Transaction Tax?

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Transaction Tax?
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Sep 22, 2010 11:54 AM
I just received this in an email. I don't know the truth or validity of it, and I honestly don't care to check. But, if this is TRUE... YIKES! Anyone hear anything about this transaction tax?

The bill is HR-4646
introduced by US Rep Peter deFazio D-Oregon and US Senator Tom Harkin D-Iowa. It is now in committee and will probably not be brought out until after the Nov. elections. Suggest that you pass this along to your US Congressman and Senators.

One percent transaction tax is proposed
President Obama's finance team is recommending a transaction tax. His plan
is to sneak it in after the November election to keep it under the radar. This
is a 1% tax on all transactions at any financial institution i. e. Banks, Credit
Unions, etc.. Any deposit you make, or move around within your account, i. e.
transfer to, will have a 1% tax charged. If your pay check or your social
Security or whatever is direct deposit, 1% tax charged. If you hand carry a
check in to deposit, 1% tax charged, If you take cash in to deposit, 1% tax
charged. This is from the man who promised that if you make under $250,000
per year, you will not see one penny of new tax. Keep your eyes and ears
open, you will be amazed at what you learn.

Some will say aw it's just 1%... remember once the tax is there they can raise it at will.

http://www.standard.net/node/44797

So let it sink in now......... We will pay ONE PERCENT of every amount involved in EVERY TRANSACTION involving a credit card, check, cash deposits. Virtually all "above the table" transactions in your life will be taxed ONE PERCENT. Just think about this. You sell your house. You get a big fat check for the equity in the home. After the mortgage is paid off at the closing, your net, lets say is $300,000. You go to deposit your check in your bank account. You pay the govt 1percent of that = $3,000 on deposit. Then you write a few checks to spend some of that money, pay off credit card balances. You mean to tell me that the check you write will now TAX THAT VERY SAME ALREADY TAXED MONEY YET AGAIN 1 percent???

And the credit card purchases you made that you are now paying off, got taxed 1 percent at the point of purchase. YIKES!


Googled HR4646 and this sure looks like its for real. Here is the wording right out of the legislation summary...
Amends the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 1% fee, offset by a corresponding nonrefundable income tax credit, on transactions that use a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. Defines "transaction" to include retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions.
Sep 22, 2010 11:54am
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 22, 2010 5:30 PM
Horse shit of the worst kind. This needs to die on the vine.
Sep 22, 2010 5:30pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Sep 22, 2010 5:38 PM
0 cosponsors.
Sep 22, 2010 5:38pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 22, 2010 5:41 PM
^^^ as it should be....
Sep 22, 2010 5:41pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Sep 22, 2010 6:03 PM
believer;493652 wrote:^^^ as it should be....

LOL. The purpose of the Bill is to gradually impose a consumption tax on the U.S. and phase out the income tax!
(b) Purposes- The purpose of section 3 of this Act is to establish a fee on most transactions. Such fee--

(1) is different than a sales tax in that a sales tax is charged only on sales to the final consumer and the transaction fee would apply to intermediate users as well as end users,

(2) is different than a value added tax (VAT), commonly used in European and other countries, in that a VAT is imposed only on a portion of a transaction's value (roughly the difference between an item's selling price and it's cost) and the transaction fee would apply to the entire amount of the transaction, and

(3) is intended to raise sufficient revenue to eliminate the national debt, which was $10.6 trillion in January 2009, during a period of 7 years and to phase out the income tax on individuals.
This Bill wants to get rid of the "punitive, confiscatory income tax" that you hate so much...in its current form it has a credit you can take against any income taxes for any of these "transaction taxes" you paid...it would replace your income tax with a type of consumption tax.
Sep 22, 2010 6:03pm
M

Manhattan Buckeye

Senior Member

7,566 posts
Sep 22, 2010 6:09 PM
Getting paid shouldn't be considered a "consumption" for purposes of a true consumption task. Must be nice living in a Congressional district where you have a single party - can propose all sorts of wacky laws.
Sep 22, 2010 6:09pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:16 PM
ccrunner609;493670 wrote:Bring that shit out after November and the GOP will crush it. THey will be in control anyways so it stands no chance.

I would let them run with it for awhile so the right can use it against Obama in 2012

Yes...the GOP would crush one of their fundamental policy goals...turning the income tax into a consumption tax which.
Sep 22, 2010 8:16pm
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:20 PM
Manhattan Buckeye;493679 wrote:Getting paid shouldn't be considered a "consumption" for purposes of a true consumption task. Must be nice living in a Congressional district where you have a single party - can propose all sorts of wacky laws.

Well at a fundamental level a consumption tax is any tax that taxes labor income only and not additions to savings. For instance, the deduction allowed for 401(k) contributions embeds consumption tax treatment in the internal revenue code. The payroll taxes are types of consumption taxes even though the tax is paid as the money is earned.
Sep 22, 2010 8:20pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:30 PM
BoatShoes;493782 wrote:Well at a fundamental level a consumption tax is any tax that taxes labor income only and not additions to savings. For instance, the deduction allowed for 401(k) contributions embeds consumption tax treatment in the internal revenue code. The payroll taxes are types of consumption taxes even though the tax is paid as the money is earned.
I admit...I'm an economic idiot. Soooooooo if I'm earning wages I'm "consuming" something therefore I deserve to be taxed on that "consumption" (whatever it is I'm consuming while earning)?

Also I'm fully aware of what this bill is allegedly designed to do...that is phase out the income tax and replace it with this so-called "transaction" tax.

But it's BULLSHIT and you know it. The Feds won't phase out a fugging thing. It's another tax scheme dreamed up by the tax & spenders to add taxes and then ask us to believe that over time it'll phase out income tax. Sure.

I have NEVER seen any politician introduce a new tax and then follow through on eliminating another. Smoke & mirrors folks.

Laugh at me all you want but I'm not buying it.
Sep 22, 2010 8:30pm
M

Manhattan Buckeye

Senior Member

7,566 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:38 PM
^^^

I've read Boatshoes' post 4 times. I have no idea what on earth he is talking about.
Sep 22, 2010 8:38pm
CenterBHSFan's avatar

CenterBHSFan

333 - I'm only half evil

6,115 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:41 PM
believer;493792 wrote:Laugh at me all you want but I'm not buying it.

As well you shouldn't. You'll just get taxed for it! ;)
Sep 22, 2010 8:41pm
ernest_t_bass's avatar

ernest_t_bass

12th Son of the Lama

24,984 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:46 PM
CenterBHSFan;493806 wrote:As well you shouldn't. You'll just get taxed for it! ;)

I see what you did there! :D
Sep 22, 2010 8:46pm
M

Manhattan Buckeye

Senior Member

7,566 posts
Sep 22, 2010 8:56 PM
The worst potential part is bank to bank transfers....if I have a savings account in Citibank and want to move it to Chase for better interest rates (a pipedream, I know, interest rates are shit)...there would be the fee for every transfer. Have $20,000 in an account? Move it and it creates a $200 tax liability.

If one reads the text of the bill, they'd see the political nature of it. This guy did nothing more than make a statement, and make a fool of himself in the process. But with no contender, why should he care? The media is more obsessed with the dullness of Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and the like rather than actual lawmakers.
Sep 22, 2010 8:56pm
redstreak one's avatar

redstreak one

Senior Member

1,152 posts
Sep 23, 2010 8:27 AM
Where in that bill does it say when this tax is enacted that the income tax will stop?
Sep 23, 2010 8:27am
RedRider1's avatar

RedRider1

Senior Member

3,850 posts
Sep 23, 2010 9:59 AM
ccrunner609;493670 wrote:Bring that shit out after November and the GOP will crush it. THey will be in control anyways so it stands no chance.

I would let them run with it for awhile so the right can use it against Obama in 2012

What if they do it during the lame duck session when the D's will still have a majority? That could get very interesting.

EDIT - Here's some background on the bill...sounds like it's been proposed, but no action is scheduled.

http://www.factcheck.org/2010/09/1-transaction-tax/
Sep 23, 2010 9:59am
ts1227's avatar

ts1227

Senior Member

12,319 posts
Sep 23, 2010 10:29 AM
ccrunner609;493670 wrote:Bring that shit out after November and the GOP will crush it. THey will be in control anyways so it stands no chance.

I would let them run with it for awhile so the right can use it against Obama in 2012

Bring that shit out before November and it will still be crushed.
Sep 23, 2010 10:29am
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 23, 2010 11:45 AM
BoatShoes;493674 wrote:LOL. The purpose of the Bill is to gradually impose a consumption tax on the U.S. and phase out the income tax!



This Bill wants to get rid of the "punitive, confiscatory income tax" that you hate so much...in its current form it has a credit you can take against any income taxes for any of these "transaction taxes" you paid...it would replace your income tax with a type of consumption tax.

1. The government likes to spend (both Rs and Ds), I highly doubt this would replace our income tax, it would end up being on top of the income tax. Most of us who have watched government tax/spend would probably agree with this.
2. I do NOT want the government to have access to my bank account, period. No ifs ands or buts about it.
Sep 23, 2010 11:45am
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
Sep 23, 2010 11:47 AM
BoatShoes;493782 wrote:Well at a fundamental level a consumption tax is any tax that taxes labor income only and not additions to savings. For instance, the deduction allowed for 401(k) contributions embeds consumption tax treatment in the internal revenue code. The payroll taxes are types of consumption taxes even though the tax is paid as the money is earned.

So if I deposit all my money into my checking then transfer a portion to savings every pay period, I will be taxed twice on that savings? You see how retarded this bill is yet?
Sep 23, 2010 11:47am
BGFalcons82's avatar

BGFalcons82

Senior Member

2,173 posts
Sep 23, 2010 1:22 PM
jmog;494236 wrote:So if I deposit all my money into my checking then transfer a portion to savings every pay period, I will be taxed twice on that savings? You see how retarded this bill is yet?

Just wait until you die and your money gets transferred into your spouse's and heir's accounts. Let's say you've got $1,000,000 in your 401K or IRA and you die. In the process of transferring the funds, a 1% tax is applied, or $10,000. It's OK, it's your death-bed contribution to paying down the debt. :rolleyes:

I say bury it in the backyard and tell your family where it's hidden. In 10's and 20's.
Sep 23, 2010 1:22pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Sep 23, 2010 3:00 PM
I'm all for a 1% National sales tax provided it eliminates the income tax entirely. A transaction tax is pure stupidity, this will never pass.
Sep 23, 2010 3:00pm
tk421's avatar

tk421

Senior Member

8,500 posts
Sep 23, 2010 3:39 PM
Yeah, when's the last time the government has ever did away with a tax completely? Any new tax will be on top of what we currently have, they will never get rid of the others.
Sep 23, 2010 3:39pm
dwccrew's avatar

dwccrew

Not Banned

7,817 posts
Sep 23, 2010 11:53 PM
tk421;494475 wrote:Yeah, when's the last time the government has ever did away with a tax completely? Any new tax will be on top of what we currently have, they will never get rid of the others.

Better yet when has the government ever gotten involved with something and did anything right?
Sep 23, 2010 11:53pm
believer's avatar

believer

Senior Member

8,153 posts
Sep 24, 2010 5:59 AM
dwccrew;495026 wrote:Better yet when has the government ever gotten involved with something and did anything right?
I have 100% confidence in the men & women serving in our Armed Forces...I just have issues with the politicians who won't let them do their jobs.

I also thought NASA was at the top of its game in July 1969 when Americans landed on the moon.

Other than that there's a 90% probability that anything the government touches will be ripe with political corruption, cost overruns, inefficiency, and bureaucratic bungling.
Sep 24, 2010 5:59am
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
Sep 24, 2010 10:59 AM
At least 25% of government could be eliminated in a heartbeat, and no one would notice it was gone.

Let's get on with it.
Sep 24, 2010 10:59am