At the beginning of this year, you might have been curious about the hoopla over the proposal that was introduced in Congress to impose a national sales tax on everything we purchase. After all, 45 of our 50 states collect sales taxes. Also, 170 different countries collect something similar: a value-added tax, which is assessed on different purchases across the supply chain for manufactured articles and digital services that is ultimately passed on to the consumer.
The proposal, codified in something called the Fair Tax Act that was introduced in the House of Representatives on January 10th, would eliminate all income taxes, payroll taxes and corporate taxes, and incidentally also eliminate the Internal Revenue Service. It would replace those lost revenues with a tax on every item sold in the U.S., which has variably been reported to be 23% or 30%. The plan was actually created by the Church of Scientology during the Reagan presidency and has been floating on the margins of political respectability ever since.
There are several challenges to implementing a national sales tax. One of them is the practical aspects of it. The bill would have each state make the actual collections on sales within their boundaries (including, of course, the five states that don’t administer a sales tax), but only provide one quarter of one percent of the collected revenue for the trouble. Instead of an IRS, you would have 50 states with their own underfunded collection bureaucracies.
The political challenge is probably more problematic. Headlines these days are talking about the high cost of goods and services, and the overall inflation rate. Making things more costly for consumers in a highly-visible way, right there on the price tags, might not be a popular idea at this time. Moreover, the 23% rate that the sponsors are pushing is not entirely accurate. The proposal would impose a $30 national sales tax on every $100 that you spend, which, if you don’t have a calculator handy, comes to a 30% price increase and should probably be referred to as a 30% tax. The 23% figure comes when someone says that $30 is just 23% of the $130 amount that the consumer is paying, which seems to be a sly mathematical sleight of hand.
Then, there’s the fairness angle. The sales tax would fall most heavily on people who spend most of their income on goods and services – things like food, transportation, clothing, and the roof over their heads. People with more space between what they earn and what they have to spend on essentials would escape taxation on that “discretionary” income. The “fair tax” would be a Godsend to wealthier individuals, who could simply stash away a big chunk of their earnings untouched by government hands. Meanwhile, corporations would escape taxation altogether.
Finally, would the proposed sales tax replace the revenues generated by the various taxes we have on the books today? Probably not, considering a 2004
Disclosure Notice: The Wealth Conservatory® is a Registered Trade Mark of Comprehensive Planning Associates, Inc. - a Registered Investment Advisor with offices in New Hampshire, California, and Missouri. The Conservatory is not licensed to and does not engage in the practice of rendering legal or tax advice. Any discussion of either is for informational purposes only and you are strongly encouraged to seek appropriate counsel prior to taking action. The Conservatory and its representatives are in compliance with the current registration and notice filing requirements imposed upon SEC Registered Investment Advisors by those states in which the Conservatory maintains clients. The information contained herein should not be construed as personalized financial or investment advice unless the recipient has an executed and active client or member engagement with the Conservatory. The Wealth Conservatory® is a Registered Trademark of Comprehensive Planning Associates, Inc. Thank you.
