OT: Why there are no new jobs

[Joerg]

On 2015-10-01 9:57 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It has the (transitional) problem you mentioned of taxing post-tax assets like
Roth IRAs, which I brought up in person with one of the plan's authors.
His reply was that they expected politicians to work those things out.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Nobody in their right might would ever believe that to be possible anymore.

... My
suggestion was a tax-free debit card you could use, equal to your Roth IRA
assets.

And all your other savings, real estate assets, et cetera. It would
literally mean that frugal people would never pay tax anymore until
their dying day, and then some.

The bigger problem is that progressives want a national sales tax as an *extra*
tax to increase the burden of government, and to keep the existing mess too.
Preventing that requires repealing the 16th Amendment, no small task.

Here's hoping that all this ends in 2016.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:23:05 -0700 (PDT), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home? (but not a used house?)
What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Homes are sort of sacred politically. But some tax on the sale of any
home is reasonable.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)
What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Services are usually not taxed, but should be. More and more of our
economy is services.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

As now, a biz pays sales tax on stuff that it consumes, not sales tax
on stuff for resale. A biz collects sales tax when they sell to
end-users, consumers.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

I think a visible end-user sales tax would be best. Let people see it.
VAT is complex and hidden. And apparently scammable.

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

A small tax on financial transactiions would be great. That would kill
a lot of dangerous speculation and automated trading.

Rent could be taxed like services, but there is less benefit there,
compared to taxing stuff.

Assets should not be taxed; only sales transactions. Inheritances
should not be taxed, because that kills farms and businesses. It's
double taxation.

It seems to me I can spin all sorts of "deals" where by I add value
but pay no tax. I just fear that those with lots of money
will be able to "game" the system, where us poor slobs in the
middle class carry the load.

Mind you I have no problem changing our current tax structure.

It's a nightmare. And very counter-productive.

(First thing (as I've said before) is get rid of the payroll tax that
employer's pay on the behave of their employee's... Everyone* gets a
~7% raise and then see's their SS, medicare etc taxes go up by 7%...
But at least they see the money on their W2.)

Payroll tax and workman's comp and unemployment insurance are major
job killers. When you punish employers for creating jobs, they don't.

 

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 7:33:59 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 14:05:34 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com Gave
us:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

Yes hired service workers charge a tax on their invoice. The service
is a "sold item".

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

Yes. The furniture is the maker's 'product', so it is not a service
industry item, even if one found him or her and had the work done in
house. The final product is a product, plain and simple.

Doesn't matter if the price was agreed as a per hour thing or a per
piece thing.


And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

When the 'product' gets sold, the maker pays a sales tax. That tax is
passed on to the consumer.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

The renter (lessor) pays a tax, but the lessee pays the lease amount.
"The renter" in this reference is the land lord.

snip

We were discussing the Fair Tax proposal, not current taxation.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Woah, The plumber pays tax, (which he passes along to me.)
But if a Businesses has a plumber come in it's tax free?

OK, where do I sign up to become my own businesses?
(I'm thinking my shower is my most important...
businesses aid... (no doubt) and it's got a leak.)

George H.
(you skipped the VAT question... that seems
even more complicated... the final seller
pays all the tax?)

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

It seems to me I can spin all sorts of "deals" where by I add value
but pay no tax. I just fear that those with lots of money
will be able to "game" the system, where us poor slobs in the
middle class carry the load.

Mind you I have no problem changing our current tax structure.

(First thing (as I've said before) is get rid of the payroll tax that
employer's pay on the behave of their employee's... Everyone* gets a
~7% raise and then see's their SS, medicare etc taxes go up by 7%...
But at least they see the money on their W2.)

I like that a lot. I like for things to be honest, out in the open.
Currently they're not.

I do not like the Fair Tax for two reasons, first, because I don't like the idea
of every single American coming to expect a regular check from the government
(for the "prebate"). I think that's bad psychology.

Second, it's unlikely to happen because the 16th has to be repealed first, and
there's an enormous danger that doesn't happen and we wind up with just a new
tax.

An easy compromise that's doable would be a flat income tax with no
fancy gimmicks (ideally not even the popular deductions--they're all handouts
for special interests, even us). Or, if need be, two tiers based on income
and one fixed large deduction. Even that's a lot better.

That would be an easy way to save, oh, <breaks out envelope> 130 million
returns filed, times two hours' labor to fill out, hire the tax guy, drive it in, etc. ... ~230 million man-hours' of labor a year.

A friend showed me his dad's return from the '50's. The front had a line for
his income, some lines to multiply by his rate, then a line for the amount he
owed. IT WAS A POSTCARD--not kidding--and that was his official IRS return.

The economy would soar, and it's free.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

Den fredag den 2. oktober 2015 kl. 02.40.05 UTC+2 skrev George Herold:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Woah, The plumber pays tax, (which he passes along to me.)
But if a Businesses has a plumber come in it's tax free?

OK, where do I sign up to become my own businesses?
(I'm thinking my shower is my most important...
businesses aid... (no doubt) and it's got a leak.)

George H.
(you skipped the VAT question... that seems
even more complicated... the final seller
pays all the tax?)

everyone pays VAT, everyone along the way gets a refund
when they sell it on, so only the final buyer gets to pay it

-Lasse

 

[Lasse Langwadt Christense]

Den fredag den 2. oktober 2015 kl. 02.49.15 UTC+2 skrev DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno:

On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:12:18 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> Gave us:

Not much more than it costs to make in China. Pick-and-place machines
cost about the same either place, and there can't be many minutes of
hand labor in the final assembly. Maybe a few dollars cost difference.

The boards are pick and place, but the integration of them into the
case is the hand assembly part. The boards, all the little connectors,
the screen, the battery, the screen protector, the manual, the bag all
the other items like the charger and cord.... all those elements are
hand operations, and they also get tested.

They would cost a lot more made here than over there.

someone did the analysis and there is roughly $7 worth of labor in an
iphone, even if a US worker need 5x that it wouldn't make a huge different
on a $600+ phone

The problem is that all the parts are in China

-Lasse

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

It seems to me I can spin all sorts of "deals" where by I add value
but pay no tax. I just fear that those with lots of money
will be able to "game" the system, where us poor slobs in the
middle class carry the load.

Mind you I have no problem changing our current tax structure.

(First thing (as I've said before) is get rid of the payroll tax that
employer's pay on the behave of their employee's... Everyone* gets a
~7% raise and then see's their SS, medicare etc taxes go up by 7%...
But at least they see the money on their W2.)

I like that a lot. I like for things to be honest, out in the open.
Currently they're not.
(How about disclosure of all campaign contributions?)

I do not like the Fair Tax for two reasons, first, because I don't like the idea
of every single American coming to expect a regular check from the government
(for the "prebate"). I think that's bad psychology.

Huh, I'm not getting any checks? Are you?

Second, it's unlikely to happen because the 16th has to be repealed first, and
there's an enormous danger that doesn't happen and we wind up with just a new
tax.

An easy compromise that's doable would be a flat income tax with no
fancy gimmicks (ideally not even the popular deductions--they're all handouts
for special interests, even us). Or, if need be, two tiers based on income
and one fixed large deduction. Even that's a lot better.

Defining what is and is not "income" is about the same as
sales... Capital gains, interest, dividends.
I don't think there are easy answers.

George H.

That would be an easy way to save, oh, <breaks out envelope> 130 million
returns filed, times two hours' labor to fill out, hire the tax guy, drive it in, etc. ... ~230 million man-hours' of labor a year.

A friend showed me his dad's return from the '50's. The front had a line for
his income, some lines to multiply by his rate, then a line for the amount he
owed. IT WAS A POSTCARD--not kidding--and that was his official IRS return.

The economy would soar, and it's free.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 9:00:43 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:

On 10/01/2015 08:39 PM, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Woah, The plumber pays tax, (which he passes along to me.)
But if a Businesses has a plumber come in it's tax free?

OK, where do I sign up to become my own businesses?
(I'm thinking my shower is my most important...
businesses aid... (no doubt) and it's got a leak.)

You can try deducting that as a business expense today, if you're brave.

Grin... giggle..yeah. :^)

Of course, if the IRS finds out, they'll crucify you. Keeping a
squeaky-clean separation between business and personal expenses helps a
lot with sleeping soundly. I wouldn't expect that to be very different
under an all-sales-tax system.

Not very different in that big biz will keep all their
"legal" loop holes too?

As someone working for a small business, I'm all for
business tax reform. I'd probably feel different
if I was working for GE.

George H.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 2 October 2015 10:40:05 UTC+10, George Herold wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

(you skipped the VAT question... that seems
even more complicated... the final seller
pays all the tax?)

VAT isn't complicated. In Australia it's called Goods and Services Tax, and I had to deal with it - in a small way - for the year I was treasurer of the NSW branch of the IEEE. If I'd ever done and significant business in for myself in Europe I'd have had to register for VAT - the threshold was something like $50,000 business per year, from memory.

Value-Added-Tax works on the principle that you pay tax on the value you add to the goods and services going through your business.

The principle is very simple. On any VAT-eligible goods or services you sell, you have to pay value-added-tax (at say 15%) on the total payment you get from the customer, and you invoice has to show that component as a separate item.

On any VAT-eleigible goods or service you buy in, you have to pay a VAT component of the price to the supplier. At the end of your VAT-assessment period - the NSW IEEE did it quarterly - you look at all the invoices you've issued and add up all the VAT items for the VAT you've received.

You then look at all the invoices you've paid and add up all the VAT items to get the VAT you've paid out. If the VAT you've received is more than the VAT you've paid out, you have to send a cheque for the balance to the VAT office.

If it's less, you send a claim to the VAT office and they'll pay you the difference.

The way the NSW IEEE worked, we didn't charge anybody for anything that attracted VAT and we paid VAT on some of the services we bought, which we got back from the VAT office.

I scanned every last receipt detailing the VAT we had paid, and the scans all ended up in the IEEE's Netsuite on-line accounting system, which dealt with VAT just fine.

People have been know to try to cheat with fake invoices, but the VAT office always get the buyers and the seller's invoices - or can get them if they get suspicious - so anybody who get greedy enough to stick out of the background is easy to take down. It's a double entry system, after all.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

It seems to me I can spin all sorts of "deals" where by I add value
but pay no tax.

European jails contain quite a few people who had the same idea.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Joerg]

On 2015-09-30 7:24 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:37:27 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2015-09-28 5:57 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 14:12:57 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2015-09-26 4:00 PM, krw wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 08:17:08 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2015-09-24 10:00 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/24/2015 8:23 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-24 1:37 PM, rickman wrote:


[...]

... Seems like plenty of folks are trying to get into the
US to have those. H-1B visas ring a bell? Obviously we still have a
very competitive market for Engineering.


Sure. Engineering jobs are plentiful here. I want to partially retire
and my clients don't let me.

H-1B is abused. People often come in because making $35k/year is still
better than making $15k where they came from. This abuse is trivially
easy to stop and I have explained numerous times how. Sad to say but it
seems the only other person that seems to understand how or is willing
to even say it is ... Donald Trump :-(

My employer hires boatloads of H1B[*] programmers. I don't think
they're underpaid. The salaries range from $75K to somewhere around
$125K. Without H1Bs, all of the jobs would likely be somewhere else,
though they've started moving some of that work off-shore anyway (for
tax reasons, I'm sure).


Then you employer adheres to the letter of the law. That's what H1B is
supposed to do, bring in talent where we can't find suitable US engineers.

When I said "all of the jobs", I meant mine too. There likely
wouldn't be any presence in the US.


Exactly. If one would curb H-1B and thereby companies would be forced to
leave some employees overseas then they will eventually move the whole
operations overseas. Because it would make sense, not so much
financially but to facilitate collaboration.

This is something leftists will likely never understand. I have been
part of a few location decisions and it is mindboggling how fast and how
final that process is.


[*] All H1B job postings have to be displayed on company boards, along
with descriptions and salaries. These listings have from one to over
a hundred positions each, so there are a *lot* of jobs involved. The
number is sorta amazing since there are only 65K H1Bs allowed.


We had our ads everywhere, with the IEEE jobs board being one of the
most likely sources of good candidates. To our surprise we even found a
good analog guy though that (but needed more than one). Problem is, in
consequence another company lost a good analog guy because of us hiring
him away. So not importing one didn't help our country.

Our HR people are constantly complaining that they can't find the
right people. Obviously they're not willing to pay enough but you're
right, that would just shuffle the deck, from a national standpoint.
It wouldn't hurt the profession, though.


Above you wrote "The salaries range from $75K to somewhere around
$125K". $125k is a princely salary for an engineer, at least outside
Silicon Valley. If that doesn't attract talent then chances are there
aren't enough people available. Plus that salary level indicates a trend
towards a zero-sum game where, inside one country, Peter begins to rob
Paul and vice versa. That is not good for an economy.

The Brat is working on her MBA at Berkeley. She reports that there is
a lot of discussion of offshoring, with the emphasis that it often
doesn't work very well.

I've seen high-tech companies move manufacturing and engineering
offshore with pretty disastrous results. ...

With engineering I have often seen poor result when companies offshore.
I just went through a case with a vendor and it cost us more than two
months of schedule slip.

... I guess it does make sense
for Apple to use Chinese child labor at 17 cents an hour to make $600
iPhones.

Production will always be offshored. The more unions strangle employers
here in the US the more jobs will leave. It is foolish to stick the head
into the sand about it like some do. It's a fact and I have seen it
first hand many times. Like one of my older designs that is still in
production, initially produced in Southern California and when that
gradually turn socialist it went to Guangdong. Those jobs will never
come back.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 8:40:05 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Woah, The plumber pays tax, (which he passes along to me.)

No, you pay the tax. The plumber collects it.

> But if a Businesses has a plumber come in it's tax free?

I'm not sure--it has been a while, and I prefer a flat tax anyhow. That's
politically simple, 80% as good, and reasonably feasible.

There's a Fair Tax website though, and lots of people who are very
enthusiastic about it.

OK, where do I sign up to become my own businesses?
(I'm thinking my shower is my most important...
businesses aid... (no doubt) and it's got a leak.)

George H.
(you skipped the VAT question... that seems
even more complicated... the final seller
pays all the tax?)

VAT tax is paid by everyone in the supply chain every time they "add value."
Sounds like an ideal mess to me, an optimal method of discouraging
adding value.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 9:13:36 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

It seems to me I can spin all sorts of "deals" where by I add value
but pay no tax. I just fear that those with lots of money
will be able to "game" the system, where us poor slobs in the
middle class carry the load.

Mind you I have no problem changing our current tax structure.

(First thing (as I've said before) is get rid of the payroll tax that
employer's pay on the behave of their employee's... Everyone* gets a
~7% raise and then see's their SS, medicare etc taxes go up by 7%...
But at least they see the money on their W2.)

I like that a lot. I like for things to be honest, out in the open.
Currently they're not.
(How about disclosure of all campaign contributions?)

I do not like the Fair Tax for two reasons, first, because I don't like the idea
of every single American coming to expect a regular check from the government
(for the "prebate"). I think that's bad psychology.

Huh, I'm not getting any checks? Are you?

It's part of the Fair Tax. They call it the "Prebate." I explained the
workings briefly above.

"a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense,"

Second, it's unlikely to happen because the 16th has to be repealed first, and
there's an enormous danger that doesn't happen and we wind up with just a new
tax.

An easy compromise that's doable would be a flat income tax with no
fancy gimmicks (ideally not even the popular deductions--they're all handouts
for special interests, even us). Or, if need be, two tiers based on income
and one fixed large deduction. Even that's a lot better.

Defining what is and is not "income" is about the same as
sales... Capital gains, interest, dividends.
I don't think there are easy answers.

We already have those definitions. Most of the complication in the tax code
comes from special deductions, and multiple rates for various things.

Companies shouldn't be taxed at all--it's an unnecessary burden, and an
inefficient way to collect monies ultimately paid by the customer. It's also
dishonest, a way of hiding a tax from the consumer that he nonetheless pays.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[P E Schoen]

"Joerg" wrote in message news:d75re2Fseh0U1@mid.individual.net...

Production will always be offshored. The more unions strangle employers
here in the US the more jobs will leave. It is foolish to stick the head
into the sand about it like some do. It's a fact and I have seen it first
hand many times. Like one of my older designs that is still in production,
initially produced in Southern California and when that gradually turn
socialist it went to Guangdong. Those jobs will never come back.

So you blame Socialism for Capitalistic companies sending jobs to a
Communist nation?

Interesting...

Paul

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 14:05:34 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com Gave
us:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

Yes hired service workers charge a tax on their invoice. The service
is a "sold item".

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

Yes. The furniture is the maker's 'product', so it is not a service
industry item, even if one found him or her and had the work done in
house. The final product is a product, plain and simple.

Doesn't matter if the price was agreed as a per hour thing or a per
piece thing.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

When the 'product' gets sold, the maker pays a sales tax. That tax is
passed on to the consumer.

Then I sell it. How much tax... do we get the whole VAT type
thing in Europe?

What about taxes on assets, stocks, bonds, companies, rental property?

No tax, IIRC, except rentals, where I'm not sure.

The renter (lessor) pays a tax, but the lessee pays the lease amount.
"The renter" in this reference is the land lord.

snip

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 19:23:02 -0400, "P E Schoen" <paul@pstech-inc.com>
Gave us:

"Joerg" wrote in message news:d75re2Fseh0U1@mid.individual.net...

Production will always be offshored. The more unions strangle employers
here in the US the more jobs will leave. It is foolish to stick the head
into the sand about it like some do. It's a fact and I have seen it first
hand many times. Like one of my older designs that is still in production,
initially produced in Southern California and when that gradually turn
socialist it went to Guangdong. Those jobs will never come back.

So you blame Socialism for Capitalistic companies sending jobs to a
Communist nation?

Interesting...

Paul

Some folks have little grasp of the bigger picture.

Do you know what a 'smart phone' of any brand would cost right now,
had Apple produced everything that goes into one here?

A couple thousand dollars each easily.

If all we used over the years was US fuel, it would be over ten
dollars a gallon right now. Maybe more than twenty.

 

[John Larkin]

On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:39:38 -0400, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 19:23:02 -0400, "P E Schoen" <paul@pstech-inc.com
Gave us:

"Joerg" wrote in message news:d75re2Fseh0U1@mid.individual.net...

Production will always be offshored. The more unions strangle employers
here in the US the more jobs will leave. It is foolish to stick the head
into the sand about it like some do. It's a fact and I have seen it first
hand many times. Like one of my older designs that is still in production,
initially produced in Southern California and when that gradually turn
socialist it went to Guangdong. Those jobs will never come back.

So you blame Socialism for Capitalistic companies sending jobs to a
Communist nation?

Interesting...

Paul


Some folks have little grasp of the bigger picture.

Do you know what a 'smart phone' of any brand would cost right now,
had Apple produced everything that goes into one here?

Not much more than it costs to make in China. Pick-and-place machines
cost about the same either place, and there can't be many minutes of
hand labor in the final assembly. Maybe a few dollars cost difference.

A couple thousand dollars each easily.

If all we used over the years was US fuel, it would be over ten
dollars a gallon right now. Maybe more than twenty.

Fracking in the USA has driven down the world price of crude to $40 a
barrel. We'd be exporting crude oil if it wasn't illegal.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:12:18 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> Gave us:

Fracking in the USA has driven down the world price of crude to $40 a
barrel. We'd be exporting crude oil if it wasn't illegal.

You missed the point.

Had we been using our own oil since the sixties, the price would be
enormous right now.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 1 Oct 2015 17:20:11 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com Gave
us:

We were discussing the Fair Tax proposal, not current taxation.

Cheers,
James Arthur

Connecticut has no sales tax and they do fine.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 17:12:18 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> Gave us:

Not much more than it costs to make in China. Pick-and-place machines
cost about the same either place, and there can't be many minutes of
hand labor in the final assembly. Maybe a few dollars cost difference.

The boards are pick and place, but the integration of them into the
case is the hand assembly part. The boards, all the little connectors,
the screen, the battery, the screen protector, the manual, the bag all
the other items like the charger and cord.... all those elements are
hand operations, and they also get tested.

They would cost a lot more made here than over there.

 

[Phil Hobbs]

On 10/01/2015 08:39 PM, George Herold wrote:

On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 5:05:47 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 2:23:19 PM UTC-4, George Herold wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:57:40 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Thursday, October 1, 2015 at 12:13:10 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 10/01/2015 12:05 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:

The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.


And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.

There is an argument that used stuff should not be taxed. That lets
poor people buy used things cheaper.


The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.

I was thinking about a national sales tax to replace the income tax,
and especially replace multiple business taxes. Imports now have a
huge advantage over USA products, and a sales tax on both would
equalize things and create US jobs.

But politicians don't use logic, or work for the greater good, so it
won't happen.

The main problem is the double taxation of accumulated assets due to the
change. It wouldn't be such a problem with houses, say, since
everybody's income would effectively go up to match the tax. Normal
IRAs and 401(k)s would be okay too, since they're pre-tax. With
after-tax financial assets (including Roth IRAs) it would be a real
blow. It would also hurt LLCs as well (such as mine), since I can
expense everything I buy for the business.

The Fair Tax is a proposal for a nat'l sales tax like John's, that would replace
all other federal taxes (corporate, SS, Medicare, personal income, etc.). The FT
has a 'prebate' provision that sends every citizen a fixed check--everyone gets
the same, regardless of how rich or poor--for the tax on their basic living
expense, then taxes all sales of NEW goods (not used) at XX%, XX ~=22. That's
a simple way of capturing XX percent of GDP to fund the federal government, with
a minimum of hassles.

It sounds OK.. but I see a lot of details that are tricky.
Do I pay tax when I buy a new home?

Yes.

(but not a used house?) Correct. It was already taxed.

What makes a house used? (Say I build my own home and then
sell it.. in ten years, in one year, in one week?)

Dunno. Would have to set by reasonable rules.

If I have a plumber come in and do some work, I pay no tax.(?)

Taxed, I think.

What about if I hire someone to make furniture for me?
I use it for one year and then sell it. tax or no tax?

Taxed, IIRC.

And then the whole business/ OEM thing. As a business
I buy some stuff to put in a product. Do I pay tax on the stuff?

No. Only retail sales. Businesses wouldn't pay taxes at all.

Woah, The plumber pays tax, (which he passes along to me.)
But if a Businesses has a plumber come in it's tax free?

OK, where do I sign up to become my own businesses?
(I'm thinking my shower is my most important...
businesses aid... (no doubt) and it's got a leak.)

You can try deducting that as a business expense today, if you're brave.

Of course, if the IRS finds out, they'll crucify you. Keeping a
squeaky-clean separation between business and personal expenses helps a
lot with sleeping soundly. I wouldn't expect that to be very different
under an all-sales-tax system.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net