Tax Reform

I'm very interested in tax reform. The current tax code has a ton of problems that need to be fixed. I have seen various proposals to fix this, but I want everyone to pick their favorite or favorites.

• Automated Payment Transaction Tax
• Buffet Rule
• Competitive Tax Plan
• Efficient Taxation of Income
• FairTax (spelled with no space between the r and T)
• Flat Tax
• Hall-Rabushka Flat Tax
• Kepner Income Tax
• Pigovian Tax
• Land Value Site Valuation Tax
• Taxpayer Choice Act
• Unlimited Savings Allowance Tax
• Value Added Tax
• X Tax

edited 20th Oct '11 11:27:51 AM by secretist

...absolutely none of them, although Kepner Income Tax is probably the closest.

101% on anyone in the entertainment industry.

~ignores Deboss~

The Kepner Plan isn't half bad, actually, if it didn't get rid of corporate taxes. I don't know exactly what payroll taxes are, but...

Deboss: What.

Care to explain that?

edited 20th Oct '11 7:45:39 PM by MarkVonLewis

1001% on Michael Bay's estate.

Fuckin' with people.

Michael Bay isn't that bad, though. Who's that one German guy, Uwe something? He's a dick.

Anyhow, I think the Kepner plan sets the top bracket a bit too low, but with corporate and payroll(?) taxes retained and no loopholes, perhaps it'd be alright...

edited 20th Oct '11 8:12:16 PM by USAF721

@USAF

If I'm remembering right, payroll taxes are basically Social Security, Unemployment, and Medicare. So... unless we're implementing a system to replace those, repealing the taxes that fund them would be kinda really bad.

And I too think that removing the corporation tax is bad.

And there needs to be more tiers, and those percentages are not going to be nearly high enough.

But it's still closer to a sane idea than every other tax idea I've seen.

edited 20th Oct '11 8:46:59 PM by Jeysie

I don't think the percentages are that low, considering that exemptions and loopholes would be gone, largely.

If we retained corporate and payroll taxes, it wouldn't be too bad at al, actually. Could always tweak the numbers, but...

As an addendum: Funny you should mention raising taxes on Uwe Boll, as IIRC the entire reason he makes movies is because he gets tax breaks from it.

Too bad there's no Wikipedia page for 999 or I would have listed it too. There is a political positions of Herman Cain page.

edited 21st Oct '11 2:22:08 PM by secretist

Here's your 9-9-9 data.

Here's the info Rick Santorum quoted against 999, but not in chart form.

Herman Cain does claim that only the analysis on his website is correct and that the others are incorrect.

edited 21st Oct '11 2:29:08 PM by secretist

Well, thing is, you're (naturally), approaching this particular issue from the position of defining "reform" as "whatever minimizes taxes across the board, period."

That's not necessarily good reform, though...

Yes, I know reform has to tackle spending also. Wikipedia didn't have anyone that involved spending in the calculations. Most plans have no actual laid down rates, so they can be as low or as high as the government wanted to put it.

I am thoroughly unsurprised that you missed my point entirely—or just don't care to address it.

Oh well.

Yeah, the idea of actual useful reform would be to simplify the tax code as much as possible while still generating enough revenue in a progressive way to cover all needed services.

Not "whatever makes taxes as low as possible".

Simply put, I think that taxes are far too low, and that they should be greatly increased so that there can be more funding for research, culture, science, development, medicine, and Libraries.

You assume if government doesn't fund those things they won't get funded.

Except you know, they generally dont

Some of it won't. Much of it will, and will come out as a much more expensive products marketed for profit, limiting those who could afford it to the high-middle and upper classes.

edited 22nd Oct '11 1:54:32 PM by USAF713

What assumption? There's no private funding for those things occurring right now. It's not like government spending money on libraries blocks private funding.

Also, govt revenues isn't limited to taxation, but there's non-tax revenue sources. Increasing revenue doesn't neccessarily mean increasing taxes.

Yes, but to make the discussion clear, which things are you referring to?