The first thing America needs to be educated on is how many bloody taxes there are and how much they take from productive Americans in return for benefits that never, ever equal the magnitude of the taking. We also need to know the truly stupid and corrupt shit the gov't spends it on. USAID isn't even the tip of the iceberg.
The bloody Tax Code is the real enemy here. It is beyond the ability of even a single lawyer practicing law for 50 years to master. You have to seek counsel of lawyers who specialize in your particular industry. Think about that for a second.
The benefits of a "different" methodology -- the taxation process -- would be to make it understandable, simple, and effective.
Today a fairly average person is paying income, medicare, SS, sales tax, capital gains tax, and estate taxes. Income gets taxed 3X at least.
All that shit can be abolished with a simple reliance on tariffs -- which is how the bloody country was funded until 1913 -- and a simple consumption tax. A mediocre accountant could make the numbers balance in about an hour and 16 minutes. The math isn't hard.
The real problem is the God damn gov't has to stop spending money it doesn't have. We could easily cut the Federal gov't by half and never notice the difference.
In my lifetime, Trump 2.0 is the only President who has understood the problem sufficiently to be able to fashion a solution.
As much as I like the consumption tax, until the 16th amendment is repealed, any changes to the tax system only open up the option for the feds to re-institute the income tax whenever they decide it's "necessary".
The FairTax.org site says if the amendment is not repealed, FairTax gets repealed and we go back to the old system. This is also in the House Bill that is sitting in the Ways and Means Committee.
IT Gone! There's your slogan. Now let's make it happen.
It's simple enough, it's "deceptive" enough, though true, but not encompassing everything you wrote.
It's a simplification, or dumbing down, that will draw attention to the extent that many people will actually want to know a little bit more about it. It also focuses on getting more of the older crowd to actually express curiosity.
I hate the idea of an inheritance tax. Besides, most inheritors of great wealth eventually lose it in successive generations since they do not have the drive nor ideas of the original wealth creator.
I also hate how it is always framed as part of a class struggle when it’s really just envy. My only struggle was working hard enough to build my personal wealth. Why should government have claim to any of it since they already taxed it the first time around?
I would love to see a poll that strips away the class elements and envy of the inheritance tax.
The only poll question that needs to be asked is: “Should death be a taxable event?”
Capital gains are another "double" tax, likewise taxes on dividends.
Years ago my father was on the National Tax Council. They worked very hard to eliminate both taxes...did have some success in reducing capital gains and dividend tax rates.
Of course Congresscritters love to mess with these formulas so the real tax paid can be different.
Just think how much of an economic boost we would see from moving non-value added IRS employees and tax accountants/ attorneys to productive endeavors.
Ever since Neal Boortz started talking about it (and I have his book), I've been a big fan of the idea. My congressman (R) won't take a stand on it, and I might have to help get a FairTax fan in the next primary. My Colorado senators (communists both) would fight it tooth and nail. :(
You'd be surprised. I had a conversation with the Economic Policy person of a Democratic Senator. They were not against it, not for it, wanted to learn more. Parts of this are VERY appealing to a Democrat. Big incentive to a recycle, reuse economy. Big incentive to get people off welfare and no tax for poorer people. Big incentives for American investment as far as factories etc with elimination of all the bullshit taxes and minefield of deductions.
Would the tax apply to the purchase of residential real estate? Would it apply to corporations? To services? To private school tuition? College tuition? Hard to see tax lawyers and lobbyists going away.
brand spanking new residential real estate, probably in some form. the building materials used would have been charged a tax, so that would probably be passed on in some way. "used" residential real estate, no.
If only. I just don't see the shift in thinking about the tax structure needed to accomplish a consumption tax base in the general population, and definitely not in the "elites" that rely upon the current structure for their power.
The consumption tax is logical and I support it, however, human beings are not logical in much of their reasoning
The Fair Tax needs a slogan as simple as MAGA or MAHA in order to convince hearts and minds. People change their opinions based on persuasion more than facts.
The Fair Tax website has a couple of good, simple lines that could work. “Keep your paycheck” and “Keep your benefits.” Those two statements are a great starting point. Make America Income Tax Free is kind of clunky but might be good persuasion for much of the country.
As to the voter base, there is a path forward based on the rise of Americans self identifying as Independents. The rise of Independents is due to people wanting to avoid the excesses of each party but still be able to navigate their way through their social circles with a default non-controversial identifier. Some of these new Independents are also of the illogical “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” crowd. The Fair Tax should appeal to them.
One of the reasons Trump won in 2024 was by attracting more Independents. I believe that Trump is the only politician who could make the Fair Tax a reality through Republican and Independent support, and also through an appeal to the youngsters who voted for him and are open to new ideas that could make them wealthier and reduce the power of Big Government.
Replacing the "income tax" with a "consumption tax" could abolish the IRS, and replace it with another bureaucracy to monitor and enforce it. I don't see how it will collect on the underground economy.
There's plenty wrong with the "income tax" as currently structured. The only tax which would be fair is a tax on privilege. That is, all privileges granted or protected by the governments.
Underground economy uses cash. when they buy goods from retail, they pay. Used goods don't matter. You might miss some services taxes, but for a person in a reputable business the risk of not collecting the tax will be far too great.
I would do a starter with an Alternative Maximum Tax. No deductions. Just (perhaps) 20% maximum tax on individual income, no matter where it comes from.
The first thing America needs to be educated on is how many bloody taxes there are and how much they take from productive Americans in return for benefits that never, ever equal the magnitude of the taking. We also need to know the truly stupid and corrupt shit the gov't spends it on. USAID isn't even the tip of the iceberg.
The bloody Tax Code is the real enemy here. It is beyond the ability of even a single lawyer practicing law for 50 years to master. You have to seek counsel of lawyers who specialize in your particular industry. Think about that for a second.
The benefits of a "different" methodology -- the taxation process -- would be to make it understandable, simple, and effective.
Today a fairly average person is paying income, medicare, SS, sales tax, capital gains tax, and estate taxes. Income gets taxed 3X at least.
All that shit can be abolished with a simple reliance on tariffs -- which is how the bloody country was funded until 1913 -- and a simple consumption tax. A mediocre accountant could make the numbers balance in about an hour and 16 minutes. The math isn't hard.
The real problem is the God damn gov't has to stop spending money it doesn't have. We could easily cut the Federal gov't by half and never notice the difference.
In my lifetime, Trump 2.0 is the only President who has understood the problem sufficiently to be able to fashion a solution.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
PS -- all those founders and VCs in Silicon Valley need to understand the USBS, bloody morons.
https://themusingsofthebigredcar.com/venture-capital-qsbs-capital-gains-tax-exemption-and-one-big-beautiful-bill-act-2025/
If they did, they would pay nothing in taxes except to the vampires in California.
As much as I like the consumption tax, until the 16th amendment is repealed, any changes to the tax system only open up the option for the feds to re-institute the income tax whenever they decide it's "necessary".
The FairTax.org site says if the amendment is not repealed, FairTax gets repealed and we go back to the old system. This is also in the House Bill that is sitting in the Ways and Means Committee.
I(income)T(ax) Gone!
IT Gone! There's your slogan. Now let's make it happen.
It's simple enough, it's "deceptive" enough, though true, but not encompassing everything you wrote.
It's a simplification, or dumbing down, that will draw attention to the extent that many people will actually want to know a little bit more about it. It also focuses on getting more of the older crowd to actually express curiosity.
It just might work.
I hate the idea of an inheritance tax. Besides, most inheritors of great wealth eventually lose it in successive generations since they do not have the drive nor ideas of the original wealth creator.
I also hate how it is always framed as part of a class struggle when it’s really just envy. My only struggle was working hard enough to build my personal wealth. Why should government have claim to any of it since they already taxed it the first time around?
I would love to see a poll that strips away the class elements and envy of the inheritance tax.
The only poll question that needs to be asked is: “Should death be a taxable event?”
Capital gains are another "double" tax, likewise taxes on dividends.
Years ago my father was on the National Tax Council. They worked very hard to eliminate both taxes...did have some success in reducing capital gains and dividend tax rates.
Of course Congresscritters love to mess with these formulas so the real tax paid can be different.
Consumption tax is the only way.
Just think how much of an economic boost we would see from moving non-value added IRS employees and tax accountants/ attorneys to productive endeavors.
You will never be able to eliminate the IRS even with the Fairtax, but you could go a long way toward doing more with less.
Ever since Neal Boortz started talking about it (and I have his book), I've been a big fan of the idea. My congressman (R) won't take a stand on it, and I might have to help get a FairTax fan in the next primary. My Colorado senators (communists both) would fight it tooth and nail. :(
You'd be surprised. I had a conversation with the Economic Policy person of a Democratic Senator. They were not against it, not for it, wanted to learn more. Parts of this are VERY appealing to a Democrat. Big incentive to a recycle, reuse economy. Big incentive to get people off welfare and no tax for poorer people. Big incentives for American investment as far as factories etc with elimination of all the bullshit taxes and minefield of deductions.
Would the tax apply to the purchase of residential real estate? Would it apply to corporations? To services? To private school tuition? College tuition? Hard to see tax lawyers and lobbyists going away.
brand spanking new residential real estate, probably in some form. the building materials used would have been charged a tax, so that would probably be passed on in some way. "used" residential real estate, no.
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
If only. I just don't see the shift in thinking about the tax structure needed to accomplish a consumption tax base in the general population, and definitely not in the "elites" that rely upon the current structure for their power.
How would you shift it strategically? Who would be your spokesman to get to people under the age of 45?
The consumption tax is logical and I support it, however, human beings are not logical in much of their reasoning
The Fair Tax needs a slogan as simple as MAGA or MAHA in order to convince hearts and minds. People change their opinions based on persuasion more than facts.
The Fair Tax website has a couple of good, simple lines that could work. “Keep your paycheck” and “Keep your benefits.” Those two statements are a great starting point. Make America Income Tax Free is kind of clunky but might be good persuasion for much of the country.
As to the voter base, there is a path forward based on the rise of Americans self identifying as Independents. The rise of Independents is due to people wanting to avoid the excesses of each party but still be able to navigate their way through their social circles with a default non-controversial identifier. Some of these new Independents are also of the illogical “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” crowd. The Fair Tax should appeal to them.
One of the reasons Trump won in 2024 was by attracting more Independents. I believe that Trump is the only politician who could make the Fair Tax a reality through Republican and Independent support, and also through an appeal to the youngsters who voted for him and are open to new ideas that could make them wealthier and reduce the power of Big Government.
I agree more with you than you do with yourself.
JLM
www.themusingsofthebigredcar.com
Good questions Jeff, and ones that admittedly I had not considered (as he hangs his head in shame). Let me "cogitate" on it for a while.
Replacing the "income tax" with a "consumption tax" could abolish the IRS, and replace it with another bureaucracy to monitor and enforce it. I don't see how it will collect on the underground economy.
There's plenty wrong with the "income tax" as currently structured. The only tax which would be fair is a tax on privilege. That is, all privileges granted or protected by the governments.
Underground economy uses cash. when they buy goods from retail, they pay. Used goods don't matter. You might miss some services taxes, but for a person in a reputable business the risk of not collecting the tax will be far too great.
"Should We Eliminate the IRS?"
Yes. Great piece. I think Lois Lerner is the only government employee to pay somewhat of a price.
I would do a starter with an Alternative Maximum Tax. No deductions. Just (perhaps) 20% maximum tax on individual income, no matter where it comes from.
that changes nothing except rates
Would be incredibly simple, and less chance for abuse like Green Energy tax avoidance schemes.
Simple predictable taxes for individuals would be a huge boost to making productive decisions, rather than tax avoidance.
I think it would flow from corporate to individuals pretty easily.
I have to say that I DESPISE AMT. Not just the circuitous way it is calculated.
Let's not forget the additional taxes we all pay on investment income courtesy of ObamaCare.
Yeah but... AMT should be Max