Thin Tax Bill (Withdrawn)

[Emsworth]

Thin Tax Bill

1. All Acts, bills, and provisions related to taxes on Income, Estates, and Capital Gains are hereby repealed, save for articles related to enforcement.

2. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shall hereby be renamed the Tax Collection and Enforcement Agency (TCEA). Employment eliminations and reforms shall be in the purview of the Department of the Treasury.

3. In all future government legislation, "Income" shall be defined as the sum total of the following an individual,
family, or corporation can make in a single fiscal year:
- Salary paid by an employer, public or private;
- Profits made from selling goods and/or services to consumers, businesses, or government agencies;
- Gains in capital from investments, as long as there is a net positive income;
- Gifts and Prize Money, if said amount is more then $1,000.

4. A household minimum income unit (HMIU) shall be defined as the total of the following:
- $15,000 for each income-earning member of the household over the age of 18 years, as well as non-income earning spouses of income-earning members;
- $7,500 for dependents (to be defined as children under the age of 18, as well as inviduals who are legally disabled and are unable to work), and all other household members.

5. The corporate minimum income unit (CMIU) shall be defined as $25,000.

6. Provisions 4 and 5 shall be adjusted every three years, tied to the Consumer Price Index.

7. All income above the HMIU (for households) or CMIU (for businesses and corporations) shall be taxed at a rate of 20%.

8. The TCEA shall issue a tax form on a double-sided, 8 1/2 x 11 inch piece of paper on which the Thin Tax Act and all related tax regulations are printed on one side in 10 point font or greater, and a tax form on the other in 12 point font or greater.

9. The Department of the Treasury and the TCEA shall be responsible for producing a reasonable tax collection schedule, and shall issue accurate and up-to-date tax forms at least 2 months before any tax on income is due.

Sponsor: Sen. DanielX

[MHS2002]

What exactly are the financial implications of this bill? The change in revenue for the federal government? Seeing as how we have a federal deficit to trim, I don't want to vote for something that is going to decrease gov't revenue by a sizeable margin.

[Emsworth]

Seeing as how we have a federal deficit to trim, I don't want to vote for something that is going to decrease gov't revenue by a sizeable margin.

I agree with the distinguished Senator. A flat tax of only 20% will probably require some extremely draconian spending cuts, perhaps even in vital areas like Defense.

[True Democrat]

Although I agree we should explore a flat tax, I don't think it should be right now.  Let's wait until we have a sizeable surplus.

[DanielX]

Proposed amendment to the thin tax bill.

Change sections 4, 5, and 7 to:

"4. A household minimum income unit (HMIU) shall be defined as the total of the following:
- $17,500 for each income-earning member of the household over the age of 18 years, as well as non-income earning spouses of income-earning members;
- $8,500 for dependents (to be defined as children under the age of 18, as well as inviduals who are legally disabled and are unable to work), and all other household members.

5. The corporate minimum income unit (CMIU) shall be defined as $30,000.

7. All income above the HMIU (for households) or CMIU (for businesses and corporations) shall be taxed at a rate of 25%."

Anyone with enough time to figure out the financial implications of both versions? This modification increases the rate, but it exempts slightly more income.

[Siege40]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

[DanielX]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

[Colin]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Well the thing is Estonia doesn't really have a huge amount of defence spending like we do. I echo the statements of Senator True Independent I have always been in favour of a flat tax but feel that the measures needed to implement such a tax at this time would require draconian spending cuts from all areas, including vital areas like defence and national security. As it is now most Senators are considering a tax increase to try and get our final budget within constitutional limits.

[Siege40]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

[DanielX]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

[Siege40]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

Good idea, let's gut highway spending, I don't drive anyway. Airforce One.

Siege

[DanielX]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

Good idea, let's gut highway spending, I don't drive anyway. Airforce One.

Siege

Actually, I was going to suggest that there be highways funded by tolls and maybe service plazas or something. You use it, you pay. Think about the New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or Florida Turnpikes, or the New York State Thruway.

[Siege40]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

Good idea, let's gut highway spending, I don't drive anyway. Airforce One.

Siege

Actually, I was going to suggest that there be highways funded by tolls and maybe service plazas or something. You use it, you pay. Think about the New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or Florida Turnpikes, or the New York State Thruway.

Perhaps you should introduce a Highway Bill then Senator.

Siege

[DanielX]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

Good idea, let's gut highway spending, I don't drive anyway. Airforce One.

Siege

Actually, I was going to suggest that there be highways funded by tolls and maybe service plazas or something. You use it, you pay. Think about the New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or Florida Turnpikes, or the New York State Thruway.

Perhaps you should introduce a Highway Bill then Senator.

Siege

I might... but RL issues are becoming a concern (College!). I might take a leave of absence soon (probably Saturday-Friday or Friday-Friday). Plus, I'm a little slipshod with the jargon needed in bill-writing. That's why I want to be president: all I'd have to do with bills is sign my name or smack a veto stamp.

[Siege40]

Perhaps to afford this tax bill we should just sell Alaska and Washington, I'm sure the Canadians will buy them at a reasonable price.

Siege

Ah... is Georgia going to sell Ossetia to afford its flat tax? Russia Siberia? Estonia... whatever?

Might be a good idea, Ossetia is in rebellion. But just kidding.

To afford this, probably the easiest thing to do is to gouge at federal highway spending and environmental packages. Of course, that would be politically difficult at best .

Good idea, let's gut highway spending, I don't drive anyway. Airforce One.

Siege

Actually, I was going to suggest that there be highways funded by tolls and maybe service plazas or something. You use it, you pay. Think about the New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or Florida Turnpikes, or the New York State Thruway.

Perhaps you should introduce a Highway Bill then Senator.

Siege

I might... but RL issues are becoming a concern (College!). I might take a leave of absence soon (probably Saturday-Friday or Friday-Friday). Plus, I'm a little slipshod with the jargon needed in bill-writing. That's why I want to be president: all I'd have to do with bills is sign my name or smack a veto stamp.

LOL! Touché.

Siege

[Emsworth]

Change sections 4, 5, and 7 to:

"4. A household minimum income unit (HMIU) shall be defined as the total of the following:
- $17,500 for each income-earning member of the household over the age of 18 years, as well as non-income earning spouses of income-earning members;
- $8,500 for dependents (to be defined as children under the age of 18, as well as inviduals who are legally disabled and are unable to work), and all other household members.

5. The corporate minimum income unit (CMIU) shall be defined as $30,000.

7. All income above the HMIU (for households) or CMIU (for businesses and corporations) shall be taxed at a rate of 25%."

The question is on passage of the amendment. All those in favor, say Aye; those opposed, say No.

[DanielX]

Aye

[Colin]

Abstain

[PBrunsel]

Abstain

[True Democrat]

Abstain, and I will still not be voting for this bill.

[MasterJedi]

Abstain

[Gabu]

Abstain, as I will be voting against this regardless.  A time when we currently are trying to simply balance the budget is not the time for experimental tax reform.

[Sam Spade]

Abstain, as I will be voting against this regardless.  A time when we currently are trying to simply balance the budget is not the time for experimental tax reform.

What Gabu said.

Nay, just so the thing doesn't pass. 

[Emsworth]

If the two other senators (Harry and MHS2002) abstain, then I might *shock* actually get to cast a tiebreaking vote.

[MHS2002]

Nay