Can lawmakers who don't have the courage or intelligence to outlaw texting while driving really be expected to create a saner tax structure? Hmmm.

Developing a fairer tax environment is much less an economics problem than it is a political dilemma and, as many of you observed, it is unlikely that anything "tax" will be improved upon until there is some serious facial (and cultural) change in Washington.

Politicians focus on one issue at a time, and pretend to have problems dealing with inter-related programs. Tenured politicians have a vested interest in resisting any change that involves their spheres of influence. Both parties are embarrassingly mired in twentieth century class warfare that stifles all forms of productive debate.

Tax cuts don't just benefit the rich. In fact, they provide the opportunity for everyone to attain greater wealth. Demand directs resources far better than punitive taxation. Money in consumer hands will fuel social and environmentally friendly change.

"You cannot eliminate revenue from one program without replacing it from another, equally complicated, one", career politicians will say philosophically. They have little to gain from simplifying the tax collection system --- yet it is obvious that a whole new approach would solve most of the economic woes plaguing us today, domestic and international.

So what would become of all the CPAs, tax attorneys, and offshore laundries--- new jobs as consultants, auditors, and regulators perhaps?

Survey responses outlined constructive and manageable solutions to our multiple tax problems. If they could only be dealt with as a whole "New Deal" (catchy phrase), a fairer tax structure would be in reach.

Several basic concepts need to be accepted: (a) don't tax the job creators, (b) tax consumption instead of income, and (c) regulate shareholder abuse in the form of obscene executive pay. Then, enforce compliance with the intent of a simplified tax code.

A smarter tax system would allow more people to become wealthy honestly; smarter regulation of thieves in high places would improve the image of big business (and big government) significantly.

There are 44,000 pages in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) alone, 5.5 million words, incomprehensible at best. Obviously, there is a lot more to be said about each of the ideas that follow. Here are the top survey ideas; the first two were discussed in previous results articles as consumer spending enhancers and job creators, respectively.

For the rest of the Article, just Google the title.

Steve Selengut
sanserve (at) aol.com
http://www.kiawahgolfinvestmentseminars.com
Author of: "The Brainwashing of the American Investor: The Book that Wall Street Does Not Want YOU to Read", and "A Millionaire's Secret Investment Strategy"

If you read several books on fair tax you will soon discover that you are currently paying 18-32% income tax plus 22% imbedded taxes on every thing you purchase. FairTax would put 18-32% directly in your pocket, and only tax you when you spend. Supply and demand will drive the 22% imbedded taxes out of all pricing and prices should fall.

check out www.faretax.org

Why wouldn't you tax income instead of sales? I guess if I was rich, I would certainly love the idea of only taxing sales. It lands the tax burden on the little guy. Haven't the bush years shown that the greed of the rich is insatiable?

Fair Tax is better than a flat tax. Eliminate income taxes so people are rewarded for being successful and they will pay taxes as they comsume from their hard work.

I've listenend to you for many years, but if you actually think not paying taxes by Mr. Geithner was a simple mistake, I think you need to pull your head out of the sand. And, do you not realize how much tax is already on the gas. Wake up@

You really believe that he made an honest mistake with Turbo Tax? I don't!!!

The fair tax,
clark. Wake up and smell the roses.

Those who have made comments about flaws in the Fair Tax do not understand the Fair Tax. For example, one comment discusses the inherent inequality between someone who make $250,000 and someone who makes $25,000,000. The argument being that spending is basically flat after $250,000, so they are paying the same tax. I submit that someone who makes $25,000,000 will spend substantially more than someone who makes $250,000. They will have a bigger house that requires more maintenance and more "stuff" in it. That "stuff" will cost more than the "stuff" of the person making $250,000. And if they are a miser and do not spend anymore money than absolutely necessary, that is their choice. It is not left up to the government to decide how much of your income should be redistributed to the rest of us.

The real benefit is getting all the people who live outside the Tax Code (drug dealers, illegals, under the table workers, etc.) to finally contribute their fair share. This will add tremendously to the current tax revenues.

If you have not read the Fair Tax book, give it a chance. You can read it in an evening. It is the simplest approach to fixing our tax code mess that I have seen. There is a lot of very good research behind it and it is very well thought out. As I said, those who point out flaws in the Fair Tax proposal, do not understand the Fair Tax. I have yet to find an argument that is not addressed. If not overtly, then by implication or behavior. If there is an argument with merit then let us discuss it and hone the Fair Tax proposal to make it the best it can be. This could be our future if enough people really believe it can be and are willing to make the noise required to get it done.

For FAIR tax, not FLAT tax....

Geithner was GIVEN $34K by the IMF to pay his taxes, so he knew and CHOSE NOT to PAY the taxes, and pocketed the IMF-advanced money. Thief, fraud and STILL confirmed by the complete idiots in the Senate.

Al Capone could be confirmed for ANY post at this rate...why don't we dig him up for some post somewhere?

A flat tax is not the solution, not any kind of a tax on the money earned resulting from the fruits of our own labor. Nowhere in The Fed. Tax Code
is there any provision for such a tax on ordinary working people working in the private sectors. Such a tax would be contrary to US Supreme Court decisions
covering over 100 years. Neither did the 16th Amendment change the law as set
forth in US v. Pollack in 1895.
People, get educated and learn how to assert your rights and quit letting The
Feds trick you into giving up your right
to work without taxing the product of your labor.
For more information visit www.losthorizons.com.

A true Flat Tax mainly benefits the rich. Just do away with ALL deductions, including home sales, and keep the same tax rates. Then you have a fair system. A big problem in this country today is everyone is pitching your home as your biggest investment. Let's get back to what a home should be, a place to get out of the weather and get some ZZZZ's.

After listening to you for years, I am now convinced you are a die hard liberal.
Wanting to put a user tax on gasoline, believing Giethner made an honest mistake on his taxes and having your program on HLN! Guess I'll have to listen to someone else.

You can advocate and talk about the flat until the cows come home, but it's not going to happen. Neal Boortz will keep writing about it and selling books, but there are just too many powerful special interests to allow this come about.

Clark,
If you believe this guy's story then I begin to wonder if I should take you serious on your advice as a fiscal wizard.

Oh, come on, Clark! I've been a fan for years, but you are "out there" on this one! So you REALLY believe someone in Geithner's tax bracket just used a tax software program to do his taxes? And accountants can and do use ONLY the info clients give them to produce a return-which Geithner's accountant obviously never got!! As far as the flat tax, our code might be awful now, but at least it is designed to encourage people to reinvest their money into "building" this country-real estate, businesses, etc. to get tax breaks. We could lose those job-creating incentives in exchange for a very low flat "teaser" rate plan afterwhich the Government will continuously raise the rate until we are back paying 25%? 35%? or ??? WITHOUT any incentive to invest our money back into the American financial infrastructure....!!!!!!!

Any way to make taxes simpler is good.

Geithner may have been involved in FRAUD. Apparently he took a dependent care deduction for his child at sleep-away camp, which is disallowed. So he remembers all the deductions, forgets all the payments...eeeee

The problem with our tax code now is all the loopholes and deductons. The Fair Tax has no loopholes and no deductions, everyone is treated the same. www.fairTax.com

Anything that will get rid of the burden of supporting the IRS I'm for.

I'm therefore apposed to any sort of Flat Income Tax. If you have any Income Tax you have to have the IRS.

I'm for a National Sales Tax. There is already a mechanism in place to collect sales tax. It works fairly well.

The big advantage is that it gets rid of the IRS, H&R Block, Jackson Hewitt, the significance of April 15th (Tax Day), and a bunch of CPAs have to find something new to generate income.

Getting rid of the IRS chops a huge/significant portion of the governments NEED for money.

Smaller government! No IRS!

I only make 40,000 a year and a lot of that goes to taxes. If anyone has seen Platinum Weddings or Super Sweet 16 you will know that if you can spend a million dollar on a wedding or by your daughter a 80,000 dollar BMW for her sweet 16, you are not paying your fair share of taxes. The economy needs police, fire, trash, restaurants, etc.. to keep running. Everyone can't be rich it just won't work. I have to spend all $40,000 for my family each year. Someone making a million dollars a year would only have to spend a fraction of that and could shelter the rest of their income by not spending in state side. They could book travel overseas, park it in super high yield investments tax free until they decided to spend in on whatever. The bottom line is a simplified progressive income tax with a few deductions like mortgage, education, and retirement is the most equitable way to collect taxes. The right would not be rich if they did not have the middle class to work for them.

I liked my effective tax rate this year; neg15.66%. I can agree with a flat tax though. The problem is the deductions and exemptions, too many loopholes for the big money makers. What happens to the soldiers who make tax free combat pay? What about state taxes?

Timothy Geithner knew exactly what he was doing. Maybe not initially, but certainly when he was audited, he knew he owed the prior years taxes.

1. Our current tax system is beyond repair, and beyond recognition. It creates huge artificial loopholes that prevent proper government support by the citizens.
2. The flat tax is simpler but has many flaws, just ask anyone in Europe about their system, and the hoops they jump through to get VAT rebates.
3. The Fair Tax plan is the most researched (world-class economic scholars for well over a decade), the most supported (once people understand it), and the most balanced tax system ever proposed.
It promotes savings, which will in itself change our economy and currency.
It is progressive, so lower income citizens are not hurt, but everyone else pays when they spend.
It is tax neutral, so the total tax receipts is the same, just much less effort toward getting them paid.
The retailers already collect 3 levels of tax at the cash register, this simply adds a 4th to their process at the sales transaction.
I don't know if it will ever pass our crooked controlling congress, but it is in the very best interest of the citizen/taxpayer.
Yes, it does cause some displacement of tax preparers, but they largely support it because they do not prefer preparing individual tax returns anyway.
Logical and practical?, most definitely.
Probable in our overbearing government systems? Perhaps not so easy.
However, we should be aware and promote it every chance we get.

I'm all for a flat tax/fair. However, the reality is that it will never pass. Congress and Senate would never give up this power. With the current tax code, they can "social engineer", buy votes and creat a power base. They would never give this up willingly.

Congress and The Senate don't care about whats right or best for this country only in getting reelected.

That's why we're in the mess we are currently in.

Ok, big fair tax supporter here. Just for the record, I have done my own taxes for abotu 12 years now. The reason the fair tax is such a great idea is that you only pay tax on something when you buy it. You only pay a sales tax on property, not every year. You only pay the tax when you put money back into the economy. The best part is that you are totally driven by what you consume. Think of it as a consupmtion tax. The less you consume, the less you pay. There is no reason I have to pay for the right to continue to own my house.

The benefit of the flat tax is also it's fairness. Everyone pays the same "percentage." Someone above wrote that someone rich paying X amount wouldn't matter much to them and they should have to fall in a a tax bracket and pay higher taxes. That is what we have now. People who have a lot of money pay a lot of taxes. People who have very little money pay almost NO tax. That is completely unfair. Why am I working my butt off so that some other person can do a half-assed job and get all their money back while I only get a portion if I witheld enough. Do your research people. If all the rich people pay a larger percentage, they will just find a better way to get around the entire tax code. Make it equal for everyone and no one can say it isn't fair. If they do, they aren't pulling their weight around here.

The flat tax idea is ok, but I have a problem with the fair tax (national sales tax). It would be double taxation
on after tax savings accounts and Roth IRA accounts already accumulated by many seniors.

I am all for flat tax.

If a flat tax is implemented how would we address contracts that have been entered into based on current tax deductions. Mortgage deductions or how about long term corporate decisions based on depreciating assetss. Also, has anyone tallied up the amount of instant job losses in the accounting and tax service industries. I know they should never have been there in the first place but.....you can't just lose millions of jobs over night. Any ideas on this?

Until the spending problems are solved no tax system is going to work.

Come on Clark !
Geitner was actively and knowingly involved in tax FRAUD. You can't possibly be so naive to believe otherwise. Even he knows the difference in reporting restrictions for 1099 employees vs. W-2 employees ! Shame on you for thinking otherwise !

I love the ease of a flat tax. I know how much I am spending to run the government. No tax booklets. No, if you add line 45 to line 56, then deduct lines 5-9 you will get the gross adjusted tax, etc.

by definition a "flat tax" is a simple percentage without brackets. a tax with brackets is a graduated tax.

the problem with the top end paying heavy taxes is that their money is going to the government instead of employees.

Go to the Dollar Store and get Tax Act for one buck.