2005 FairTax act unfair

By Caitlin Welch

In his recent article, “Roundhouse Kick the IRS,” Jacob Vial argues for a tax reform proposal, H.R. 2005, which would change our current tax system into a 23 percent sales tax that would be levied on all retail purchases. It would collect the same amount of revenue that it currently does. He makes sure to stress that this proposal is not “poor people” unfriendly because this Act requires that “the required spending for basic consumption is paid back to all consumers by the government.” Well that sounds all well and good, but Vial fails to provide a list of what the government considers as “basic consumption.” Since the U.S. government generally does a poor job deciding what its citizens need (consider the fact that a full-time employee working at minimum wage makes less than the poverty line) I doubt that this retraction from freedom for American citizens to decide what they need would present a far different case. Since health care is a privilege in America, I bet that medical supplies could not be considered a need, although I am not entirely sure since what constitutes basic consumption was not elaborated on. And when does the government pay the money spent on basic consumption back to consumers? For those who struggle daily to get by, it may be too late since such an increase in costs of living would leave them in the dust. They could not buy what they needed in the first place; therefore they would not get a refund anyway.

As far as businesses and corporations are concerned, this tax reform would discourage consumers from buying products that corporations and businesses have manufactured, due to the rise in cost. Businesses and corporations would be devastated and the economy would stagnate. Walker Texas Ranger would be proud.

Caitlin Welch

sophomore in LAS