It is the ones who have abused the tax free benefit that leave a bad taste in other people's mouths. Flat tax... Everyone everywhere pays the same amount of tax. Get rid of the IRS and the money savings would nearly cover the national debt. No breaks, no earned income non-sense, no tax free crap, nothing, just a flat tax, cross the board. Then stuff like this wouldn't be up for discussion.
Tax the Churches
- Thread starter wxtornado
- Start date
This_person
Well-Known Member
Income, or net worth? Or purchases?
Because, not everyone has a paycheck-style income, so how would you tax income? Net worth taxing would encourage debt, which is bad for society in general. A national tax on purchases would entice the rich to purchase elsewhere, and is considered a "regressive" form of taxing.
Which one do you mean?
A true flat tax is based on income, and I don't see how a method, such as a true flat tax system, would encourage more debt.
Right now, there are far too many tax breaks, one way to cut cost now is get rid of earned income credits and work on a fair and equitable tax system for everyone. When you look at churches, how much is fair game here? How can ding bat Wright live in a $10,000,000 house and call himself a worker for God? I'm sick of these greedy bastards claiming to be doing the work of God and using tax except as the means to do it. It is downright abuse of the system.
This_person
Well-Known Member
If it were based upon net worth, one would simply lower their net worth borrowing.
Right now, there are far too many tax breaks, one way to cut cost now is get rid of earned income credits and work on a fair and equitable tax system for everyone. When you look at churches, how much is fair game here? How can ding bat Wright live in a $10,000,000 house and call himself a worker for God? I'm sick of these greedy bastards claiming to be doing the work of God and using tax except as the means to do it. It is downright abuse of the system.[/QUOTE]So, by providing a home for the pastor, and providing his home, and providing people to do his bidding (maids, butlers, drivers, etc.), and providing his meals, and..... They could "pay" him about $10/week, and he'd have all the spending money he needed. Same as any corporate CEO, or small business owner, or....... So, what would you tax?
First, net worth to me is entirely different than taxing somebody on the income they have earned during that year. When basing somebody's "net worth" (or company's net worth) you are looking at all their assets, earned and valued at a particular point in time, which includes past earnings and holdings.
In a flat tax system, there is a cap and anything over that amount is taxed at a percentage. A church shouldn't collect millions and millions of dollars, have a pastor living in a palace and call that greed the work of God.
Tax them after a cap amount, so do you have any ideas? Any solutions? Seems to be a rather large problem in today's day and age and surely not the original intent of the tax except status given by our founding fathers.
This_person
Well-Known Member
I realize the difference between taxing net worth, and taxing income. That was the point of asking which you were talking about.
So, you did lose me after that, though. Are we talking about a tax on actual income, or a tax on net worth after a cap? Or, arbitrarily deciding how much a given business or church is "allowed" to make, and taxing the rest regardless of whether it's net profit or needed for operating costs? You're being very wiggly with what you think a flat tax is, or what you would tax.
Tax on income above a specified cap amount.
I honestly don't think you have a clue what flat tax is. I know what it is and once you research it, come back and we'll have a conversation about it.
This_person
Well-Known Member
Okay, so we're going to tax income above a specified cap (so, it's no longer a flat tax that's equally fair, but subjective to who should be taxed).
Take the scenerio I gave above, where a CEO or pastor or small business owner or whatever is living on $10/week "income" while living like a king, and tell me how you would tax that "income".
In a flat tax system, the income is taxed after a certain level of income in reached. There has been talk of a $30K family friendly tax cap and anything over that is taxed at a percentage rate. If the paster gets the cap on the income earned as his families salary, then anything over that would be subjected to a flat tax rate.
So now that you've drilled me with your questions, I'd sure love to hear your solution?
This_person
Well-Known Member
My point was that a flat tax, or a progressive tax as you've described it, is even easier to overcome than our overly complicated and abusive/abused system is now. The level of income would drop drastically in this country (on paper), and the standard of living of rich would skyrocket, with the standard of living for middle and lower class individuals dropping like a rock due to the massively increased burden.
My solution - as is and tweak, tweak, tweak.
Then get rid of the cap (not that that will ever happen - because if this country went with a flat tax - I believe a cap would be imposed) but with any proposed flat tax system it shows that all proceeds, earnings from corporations/companies are also taxed at a flat rate, therefore, saying the CEO/Pastor/Businessman would just adjust his/her income really wouldn't be of any benefit. The tax would be collected one way or another or it is consider tax evasion.
I was, at one time, completely against flat tax but over the years, I think the idea is worth taking a look at. Our tax system shouldn't be this complicated and the only way to get fair and equitable is through such a system, in my opinion.
This_person
Well-Known Member
And there's the beauty of the scam - it's a business expense to provide those things, so it wouldn't be a part of the business's income, it would be part of their operating costs. Win win for big money.