Forum Thread

Tax Proposal Submitted to Senator Baucus for Tax Reform


Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts
  • David5372
    2013-05-14 01:43:04 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I submitted this plan (my own!) as a reply for suggestions to Ideas for tax reform. The Following is verbatim to Senator Baucus's Office:
    * * * * *
    1. Graduated tax, weighted to income.
    2. Close ALL Corporate tax loopholes
    3. 1/10% Tax on ALL stock/bond transactions
    4. Remove ALL subsidies from OIL, Big Pharma, Big Agriculture, etc.
    5. 20% tax on personal firearms and ammunition, to subsidize Law Enforcement, Nationwide.
    6. Tax off-shore tax shelters. If the sheltering nations do not cooperate, withdraw diplomatic recognition and foreign aid until they do. Make the tax retroactive to 1981, and effective IMMEDIATELY.
    7. No elected official, or federal public servant shall engage in insider trading, fraudulent behavior, or influence-peddling for any reason -- EVER! It must be made a felony.
    8. Any person or persons convicted of actions not benefiting the Common Good of the poorest among us, shall be subject to a 100% Tax on Income and Assets for a period of not less than 1 year, not to exceed 10 years.
    9. Any group classified as 501(c)3, 501(c)4, or other non-profit not classified as a Political Action Committee, will be subject to 20% tax on gross income if and when these groups are engaged in political action, influence-peddling, or campaigns of disinformation, defined as stretching the facts, distorting the facts, or outright lies. Their Agents, defined as Media Outlets and Spokespeople, will be prosecuted under the Statutes governing Perjury.
    10. All Elected Officials, regardless of income shall be stripped of Special Medical, Dental, and Travel benefits; they shall be subject to taxation under Social Security, Medicare, and Federal Law as it pertains to their income.
    10A. Any Elected Official, regardless of Seniority, shall lose lifetime benefits, when defeated in either Primary, or General Election.
  • Dragon
    2013-05-14 02:55:06 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Aside from the two #10s, I'd say that's a good foundation to open discussion with.

    #10(1) is pretty much in place now. Our employees on Capitol Hill do enjoy their perks, but everyone who started there since 1983 has been participating fully in Social Security, Medicare and the tax code.

    10A looks problematic. For one thing, only people who are well-off enough to afford to take years out of their career/life of leisure to serve could afford public service. People like that are peers of some of us, not not most of us, and I like the larger candidate pool we have now.
  • jamesn
    2013-05-14 04:15:30 PM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Far too much common sense and fairness for this plan to have a chance.

    We have to remember that it is the robber barons who have control, and they are very concerned with jobs and benefits: Their OWN jobs and benefits. The rest of us...not so much.
  • ProgressForward
    2013-05-27 10:42:55 AM
    Not Logged In
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    For #1, the US already has an income tax.
    #2 is good, although the trouble is identifying exactly what the loopholes are and how to fix them.
    #3 is good.
    #4 is problematic because it would cause the prices of oil, food, etc., to increase, thus hurting us. You can't really cure greed, so the best way to combat this is to get more people to buy American products (I have my own economic plan dedicated to doing just that).
    #5 will hurt American businesses that sell firearms, damaging the economy. Also, trying to put such a tax through Congress would draw a lot of attention, causing people to buy more guns in fear of having to pay a tax.
    #6 is okay, with the mild expense of foreign relations.
    #7 is good.
    #8 is confusing to me. It sounds like you're making it a crime to not benefit the "Common Good." If I buy gasoline, that helps big oil companies. Does that mean I'm going against the poor by aiding the rich and should be convicted with a massive tax penalty?
    #9 is good.
    #10 is good if you're referring to special benefits provided by the government to politicians.
    #10A has some flaws. Getting secret service for life is a lifetime benefit given to presidents (and Supreme Court justices). If Obama lost the election for his 2nd term, would he lose his secret service? But since he won again, he keeps his secret service?
Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts