Hey I jumbled up the pros and cons together in one paragraph because I forgot that it had to be a pros and cons in their own paragraph for each of the topics...sorry mister mcmaniman :(
National Sales Tax
A national flat tax is the idea that there is a specific percentage that everyone pays for taxes. The idea of this it to simplify the tax system that we have in place right now. Those in support say that this way everything that everyone pays is fair and no one is going after the rich's money. Those say the same thing when going against it. They say the problem with this is that it targets the poor because that percentage will have a greater affect on the poor than they will the rich. This tax will be on what people buy. According to Facts on File News Services, those in favor of the national sales tax say, "the current income tax system and the code governing it is far too cumbersome on taxpayers. A national sales tax would eliminate the bureaucracy of the International Revenue Service and make it much easier for taxpayers to comply with the tax code. Businesses who have taken their assets to off-shore accounts because of the federal income tax would return to the US bolstering the economy."
I do not chose this as something that I agree with, and the reason is strikley personal. Not knowing exactly how much I am paying for something because the price tag is only the original price, not the price I have to pay because of sales tax, is very irritating. Not to mention, if a store has a surplus in something, and can't sell everything (which happens) the government gets no money for it. Its just wasted space and wasted cash in investing in it.
Taxation and Tax Reform
Income tax is when you are taxed on the money you earn from working. What's happening now is that the rich are having to pay a much higher tax on their incomes than the poor are. Supporters say that this is good because the rich can spare more money than the poor are able too. Opponents say that this is bad because why punish the rich for working hard for their money? If we keep raising taxes on the rich, they are not gonna be able to be financially stable to start making investments like opening up a business that could hire the poor. Not only this, but raising the taxes for the rich is almost like punishing them for working hard and being successful. The idea that the rich can spare more money to help pay for taxes than the poor can is spot on. The wealthy can spare a lot more money than the poor can. But the opposing side to that points out that if you keep taxing the rich higher and higher tax rates (Which is what they are trying to do) then all you are going to do is make the rich have as much spending money as the poor do. And we need the rich to spend their money so that the economy can continue to grow and businesses can keep forming and hiring the poor. According to Facts News Services, those opposing of raising the income tax rate for the rich say, "The wealthy are unfairly force to pay the lion's share of the annual US tax burden. Taxes should be drastically lowered across the board, but especially for higher-income earners, since they drive the economy. It is in the entire country's best interest to tax the wealthy at a lower rate. Income taxes in general are an affront to freedom itself." Supporters of raising the tax rate for the rich say that if they lower the rate to much, the burden will be back on the lower middle class of America which is unfair to those who cannot afford it while the rich can.
I agree with this, however, I do see it as the most complicated form of taxation and I do not agree with how much more they charge the rich in taxes. Making everyone the same level will not help the economy in any way. Giving the rich more of a tax break would be good because they can still make investments and help the economy even though they will be paying a slightly more tax amount than the poor.
VAT (Value Added Taxation)
VAT is the tax that grows and gets paid as products move along. It's a very small tax that most people don't even notice while they are paying it. This form of taxation is simple and would benefit by helping reduce the deficit by not having to raise taxes. According to GALE learning library, "VAT is not without its disadvantages. Being a tax on consumption, it's a regressive tax, one that is disproportionately burdensome on the poor and middle class . The lower a person's income, the greater the proportion of that income that goes into produces and services. The higher one's income, the greater the proportion that goes into savings and investment." Another disadvantage is the fact that the VAT is less flexible than income tax would be. VAT ends up discouraging consumption and encourages investment. Those in favor, according the GALE learning library, say "..VAT is,in most cases, a neutural tax...,it is often not a decisive issue for investors, whereas corporate taxes are more decisive."
I don't agree with this because I do not think that the government will make enough to matter going about using a VAT. Although it is a good idea and maybe they could place this as well as add on income taxes, maybe you will go somewhere with that. But for now I have to pick one of the four options and this is not one that I would choose.
Flat Tax
This is where everyone's income tax is the same number and percentage, despite those that are paying for mortgages; few or no deductions would be available for income tax payers. Mostly Republicans are fond of this flat tax. This is a positive idea because it is the most 'fair' and simple way for people to be paying taxes. Everyone has the same and there is no confusion towards the deductions or what people owe at the end of the year. However, opponents argue this is not fair at all. Although it is indeed simple, having everyone pay the same amount isn't fair to the poor because a 15% tax on income is more drastic for a low income family than a wealthy one. Although, charging the rich more in taxes is viewed as a form of punishment for being successful.
I do not agree with this tax because I see it from the poor's point of view. Having no deductions for say single mothers who are paying medical bills because her kids are malnourished due to her unable to buy healthy foods is wrong to me and I do not agree with it.