If you believe in the flat tax

[Husker-J]

Why would it be a wreck?

Are you saying that farmers buy lots of equipment, just for the tax write-off?

Leasing a tractor, would be a legitimate expense, IMO, and you could buy it at the end of the lease, with your 85% of after tax dollars.

The whole point of the flat tax, is so that no one, not even rich farmers, get special treatment.

[clayton58]

Some may buy equipment just for the tax right off. I don't know people's motivation for a given purpose. But the right off surely makes equipment more affordable

[farawayguy]

I concur - it'll be a wreck. Heavy construction companies no longer get to write off their legitimate equipment costs? Good luck getting that through. No deduction for grain bins, tractors, etc? We don't buy these things for the tax write-off, we buy them because they're needed for the business and business needs are written off. Always have been and pretty sure always will be - it's just sound accounting. And yes, if leasing companies get to write capital equipment off, guaranteed every piece of equipment in the country will be leased. Now you've killed the reason for eliminating capital cost deduction (to increase taxable income) and at the same time you've dramatically increased the complexity you wanted to avoid by creating a leasing industry based simply on tax regulations. And apparently a different set of capital write-off rules for leasing companies than for farmers. On and on it goes.

[belarus]

One more reminder. Most people incorporate and don't pay social security on anything more than a reasonable wage. The IRS allows a wage of around $25,000. http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10022.pdf. So are you recommending most business owners pay $2500 a year in social security? Or are you recommending social security tax on dividends, rent, etc?

[Husker-J]

Repairs and leases would be deductable, from what I understand.  I am not any kind of accountant, but the accountant that does my taxes favors a flat tax, and is of the opinion that 90% of the farmers and business owners would benefit as much from the reduced rate, and more generous initial deductions, as would be harmed by the lack of write off.   Also, as I am thinking about it, it may only be accelerated depreciation that they are eliminating, rather than all depreciation, it has been a while since I have seen a flyer from the flat tax people.

I personally think that writing up leases, to certain guidelines, or requiring 20 year improvements to be expensed out over the full 20 years,would have to be less complicated, than our current 20,000+ pages of current tax regulations that we have right now.

There is going to have to be sacrifices, to get the government books balanced, as we are too far gone, just to hope that 'someone else' will pay the bill.

[Kay/NC]

This sounds like an analogous proposal to the tithing so many churches expect of their congregants. I would be fine with sending ten percent of my net income to government support. I am, however, thinking that capital gains ought not exceed ten percent, either. There should be no estate tax anywhere.

[Kay/NC]

FICA and Medicare taxes are employment taxes, either as employees of another or self-employed. They already act as a sort of flat yax, in that everyone's rate is the same, to a capped point.

Capital gains and investment income like rental income reflect the fact that something has been placed at risk, of either gaining or losing, just like buying stocks.

You really cannot equate that kind of income, which usually has a much longer timeline, from investment to divestment, as equivalent to wages or salaries. A twenty -year investment ought not be counted as ordinary income, in the year of its sale. 1031 exchanges have eliminated a lot of gains taxation as it is.

[kraft-t]

The only reason they promote the flat tax is because they think they will pay less. When have you ever heard f a conservative group propose anything that would raise their taxes. Look at all the recent tax measures passed in that they always result in lower tax rates for the affluent.

What are conservative approaches to a blanced budget. They take tax increases off the table. That should pretty well define their motivation for a flat tax or any other budget reform.

[Kay/NC]

Krafty, I do think there is such a thing as having to live within your means.  '

Our school systems have to do it here...they cannot spend in the red, by constitutional edict.  If they can, then so could other agencies and governmental entities.  Yes, there are times when aid and other forms of protection of our citizens miigth drive temporary deficit spending, but it ought to be required that we ha ve so long to figure out a different way to rectify things, or everyone pulls back. 

Tax limits force us to live without the means of the citizens who are actually forced to pay taxes.  The fact that some of us support and even give money to people who have never paid taxes, who have never worked, is fundamentally wrong to me, unless those individuals are truly indigent or disabled to work. 

[jput]

krafty would have us all believe if we put our bloated,  fat with bureaucrats,  federal govt. on a diet,  our highways wouldn't be maintained,  (actually that's what fuel taxes are for,  not to be siphoned off to subsidize city bus riders,  create bike trails,  etc).

No,  a diet is just like going on a diet.   You consume less,  shed unnecessary weight.     Our fed. govt. is chock full of waste,  inefficiencies,  which could easily be cut.    Putting future generations in poverty to pay for current loser projects like Solyndra,  where obama campaign contributor cronies get their kick backs is outright theft from our children,  grandchildren,  great grandchildren.

Now,  there are different hybrids of the Flat Tax out there,   not all deductions are gone.    Some of the nations like Singapore are very,  very pro-business yet thrive on the Flat Tax system.   Millionaires,  billionaires don't flee Singapore,  a nation with no natural resources of its own.   Just imagine what a resource rich,  highly productive agricultural nation like ours could accomplish with a pro-business govt. and reasonable,  simple tax system.   Yes,  Buffett,  Gates,  the Kennedy trust fund clan,  would then focus their efforts at increasing business and thus more employees,  instead of employing legions of CPAs for tax avoidance strategies.   Heck,  maybe Buffett would invest in the construction of the XL Pipeline which would move oil cheaper and much safer than by his railroad?   Maybe someone would finally build a new refinery,  haven't done that in many decades.   Then lower priced gas and diesel would stimulate employment and give lower-middle income folks a price break at the pumps.  

But then krafty,  surebutt,  AJ would have to lose their anti-business attitudes,  and forget about punishing the achievers.