Quote:
Originally Posted by PiKA2001
No, I'm talking income tax and unless the kid has a job and payroll taxes are being deducted from his check, he wouldn't be liable.
AFAIK The progressive tax rates currently in use has nothing to do with lower wage earners having zero to little tax liability, it's the tax credits in place that are saving some from the 10% bracket ( was 15% before GWB). If you believe that an across the board tax will hinder lower wage earner than what is the income to start taxing people at? 25k, 30k, 40k?
The government WILL tax the poor, trust me. It may not always be out in the open like income taxes but lottery, sin taxes, proposed "fat" taxes, sales taxes, and VAT taxes are all designed to get money from the people who are able to slink past paying income taxes.
|
Your flat tax idea would double my income tax liability.. so, no thanks
Now once my kids are grown and out of the house and I can go rent an apartment, sure! I believe that if mortgage interest was not deductible, it would further hurt the housing industry. There would be no incentive whatsoever to own a house. I would also have no incentive, nor would I be financially able to, donate as much to charity as I do. I would also be less inclined to invest for retirement with pre-tax dollars into the stock market. I believe the flat tax would hurt the middle class the most.
The difference with sin taxes is that I have a choice in those. However, most of those are state taxes anyway and wouldn't be affected by your flat rate tax.
Keep in mind that you won't always be single with no kids and no house and whether it would really be to your advantage then.
Threaded Mode
