it hits the lower earners more than those who simply invest most of their earnings.

As long as they can further stick it to the poor it's fine

I prefer a sales tax. I know im in the minority here, but it would truly raise the most money for the govt and truly tax the rich at a much higher rate

If everyday items including food, drink. cigarettes and gasoline are taxed, lower income people will pay a greater percentage of their wages in sales tax than the wealthy, that is called regressive taxing. Yes, the government will get more money and the rich will pay more in tax, but because they have more disposable income it will not be as hard on them as it will be on a low wage earner who is barely covering his expenses.

Last edited Sat Jun 13, 2015, 02:22 AM - Edit history (2)

Income tax by contrast usually have tiers -- higher marginal rates for higher incomes, and so are progressive.

Even for income taxes that are "flat taxes", they usually have an exemption and a standard deduction / itemized deductions - meaning that income below a certain level is not taxed at all.

Let's say the standard deduction plus the exemption is $9,000. And let's say the income tax rate is a flat 6%. Then the first $9000 is not taxed. If someone makes $18,000, only the 2nd $9000 is taxed, for an effective overall tax rate of 3% of income. The effective tax rate increases as income increases, giving even this "flat tax" some measure of progressivity.

Sales tax, by contrast, hits the first dollar of spending as hard as the 100,000th dollar of spending. There's no deduction or exemption before sales tax kicks in.

If you are unemployed and living off your savings (or someone else's), you rightfully pay no income tax, but you still pay sales tax.

Lower income people spend all their money and thus -- through the sales tax -- in effect pay a tax on every dollar they earn. But an upper middle / lower upper income person who spends half their money (and saves the other half) in effect have only half of their income subjected to sales tax.

A lot of what well-off people buy -- houses, vacation homes, real estate, stocks, bonds -- have no sales tax in any state AFAIK.

[font color = red]On edit:[/font] changed "Sales tax are the most regressive of the major taxes" to "Sales tax are the most regressive of the major STATE taxes" in the title

and medicare are more regressive. 15.3% tax on up to $105,000 or so a year. Nothing after that.

Social Security is a different animal because you get back roughly about what you pay in, so its like a forced saving program. Actually the benefits are somewhat progressive -- because the higher your lifetime earnings (and thus the higher amount of SS taxes you paid) the less you get back per dollar paid in. So a lower income person gets a higher "rate of return" than a middle income person.

People making over $118,500 (the 2015 cap), pay no additional social security tax on incomes above that amount, but they get no additional benefits either.

Overall -- considering the entire life cycle -- it is a progressive program.

The 2.9% Medicare payroll tax (1.45% from employer and 1.45% from employee) is a flat rate up to the last dollar, so its a "flat tax", or was until Obama added a Medicare surcharge on the top two income tax brackets.

We had a democratic congress and president for 2 years and nothing was done. Yes, I'm sure there may have been some GOP filibuster attempt or something like that, but they didnt even TRY. And all we hear is how SS is in such bad shape. And they did nothing.

Higher earners get no benefit beyond the amount they put in the kitty.

Send a check to everyone equal to the amount of tax they'd pay on a certain amount of income. The poor would then be exempted completely.
Europe uses a sales tax and has for years. I dont see people trying to get rid of it over there.
I know this is a state story, but I'm thinking more along the national level. I'm tired of people who make a lot of money get away with NOT paying what they should be in income taxes. Its so easy to avoid taxes for so many well paying professions that are cash paying jobs. Even an attorney can get away with it. I can name a dozen well paying occupations where you can just make up a number to use on your 1040 and the IRS will have a tough time proving you wrong.
Its not about taxing the poor, its about taxing everyone who makes a high enough wage.
There arent enough rich people to foot the bill that we all generate, even if they paid double the tax they pay now. And that will never happen regardless of who controls Congress

[font color = blue]>>Send a check to everyone equal to the amount of tax they'd pay on a certain amount of income. The poor would then be exempted completely. <<[/font]

Then it becomes like the flat income tax with a big tax credit that everyone gets. Progressive at the lower levels, but its progressivity fades away as income goes up. Shifts the tax burden to the middle.

I prefer a multi-tiered progressive income tax.

On the federal level, and in some states including Minnesota, the earned income tax credit is a sizable negative income tax for the working poor.

Lots of lower- and middle- income self-employed can avoid taxes too.

To get the rich to pay a lot in sales tax, we'd have to put a sizable sales tax on houses, vacation homes, real estate, stocks, bonds.

On nobody trying to get rid of VAT taxes:

Google: protest vat taxes

People who dont get paid a salary from a business. LAwyers, HVAC repair, mechanics, Accountants, all kinds of construction, plumbers, equipment rental, used car sales, the list goes on and on.
These folks can claim whatever they want as income on their 1040. They make good money and there are a LOT of them. I know several. There just aren't enough rich people to carry the load even if we doubled their rate! Sure, it would help, but its not enough. T pay for everything we (most folks anyway) want to accomplish, we have to have more people paying into the system. Exempting the poor is easy. Its getting the taxes from the rest thats hard. A sales tax would make me pay a good bit more, but i still support it

I found some VAT protests but they were mostly business protests and "tampon tax" protests!!

On the national level, I disagree with "And NOT the poor". Some poor get a negative income tax through the earned income tax credit, and some even jigger their income to maximize that! Anecdotal but I do know of such. About any self-employed person has the ability to cheat, and the self-employed range in incomes from zero to the sky.

And as before, you have to have a sales tax on real estate, bonds, stocks, and other things that wealthy people buy before you are going to get much in sales taxes from the wealthy simply by raising the general sales tax rates that exist by a reasonable amount (not an amount that crushes the lower and middle).

Anyway, in the Kansas context or any state that I know of, the switching from income tax to sales tax is a definite regressive move. They aren't replacing the income tax with the sales tax you describe where everyone gets a check for just existing (and then pay a large sales tax on what they buy). I can assure you that the reason for the red states switching from income tax to sales tax is not to get the wealthy to pay more! But rather to pay less.

It may be possible with what you describe in #25 -- give everyone a certain amount of money -- and thus make a sales tax regime fairer than a multi-tiered progressive income tax (where some people -- at all income levels -- can cheat on their income) -- I don't know -- but that is definitely not what the states are doing.

But sadly, so many people see the sales tax as "just pennies on the dollar", whereas they see the income tax hit in big dollar amounts on every paycheck.

Google: VAT unfair regressive

[font color = blue]>>A sales tax would make me pay a good bit more, but i still support it <<[/font]

Not everyone has the luxury to be able to afford to screw themselves economically.

As long as the harm primarily falls upon the poor, teabaggers and Norquist will allow it.

...the taxes are imposed on the helot classes. Lets hope consumers start calling it the "Brownback Tax"

Sorry, but it is difficult for me to have very much sympathy for the working class in Kansas who voted the monstrosity back into office. The Republican Party is the party of ignorant Hicks, Hayseeds and Hillbillies.

If I were rich I would buy somewhere cheaper.

Keep voting Republican Kansas! You are setting a great example of what not to do!

If this moron wanted a consumption based tax instead of productivity why didn't he say that before he destroyed the economy.

It's unbearable to think that people in Kansas are still behind all this prairie fertilizer.

But he's one of these politicians who is never popular, but just always wins elections (like Mitch McConnell, Harry Reid or Pete Wilson, etc).

I thought that GOP was all about cutting taxes...For everybody.

But I guess that taxing the rich is "theft" while taxing the poor (to pay for the social control and police protection of the interests and property of the rich) is "common sacrifice"...

They like raising "consumption taxes" and fees and bus fares and things like that(in my state, Alaska, they always want the fares raised on the state ferry system)because mainly the peasantry pay those costs.

It's all part of their "the rich are gods who walk the earth" philosophy.

What happens when this doesn't work?

Governor Brownstain

seems not to be able to read a map, because it appears to this casual observer the people who will REALLY get impacted by Sammy's latest atrocity are those who consider a gallon of milk in one container to be a major purchase. The state is only 200 miles from north to south, and it's bordered by four states led by less-insane governors. Anyone who CAN afford to drive to a neighboring state to do their major shopping, WILL. Dude, I grew up in a town where you could get milk, chainsaw parts and logging boots...and ONLY milk, chainsaw parts and logging boots. The absolute necessities of life. "The store" was in Spokane (60 miles one way), Coeur d'Alene (60 miles), Kellogg (62) or Moscow (70), and we survived. If we could do it then, Kansans can do it now.

Oh yeah...forget the cigarette tax too, Sam. You may want to go to The Google and search for "e-cigarettes for sale."

The savings would be minimal or nonexistent once gas and time is figured in

We have teabaggers up here in Kootenai County, Idaho, who absolutely WILL NOT buy a quart of milk in this state. Y'see, Washington has no state sales tax on food, and Idaho has one...so they will drive 60 miles round-trip to the stores in Spokane, burning three or four gallons of fuel in the process, simply to get out of paying sales tax in Idaho. The same thing will happen in Kansas.

There's also this newfangled Internet thing I've heard so much about.

"This bill keeps the state on a path of economic growth, creating well-paying jobs that benefit all Kansans," said Brownback.

pff, ya something like that you stupid asshole. instead of raising a tax on the few that could afford it, you'll just throw a VAT on to everyone's shoulders.

GOP loves those Sales Tax. It is the most regressive , unfair and un-Christian of all the tax types. Way to go GOP!

to do what brown butt did...exempt 330000 businesses from txs..

The end game was just what happened...screw the people of ks...

Its called trickle down and it never has worked...

Stupid is as stupid does.

"Taxing productivity"???? Brother please. High taxes only apply to the wealthy. If the purpose is to protect people that pay high taxes we can state the concern is to protect the financial standing of the wealthy. This is proven by the fact that the issue is not a lack of wealth, but its distribution.

If that is what the people of Kansas want then let them have what they want. They elected Brownback.