Value-Added Tax
I oppose a value-added tax because it is a burden to the lower and middle class who spend their money on the essentials items in life and would make it harder for them to put money into the economy.
Pro: It slowly gains taxes from each step in the process and so people are less likely to commit fraud because they wouldn't benefit from it. It would lower corporate taxes to help keep them in the USA. It also encourages investment instead of spending, which can be beneficial in the long run.
"We should be taxing consumption, not income . . . We should be in a position to have a tax system that finances our government and stimulates investment . . ."
Con: It is a regressive tax that is burdensome on the poor because they have to pay more in comparison to how much the wealthy have to spend on the same items. Although it's possible to reduce the tax on the essentials, it's still harder for the poor to afford them. It also wouldn't let individuals get tax incomes and so the IRS wouldn't be needed.
"Being a tax on consumption, it's a regressive tax, one that is disproportionately burdensome on the poor and middle class."
I oppose a value-added tax because it is a burden to the lower and middle class who spend their money on the essentials items in life and would make it harder for them to put money into the economy.
National Sales Tax
Pro: This tax would increase savings in households because they would be more conscious about what they purchase. It would help businesses bring their work back to the US, as their companies wouldn't be taxed anymore. We would also be able to tax foreign visitors whenever they buy items here. It is also said that the prices would drop because it wouldn't incorporate the businesses income tax.
"By removing the tax on the return to savings and investment, a consumptions tax would increase savings and investment . . . [and] result in higher production rates and higher wages."
Con: The tax would be regressive because the middle and lower class would have to spend more money on necessities while the richer can afford to save some of their income. It is also stated that the sales tax would be taken from the item plus the tax. They are also skeptical because they believe that the tax would have to be higher than the proposed rate in order to keep bringing in the same amount of revenue. It would eliminate the IRS, as well. If there were an immediate switch, then the older, retired people would have to pay double because they had paid income tax when they were working, and now they're paying taxes on the things they buy.
"The report argues that replacing most federal taxes with a national sales tax would cause large tax increases for most Americans while allowing huge tax cuts for the wealthiest."
I oppose the national sales tax because it doesn't seem realistic that we would create enough revenue to help eliminate the debt and if an item isn't sold then the government wouldn't be able to gain taxes from it.
Flat Tax
Pro: Republicans are the ones who are in the most support for this tax reform. There wouldn't be as many loopholes are there are nowadays in our tax system. Companies in the higher bracket wouldn't be able to talk to lobbyists or find loopholes in order to reduce their taxes. Investment tax also wouldn't be taxed, it would lead to economic growth and eliminate double taxation. We would also be able to save millions of dollars that we put towards hiring others to help us understand the tax code right now.
"Fairness is the greatest virtue of the flat tax . . . No matter how much money you make, what kind of business you are in, and whether or not you have lobbyists in Washington, you will be taxed at the same percentage as everyone one else."
Con: The tax would impact the lower and middle income bracket highly because they would end up paying more in taxes than the upper class. The investment income that fuels the high class wouldn't be taxed, compared to the full-time worker in a lower class where their paycheck would be taxed. It was shown that by using this system, the deficit would continue to grow. So the only way to improve it in this system is to tax more heavily on the lower and middle class.
"'. . . Forbes's plan "would greatly enlarge the gulf between have and have-nots'".
I oppose the flat tax because it would create too much of a burden on the lower and middle class, while the higher class would be able to have a smaller rate on taxes than they do now.
Progressive Tax
Pro: They believe that if a person earns more money, then they should pay more in taxes. They think that the tax rates have decreased over the past years for the higher class and that it isn't fair because some of their money comes from investment incomes. They also say that lowers the upper brackets' taxes doesn't improve the economy like they said it would. They believe that if the money stays in the lower to middle class that it would be more beneficial to the economy.
"'A progressive system distributes the risks of economic changes by basing a family's tax burden on their ability to pay.'"
Con: It unfairly taxes the higher class and it won't make up for the tax deficit that we have right now. It is believed that taxing the rich they won't be able to create businesses and jobs because they wouldn't have the money to do so. Many are tired as being seen or labeled as lazy people who don't have to work. Which causes them to be upset because they end up funding programs that they don't even use because they are directed towards the jobless/poor Americans.
"Taxing the rich to benefit the poor is also an unjust practice, opponents argue, because income distribution is inherently immoral."
I support the progressive tax because it would help level the playing field for each income bracket and so that each group would be taxed based on their incomes which would result in an increase of money into the economy.
"By removing the tax on the return to savings and investment, a consumptions tax would increase savings and investment . . . [and] result in higher production rates and higher wages."
Con: The tax would be regressive because the middle and lower class would have to spend more money on necessities while the richer can afford to save some of their income. It is also stated that the sales tax would be taken from the item plus the tax. They are also skeptical because they believe that the tax would have to be higher than the proposed rate in order to keep bringing in the same amount of revenue. It would eliminate the IRS, as well. If there were an immediate switch, then the older, retired people would have to pay double because they had paid income tax when they were working, and now they're paying taxes on the things they buy.
"The report argues that replacing most federal taxes with a national sales tax would cause large tax increases for most Americans while allowing huge tax cuts for the wealthiest."
I oppose the national sales tax because it doesn't seem realistic that we would create enough revenue to help eliminate the debt and if an item isn't sold then the government wouldn't be able to gain taxes from it.
Flat Tax
Pro: Republicans are the ones who are in the most support for this tax reform. There wouldn't be as many loopholes are there are nowadays in our tax system. Companies in the higher bracket wouldn't be able to talk to lobbyists or find loopholes in order to reduce their taxes. Investment tax also wouldn't be taxed, it would lead to economic growth and eliminate double taxation. We would also be able to save millions of dollars that we put towards hiring others to help us understand the tax code right now.
"Fairness is the greatest virtue of the flat tax . . . No matter how much money you make, what kind of business you are in, and whether or not you have lobbyists in Washington, you will be taxed at the same percentage as everyone one else."
Con: The tax would impact the lower and middle income bracket highly because they would end up paying more in taxes than the upper class. The investment income that fuels the high class wouldn't be taxed, compared to the full-time worker in a lower class where their paycheck would be taxed. It was shown that by using this system, the deficit would continue to grow. So the only way to improve it in this system is to tax more heavily on the lower and middle class.
"'. . . Forbes's plan "would greatly enlarge the gulf between have and have-nots'".
I oppose the flat tax because it would create too much of a burden on the lower and middle class, while the higher class would be able to have a smaller rate on taxes than they do now.
Progressive Tax
Pro: They believe that if a person earns more money, then they should pay more in taxes. They think that the tax rates have decreased over the past years for the higher class and that it isn't fair because some of their money comes from investment incomes. They also say that lowers the upper brackets' taxes doesn't improve the economy like they said it would. They believe that if the money stays in the lower to middle class that it would be more beneficial to the economy.
"'A progressive system distributes the risks of economic changes by basing a family's tax burden on their ability to pay.'"
Con: It unfairly taxes the higher class and it won't make up for the tax deficit that we have right now. It is believed that taxing the rich they won't be able to create businesses and jobs because they wouldn't have the money to do so. Many are tired as being seen or labeled as lazy people who don't have to work. Which causes them to be upset because they end up funding programs that they don't even use because they are directed towards the jobless/poor Americans.
"Taxing the rich to benefit the poor is also an unjust practice, opponents argue, because income distribution is inherently immoral."
I support the progressive tax because it would help level the playing field for each income bracket and so that each group would be taxed based on their incomes which would result in an increase of money into the economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment