Neal Boortz testifies before Congress..very interesting read

[Little]

I am running around a bit and haven't got to read the link to his actual testimony and his prepared script, but this is neat stuff:

What an experience ... and not an encouraging one at that. Yesterday afternoon I had the privilege of testifying before the (take a deep breath) Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information and International Security of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. I testified at the invitation of committee chairman Tom Coburn (R-OK) who, by the way, is a Senate sponsor of The FairTax Act. [read text of my testimony]
The purpose of this hearing --- and no, I have no idea what it had to do with homeland security --- was to hear testimony on ways to close the "tax gap" and simplify our tax code.
Tax gap? What's that, you ask? Well, it's the difference between what people owe and what people actually pay. The capital gains tax gap, for instance, is the difference between what taxpayers owe in taxes on their capital gains, and what they actually pay.
Now since the subject at hand was how to get people to pay more of the taxes they owe, you might expect that there would have been much said about how to gather the information necessary to better enforce our tax laws. Well, you would be right.
I made some quick notes while I was waiting to testify. Here are some of the nifty ideas that were being tossed around as to how to get more people to pay the taxes they owe:

• Credit card gross receipts reporting. Now, details weren't available to fill in the blanks for an outsider like me, but I suspect that the idea here is to get credit card companies to report to the IRS the amount of gross receipts a particular business might rack up from customers using credit cards.
• Enhanced third party reporting. I would imagine that this means the government should go to greater lengths to get third parties in financial transactions to make a report to the feds as to the details of that transaction. Just guessing, but would this mean that if you write a check to your landscaper the bank where you have your checking account would report that transaction to the IRS?
• Change the currency every five years. Yup, no kidding. One of the witnesses (if memory serves me he worked for the IRS) suggested that we change our currency every five years or so. This would keep people from hoarding large amounts of cash, or sending that cash overseas to work. Every five years that cash would have to be traded in for the new updated cash. If you come walking in to your bank with a huge wad of cash, questions would be asked and reports made.
• Withholding on independent contractors. It seems these IRS types who were testifying yesterday are more than a little upset because so many independent contractors .... people who do not have taxes withheld by those who employ them ... are not reporting all of their earnings. so, why not just withhold those taxes before the independent contractor is paid?
• Promote the use of debit and credit cards. Well, we've seen this one coming for some time. The government would just love for us to move toward a cashless society. Whenever you use a credit card or a debit card there is a paper trail of your transaction ... a trail that the government can access to determine whether or not you are paying your "fair share." So the proposal was made yesterday that the government should encourage the use of credit and debit cards. I suppose that means discouraging the use of cash.

Using cash will be outlawed... within 5 years in 6-10 years in 10+ years never These were just some of the ideas being tossed around. But let's get to one of those phrases that these tax-types seem to love so much: Tax expenditures.
Do you know what a "tax expenditure" is? You can get a detailed definition at this website, but simply stated a tax expenditure is the money that you are allowed to keep when you take advantage of certain tax breaks like the home mortgage interest deduction. Senator Coburn pretty much nailed it when he opined that the phrase seems to give the impression that the government is establish its claim to everything you earn, and anything that you are allowed to keep is a tax expenditure. In other words, the government owns all wealth, but the government will expend some of its resources so that you can receive some of the benefits of your hard work.
Then my turn to testify arrived. I have no allusions of grandeur here. I was the last person to testify on the last witness panel for the day. I was the little man with the bucket and shovel following the show horses in the parade. By the time they got to me .. by the time I had heard all of this testimony about third party reporting, expanding withholding and tax expenditures, I had thrown away much of my prepared script. I never did work all that well from prepared scripts in the first place.
I told the committee that I didn't speak governmentese very well ... but I could tell them with certainty that if their goal truly was to simplify our tax system and to make it so transparent that virtually any marginally education person could understand it, they weren't going to get there using phrases like "tax expenditures." I told them that under our current tax code not only didn't people understand concepts like tax gaps and third-party reporting, most people didn't even have an idea of how much they made in their jobs ("I take home .......") or how much they paid in taxes ("I didn't have to pay any! I'm getting some back!").
If tax simplification is the goal; if tax transparency is the desired outcome, then there is no better way to arrive there then the FairTax. You spend $100 on an item. You get a sales receipt that says the retailer keeps $77 and $23 goes to the federal government. Who can't understand that? There are no tax expenditures. There is no need for withholding from independent contractors. You don't have to change the currency every five years. You don't have to chase U.S. dollars abroad. You don't need to follow credit card gross receipts. You spend, you're taxed. You don't, you aren't. It's a system anyone can understand.
If you would like to read the actual prepared statement I submitted to the committee ... here's your link!

[john w k]

Some questions for H.R. 25 [alleged fair tax] supporters.

Now why would you support H.R. 25 which would create a new tax in America, a 23 percent tax calculated from the value of property within each of the various states, real and personal, and maintain Congress` power to also calculate taxes from profits, gains, salaries and other ``income``?

In addition, H.R. 25 would create a massive and very dangerous voting constituency under its family consumption entitlement, an entitlement which would make Hilary Health Care look like chicken feed and is estimated to cost approximately $ 600 BILLION a year.

Why do you want to create another voting block, one which would not only be dependent upon a monthly government check___ but would dwarf our nation`s social security recipients already receiving a monthly government check? Bad idea! Very, very bad idea!

We don`t need another voting constituency dependent upon a monthly government check!

Why do you not support a return our Constitution`s original tax plan which can be reactivated by demanding our public servants add the following words to our Constitution?

``The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money``

Supporting a return to the founder`s original tax plan would in fact accomplish the fairy tale version of H.R. 25, and without its undesirable consequences or effects!

Why do you not support the founder`s original tax plan?

You do know that socialists worked very hard to establish an income tax in America and remove the constitutional requirement of apportioning such a tax [a tax calculated from wealth] among the states. Seems to me that same crowd is back and this time they want to establish another tax calculated from wealth [the value of property, real and personal] without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census of enumeration.

You do know H.R. 25 proposes to subjugate the rule of apportionment for a general tax among the states to fill the national treasury. Our founding fathers agreed that if Congress found it necessary to call upon the states to fill the national treasury in a general tax among the states, those states paying the largest share of the burden would likewise exercise a vote in Congress proportionate to their financial contribution.

I know socialists love the one man one vote idea when it comes to deciding how to spend money from the federal treasury, but when it comes to filling the national treasury, they run and hide from the constitutional rule requiring one vote one dollar.

Those who support H.R. 25 seem to also love enforcing the following formula to exercise their vote in Congress when spending federal revenue:

State`s Population
_________________X size of Congress (435)=State`s No.of votes in Congress
population of U.S.

But when it comes time to paying the tab, those who support H.R. 25 want to subjugate our Constitution`s fair share formula for filling the national treasury, just like socialists run and hide from the formula:


State`s population
------------------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE`S SHARE
Total U.S. Population

HERE IS A LIST which includes Representatives and Senators who support subjugating our Constitution`s fair share formula for a general tax among the states to fill the national treasury..

Regards,
JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides, that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?" Justice Story

[john w k]

Well, not only does Neal Boortz lie to his listening audience about H.R 25, but now he has lied to a Congressional Committee!

Neal Boortz testified:

Secondly, the FairTax relieves all households of the responsibility for paying sales taxes on the basic necessities of life through a rebate system. Nobody pays federal taxes on the basic necessities of life. This means that The FairTax is truly the only tax reform plan that completely eliminates the responsibility for the payment of any federal taxes whatsoever on the poor.

my emphasis.

This turns out to be an outright lie! The truth is, all consumers pay the 23 percent tax on the basic necessities of life under H.R.25. The authors of the tax plan concocted what they call a “family consumption allowance”__ a monthly check which is doled out by folks in government to qualified households who must register with government to receive the allowance. The family consumption entitlement is intended to be earmarked by each consumer to offset taxes paid on the basic necessities of life.

In essence, the so called fair tax rations tax-free basic necessities of life, and rations them by the size of the family consumption allowance allotted to each household. Those who are sickly and have enormous doctor and medical bills, once exceeding the rationing allowance, will in fact pay federal taxes on the necessities of life.

Why did you give a fairy tale version of H.R. 25 to Congress Mr. Boortz?

Want real tax reform? Then work to demand our political employees, our public servants, add the following words to our Constitution:

The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money

See how easy real tax reform is? It doesn’t take 135 pages of bullstuff and gobblygoo, [H.R.25] which would leave us on a sinking ship, keep the tools of tax oppression alive and entrench our nation with more socialism and big government…it only takes 32 words for the people of America to re-establish a fair system of taxation, our Founder’s original plan, which would also gain control of a runaway Congress!

Regards,

JWK

[Little]

Oh look, its you. Great.

How ya been?? How's K Street treating ya?

[Little]

Here's the scary part. I AGREE with John WK(please don't tell my mother)!!!!!!!!!!! I also think we need some sort of "bridge" back to that simple taxation scheme. The voters in the USA have stood idly by while the scum of the earth subjugated them to the present system, they will fight with deadly force to keep their power.
On the other hand sir, this is a fishing website with fishing pals getting together to shoot the bull. NOBODY invited K Street onto this site.

I'd go so far as to say you are a bit closer to the problem than the solution.

[john w k]

Originally Posted by johnwade

Oh look, its you. Great.

How ya been?? How's K Street treating ya?

Hey, I'm not the one promoting a big government friendly, socialist friendly tax idea...that's you! How was your recent trip to Disney on the Potomac?

JWK

[john w k]

Originally Posted by johnwade

Here's the scary part. I AGREE with John WK(please don't tell my mother)!!!!!!!!!!! I also think we need some sort of "bridge" back to that simple taxation scheme. The voters in the USA have stood idly by while the scum of the earth subjugated them to the present system,

Well then, how about using that big microphone to educate Mary and Joe Six-Pack to real tax reform___ tax reform which binds the hands of Congress?

“The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money”

Here is how it is done at Sean Hannity’s web site in a new ongoing poll concerning tax reform
Flat, H.R. 25., current, or Constitution`s original tax plan?

At present the results are:

Current system______________________0

Forbes flat tax______________________13

H.R. 25 [asserted ``FairTax``]_________13

Constitution`s original tax plan_________13

Other [explain]_______________________2

One thing seems certain____ people want a change!

Now, keep in mind, you do have the people's attention! So, who will educate them to the truth and let them know how their Constitution’s fair share formula has been subjugated by the “K” Street Crowd you seem to have such an affinity for?

Regards,
JWK

[john w k]

Another misrepresentation made by Boortz to Congress concerning H.R.25!

Seems that it wasn’t enough for Neal Boortz to falsely assert to a Congressional Committee that “Nobody pays federal taxes on the basic necessities of life” under H.R. 25, Mr. Boortz also misrepresented the “transparency” of taxation under H.R. 25.

If its tax transparency we want, consider this: Under the FairTax, when a consumer steps up to the cashier to purchase a $100 toaster, the sales receipt he or she receives would clearly indicate that $77 of the cost of that toaster is going to the retailer, with the remaining $23 going to the federal government in the form of taxes.
What could be clearer? What could be more transparent?
No longer would American workers lack a clear understanding of how much they're paying in federal taxes. Every time they are handed a sales receipt it would be spelled out for them.

The misrepresentation involved here are embedded taxes [other federal taxes] which may be passed on in the selling price but do not appear on the sales receipt!

The question is, does H.R. 25 propose to replace ““the income tax and all other federal taxes with a national consumption tax” as Mary and Joe Six-pack are led to believe by H.R.25’s primary promoters? [e.g. see:Americans for Fair Taxation.

If all federal taxes are not repealed and federal taxes which are not repealed are passed on in the selling price, Mary and Joe Six-Pack will not have “a clear understanding of how much they're paying in federal taxes.”, nor will it “be spelled out for them” every “time they are handed a sales receipt” as asserted by Mr. Boortz. So, are there any taxes which may be passed on which will not appear on the sales receipt?

As it turns out, under the language of H.R. 25, Sec. 302, a new federal agency is proposed to be created called the "Excise Tax Bureau"!

SEC. 302. ADMINISTRATION OF OTHER FEDERAL TAXES.

(d) Excise Tax Bureau- There shall be in the Department of the Treasury an Excise Tax Bureau to administer those excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

And, when one continues to study THE TEXT OF H.R.25] they soon find out that under SEC. 104, the excise tax provisions of the Internal Revenue Act are not repealed !

Under Section 104 (a) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by re-designating, i.e. certain sections are switched around like musical chairs, and:

subtitle D (relating to miscellaneous excise taxes) becomes subtitle B, and;

subtitle E (relating to alcohol, tobacco, and certain other excise taxes) becomes subtitle C.

The existing ``subtitle D`` is the authority for all excise taxes not administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. The existing ``subtitle E`` is the authority for all excise taxes administered and collected by BATF.

Other than changing the subtitles (due to a moratorium on personal and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, estate and gift taxes, etc.) nothing changes! And so, the assertion that H.R. 25 ``replaces the income tax and all other federal taxes with a national consumption tax.`` is at best misleading, at worst an outright lie, and so, the hidden tax game of Congress remains very much alive under the proposed H.R. 25 !

Fact is, the proposed 23 percent tax which Mr. Boortz mentions will be in addition to any and all hidden excise taxes which Congress may decide to lay upon businesses, corporations, occupations and individuals, some of which may even be calculated from profits, gains, salaries and other “income” derived under a subject matter an excise tax may be laid upon, and, this is in addition to existing excise taxes which are now collected by the BATF, and other excise taxes now being collected.

Aside from the illusion of “transparency” under H.R. 25, the fact that H.R. 25 does not replace the income tax and all other federal taxes with a national consumption tax is very, very important to know and have a clear understanding of.

Why is this important? Because it exposes another fairy tale told to the American People by Mr. Boortz.

The tale spun by Mr. Boortz goes something like this: because embedded taxes [federal taxes now imposed such as the “income tax” “pay role taxes” and other taxes which businesses and corporations pay] will be repealed under H.R. 25, thereby lowering the tax burden for business owners across America, business owners will be more than encouraged, because of “competition“, to use their reduction in income taxes and other taxes to neutralize the 23 percent tax created by H.R. 25, and so, there wont be an increase in consumer prices and poor working people or our elderly living on fixed incomes do not have to worry about any dramatic price increase in goods and services.

Well, isn’t that peachy Mr. Boortz? Only problem is there are only a few specific taxes H.R. 25 proposes to put a moratorium on which businesses now pay to the federal government and are later embedded in the selling price of goods and services so businesses owners may regain these taxes paid to the federal government.

Since there is not even a whisper in H.R. 25 to restrain Congress’ power to impose countless new excise taxes on corporations, businesses, individuals and certain occupation under H.R. 25, and, H.R. 25 is specifically worded so existing excise taxes are not repealed, maybe our nation’s working people and elderly on fixed incomes really do have to worry about dramatic price increases, contrary to the tale spun by Neal Boortz about embedded taxes being eliminated which turns out to be nothing more than a fairy tale, created to mislead the people and gain their support for H.R. 25.

Be cautious of the Fairy Tale version of H.R. 25 which Neal Boortz and others are feeding you.

Regards,
JWK