Dr Paul Tax Policy

[Braddogg]

RE Dr Paul: If the IRS were dismantled, many of them would just get jobs collecting whatever other method of taxation (tariffs, federal excise taxes, federal property taxes) Dr Paul would inflict on us.  After all, the borders won't defend themselves, and the illegal immigrants won't deport themselves.

Ron Paul says he would replace the IRS with nothing... and thats a quote, and he says what he does.. history has proven that..

I'll just say this about that:  He wouldn't HAVE to replace it with something else.  The Federal Personal Income Tax gets wholly absorbed by the interest on the national debt ALONE.  The funds that pay for those types of programs come from Corporate Income Tax...

The income tax provides 40% of federal revenue. Cut expenditures enough, and you don't need an income tax.

I'm using the 2005 stats accessible in the links SnowDog compiled here: http://bbs.freetalklive.com/index.php?topic=16336.msg299421#msg299421

The personal income tax provides 40%, if you include social security as part of the total federal revenue.  Social Security makes up 36% of total receipts.  So there's 75% of the federal intakes right there.  The IRS also collects corporate taxes, so abolishing the IRS also displaces corporate income taxes.  That's another 13%, so we're up to 90% of all federal receipts.  The excise taxes (on tobacco, alcohol, gas, telephone, etc.) make up only 3.6% of total receipts.  And as Ivy mentioned, an obscene amount of money goes just to paying off the interest (forget the principle) on the national debt (Ivy stated it was as much as is collected in personal income taxes, which would mean $1 trillion/year in interest, which sounds too high, but in any event it's an assload of money).  Those payments are based on past actions of the US government and would still need to be made under Dr Paul's hypothetical presidency.  So where's the money going to come from?

[Dreepa]

So where's the money going to come from?

For what?

Most things would be abolished.

If the corporate tax was still in I am sure that some entity would be there to collect revenue.
I read somewhere that corporate tax used to cover exactly the amount of money needed for defense.

[E-ville]

The idea is eliminate wasteful spending, mainly eliminate being the world police and eliminate 131 occupied countries allover the world.. We don't need to police the world, we make our militart be defencive and we will save load of cash..  How about acytaull make government contracts go to the lowest qualified bidder instead of there "prefered" vendors..

Ther eis tons of waste in government thats easy to illuminate.. Here is a really simple example, at work they were spending 5000-8000 dollars in convention centers to get internet access.. I proposed using cellulare data cards  and sharing them over wifi, we did this we got 5 of them and pay $50 a month each for them saving 2000+ a year just by thinking about a diffrent way to do somthing.. But thats not all we now check them out to anyone traveling for business, they use these instead of paying 10 a day at a motel and they can use them anywhere not just there room, the savings there was not factored in and we also gained a bunch or productivity.

Government is wastefull, I bet if you spend a few million on independent auditors, they could cut government spending by half with out affecting the services they provide. Simply by making it more efficient. 

Also aot of money thats collected to bribe the states into complying into there federal programs.. for instance speed limits , seatbelt laws, natioanal ID, DUI laws. All these are  bribed into exsistane becuse our country is a republic of independant states that make there own laws.. you tax dollars are collected and then the feds go to the state and says we want you to pass this national ID law, if you do, we will give you all this money.. Greedy states take this and pass the law.. this is such a stupid setup and accounts for a large portion of your tax dollar to enforce these laws upon you.

Now Id expect once these thing do go away your state taxes may go up a bit to compensate, but id much rather fund my state than a national government, because its easier to change state law than federal.

There are lots of ways to cut the feds back to what they actually should be defenders of freedom and liberty..

[Braddogg]

So where's the money going to come from?

For what?

Most things would be abolished.

If the corporate tax was still in I am sure that some entity would be there to collect revenue.
I read somewhere that corporate tax used to cover exactly the amount of money needed for defense.

If Dr Paul were to eliminate the IRS (personal and corporate income tax), he would not have enough intake, if I'm reading the chart on the Government Printing Office website correctly.  In 2005, the US took in $23.3 billion in customs duties and fees and $22.5 billion in excise taxes (alcohol, tobacco, telephone, etc.).  That adds up to less than $50 billion.  In 2003, the US spent $318 billion servicing the national debt, according to the Brookings Institution's Tax Policy Center.  Am I missing something, or will Dr Paul have to drastically increase excise taxes and import/export duties (by more than sixfold!) just to service the national debt?

[jsorens]

Well, Murray Rothbard argued for repudiating the federal debt. 

[Braddogg]

Has Dr Paul advocated repudiating the federal debt?

[J’raxis 270145]

So where's the money going to come from?

For what?

Most things would be abolished.

If the corporate tax was still in I am sure that some entity would be there to collect revenue.
I read somewhere that corporate tax used to cover exactly the amount of money needed for defense.

If Dr Paul were to eliminate the IRS (personal and corporate income tax), he would not have enough intake, if I'm reading the chart on the Government Printing Office website correctly.  In 2005, the US took in $23.3 billion in customs duties and fees and $22.5 billion in excise taxes (alcohol, tobacco, telephone, etc.).  That adds up to less than $50 billion.  In 2003, the US spent $318 billion servicing the national debt, according to the Brookings Institution's Tax Policy Center.  Am I missing something, or will Dr Paul have to drastically increase excise taxes and import/export duties (by more than sixfold!) just to service the national debt?

Prior to the twentieth century the federal government funded itself almost entirely by taxing international trade. Although I don't know whether or not it would be a good idea to go back to this model—I consider taxes on "voluntary" activities such as consumption to be preferable to taxes on necessary things like basic income, but trade wars were a major contributing factor to the Great Depression.

[Braddogg]

A tax is a tax.  A tax on income is a levy on a voluntary interaction the exact same way an excise tax is.  No one's making you work for money, just like no one's making you buy taxed goods.  Both are avoidable, and both are pure evil.

And on a practical note, tariffs are terrible for the economy.  If you haven't read it already, Henry Hazlitt's excellent Economics in One Lesson features a superb treatment of this subject.

[Dan]

I believe Ron refined his claim to abolish the IRS and other institutions:
  As the executive branch, he will have control over how the Departments created by the congress go about getting their duties done.  Basically, Ron can make the machines of bureaucracy come to a halt by telling everyone in the D** (fill in random two letters) to stop.

I imagine he'll give them paid leave, then all their holidays, sick, vacation, family, and personal time, and then leave without pay.

[jsorens]

Has Dr Paul advocated repudiating the federal debt?

I hope not!

[J’raxis 270145]

Has Dr Paul advocated repudiating the federal debt?

I hope not!

It would certainly help isolate the U.S. and disentangle us from all those foreign alliances in a hurry, wouldn't it?

[J’raxis 270145]

I believe Ron refined his claim to abolish the IRS and other institutions:
  As the executive branch, he will have control over how the Departments created by the congress go about getting their duties done.  Basically, Ron can make the machines of bureaucracy come to a halt by telling everyone in the D** (fill in random two letters) to stop.

I imagine he'll give them paid leave, then all their holidays, sick, vacation, family, and personal time, and then leave without pay.

Before this thread was forked from the Ed Brown thread, we talked about this, starting here:—

http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.msg187176#msg187176

[Braddogg]

Has Dr Paul advocated repudiating the federal debt?

I hope not!

Well, then we're left with the numbers situation, which no one has addressed yet. 

I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND that Dr Paul will terminate a lot of federal employees.  Totally got it.  But if he's not going to repudiate the federal debt, then he's got to service it.  And at the current levels, excise taxes and customs duties are going to fall far short of the amount needed to service the debt alone, let alone secure the borders, or pay the people collecting the tariffs, or keep up the nuclear weapons, or . . . .

[Dreepa]

Do you really care or are you just trying to harass the Dr Paul supporters?

[Tom Sawyer]

Do as Harry Browne proposed sell off Federal assets... lots of land they shouldn't have.