complicated you need to hire an interpreter (read: tax lawyer) or count on the programming of turbo tax to get your taxes done. The current tax system is so cumbersome and unfair, most folks don’t like it anyway. I would wager that more folks would oppose this current tax system than healthcare if it was a bill they were trying to pass right now. I mean, the folks proposing it would be run out of town on a rail.

I have read about the fair tax, and have yet to hear an argument over how it will not work better than what we have.

What I see in regards to the acceptance of a fair tax is that it is a BIG change to the status quo. But no less a big change than when the 16th amendment was ratified in 1913. If it is the duty of the citizen to fund the Government, then all should do their fair share. Here are some of the benefits:

1. ALL people (not just citizens) pay.
2. ALL earnings, regardless if "under the table" or not are susceptible to tax...because when you buy...you are taxed. We would be non-discriminatory over who would have to pay.
3. Big business would return to American shores since there would be no corporate taxes. All that money in foreign accounts would return since there would be no penalty to bring it in. How would an estimated 1 trillion dollar infusion in the banking system look right about now? That is the guesstimated amount of corporate earnings sitting in foreign accounts. What about other foreign corporations that currently stay away due to the expense of doing business in the US?
4. Price of goods would not appreciably inflate because the current prices include embedded taxes at all phases of production (corporations do not pay taxes…it is passed on to you).
5. The more consumption, the better revenue…as well as opportunity for business.

I am by no means an expert in the fair tax…but have done a bit of reading on the subject. Why does the fair tax sound like a win/win, but is ignored as an extremist/whacko position?

[craigepo]

Don
A group(s) is trying to sell the state of Missouri on the fair tax now, and it has met with tepid response.

Initially, everybody knows that the government is going to get their money, whatever type of tax is imposed.

Second, the initial sell was based on statewide growth allegedly evidenced by other states that had adopted the fair tax. However, what they didn't tell everybody is that those states were also right-to-work states.

Third, the retirees are complaining, as they would now be taxed again.

Also, there is an element that is not unlike the present health care debate. Do you go with the monster that you know, or the unknown monster that they are selling?

Finally, the idea was never sold as a tax cut, just a different type of tax. Missouri is still a somewhat-conservative state(amended the constitution to make marriage between a man and a woman 75%-25%), so most here like the idea of "starving the beast" when it comes to taxation.

[The Reaper]

Once you get the flat tax, VAT, or whatever, the government just raises the tax each year to cover government expenditures, simple math, till they kill the goose.

Remember the orginal income tax rate for most Americans was 1.5% of income.

Easier for us, easier for them as well.

TR

[tonyz]

The devil is always in the details - but we as a country do need a new, simpler, predictable and efficient tax structure - one that is used predominantly to raise revenue and not for playing political games. I believe that is near impossible in our current political and economic environment.

The formula exists however - lower the rates and broaden the base - more people paying less.

Do away with most all deductions and using a low rate across the board for an income tax, a flat tax, a consumption tax, or whatever we can agree on.

It (a simple and fair tax system) can be designed, but for all the rice bowls and political cowards. I work in and have worked in the industry advising some of this country's largest corporations. EVERYONE admits that the current structure is cumbersome, inefficient and too complicated (and too expensive). Many smart folks working in the tax consulting industry are smart enough to retool and would welcome a simpler structure. Others, are unwilling and continue to throw roadblocks to feather their own nest.

The politicians, the bureaucrats and the CPA's and Tax Lawyers often are short sighted and look only to their current jobs or fee stream. The CPA's and Tax Lawyers are smart enough to find additional value added work. The pols and bureaucrats...I'm not so sure.

We as a country need a simpler and fairer system - culturally - I'm not sure that we currently have the politicians to do what it will take to get us there. I know that the bureaucrats will fight tooth and nail against a simpler system. They of the ilk that refer to a banana in regulations as elongated yellow fruit...good luck.

[GratefulCitizen]

Simple solution.
Simple, not easy.

Have the States, via a convention, amend the Constitution to this effect:
-Prohibit from the congress all powers of taxation except a direct capitation tax upon the States, in proportion to population
-Prohibit from the congress and courts the power to meddle in the States' tax policies

The States will have differing tax policies.
People will leave the States which don't work.
People will move to the States which do work.

Redistribution would necessarily go from producing to consuming States.
Attempts at excessive redistribution would be checked by the Senate.

16th amendment needs to be repealed.

[craigepo]

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Prohibit from the congress and courts the power to meddle in the States' tax policies

I don't like any law, rule, or regulation which attempts to leave me without redress in a court of law. The Founding Fathers liked juries for a reason.

[KLB]

It's probably easier to pressure congress not to raise a flat tax than it is to pressure the IRS to do anything. The tax code is so complicated that lawyers and accountants struggle with it; and much more so, the clerical worker that the average person deals with when they have a tax question. One study a couple of years ago verified that if somebody asked 5 different IRS reps the same question they would get 5 different answers. I've heard many of the pros and cons of having a flat tax, and while I don't know enough about it to be for or against abolishing the IRS, one thing does seem clear to me, the system we have now is an embarrassing example of bureaucracy run-a-muck that is in dire need of reform.

[Don]

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Simple solution.
Simple, not easy.

Have the States, via a convention, amend the Constitution to this effect:
-Prohibit from the congress all powers of taxation except a direct capitation tax upon the States, in proportion to population
-Prohibit from the congress and courts the power to meddle in the States' tax policies

The States will have differing tax policies.
People will leave the States which don't work.
People will move to the States which do work.

Redistribution would necessarily go from producing to consuming States.
Attempts at excessive redistribution would be checked by the Senate.

16th amendment needs to be repealed.

I think it is funny that most folks do not show much allegiance to their State except when it comes to college football (except for Texans...lordy, lordy they ain't in that category).

To me the world is upside down. I think the majority of my tax dollars should go to the State and a lesser amount to the Federal Government. IMHO...THAT is the crux of the matter. The Federal Gov'ment continues to hold States hostage to the almighty federal dollar. Should be the other way around.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Don

I think it is funny that most folks do not show much allegiance to their State except when it comes to college football (except for Texans...lordy, lordy they ain't in that category).

To me the world is upside down. I think the majority of my tax dollars should go to the State and a lesser amount to the Federal Government. IMHO...THAT is the crux of the matter. The Federal Gov'ment continues to hold States hostage to the almighty federal dollar. Should be the other way around.

That changed around 1865 or so.

TR

[Don]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

That changed around 1865 or so.

TR

Sure did. But now all states are enslaved to the federal government. I am not advocating secesionism, but I do think the state should have greater power to do as the state legeslature sees fit. If the State wants prayer in school...not an issue for the fed. If they want smoking in government buidings...not an issue for the fed.

The State should have the preponderance of power for it's residents. If the legislature enacts crazy laws...you do your voting with your feet. The fed is there for protection (read: common defense). The weight of my last post was supposed to be levied on the taxation issue, not on secessionism. That didn't work the first go-around...it won't work if tried again.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by craigepo

...Third, the retirees are complaining, as they would now be taxed again.........

That is a false statement that the anti-fair tax folks push to scare the older folks. "You'll be taxed on what they've taxed you on before."

It has to do with the embedded tax.

For this conversation lets drop the issue of state taxes and just look at Federal. Right now if you buy a $100 item "YOU" pay no federal tax and the item costs you $100. But the item has the embedded taxes of around $25. Corporations do not pay taxes, they pass them on to you in increased cost. So the true cost was $75 for the item and $25 in embedded tax.

Under the fair tax the embedded tax is done away with (here comes more business) and the $75 item is placed on the shelf for you to buy. You purchase it and now pay the $25 tax - total cost to you $100.

The purchasing cost of the retired folks money remains the same.

The other thing anti-Fair Tax folks like to play with are inclusive and exclusive tax rates. Lets look at a person who earned $100,000 and paid $30,000 in tax. What was the tax rate? Depends. Inclusive your tax rate was 30% exclusive it was 42.85%. The anti's love to twist around things and the MSM is happy to help.