What People Think
 |
 |
41% For, 59% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
H.R. 2130, The Comprehensive Transform America Transaction Fee Act of 2007
Revision History 
Below is the revision history of this article.
(Learn how to edit the WashingtonWatch.com wiki.)
(Latest | Earliest)
To look at a past version, click on its date. To compare any two versions, select their radio buttons and click on "Compare Selected Versions." To compare a past version with the current version, click on (cur). To compare a version with the preceding version, click on (last).
Learn More
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_HR_2130.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
pevo
This would amount to a flat tax and as such would unfairly stress the poor and unjustly aid the rich.
Robert
This is not the implementation of a "flat tax" but would be a formal study to see if it might just "unfarly stress the poor and unjustly aid the rich".
This change in the tax structure has been debated on several levels, and is something that has the bi-partisan support of several members of congress in both houses. Unfortunately the studies to see what the real impact might be are tainted by strong proponents, and have been criticized as being overly simplistic.
The only reason I can see opposition to this bill is if you think the idea of a consumption tax is something that is a pipe dream that will never happen, and that spending any money to study what effects it may have is a waste of resources. And the belief that such a proposal to overhaul the tax code will never make it onto the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Jeff
Tax reform is long overdue. I would happily give up my mortgage deduction to eliminate all the other special interests that are the US Tax Code.
Richard
This could indeed transform the country, but only if the government were to concurrently do the following: (1) permanently and irrecovably exit from funding entitlement programs and turn the management of such to private charity; (2) cease and desist from the practice of congressional earmarks and let each new bill stand or fall on its merits; (3) outlaw lobbying, lobbyists and influence peddling in all its forms; (4) apply the same term limits to all elected officials as exists for the President.
Ed Z
This isn't a consumption tax -- it's legalized mugging. Only instead of someone having to sneak up behind you while you're at the ATM machine to do it, they just have to get elected or appointed to Federal office.
If I withdraw $500.01 from my bank account -- using a check, my ATM card, or any other "non-cash" means, (To my knowledge, there is no other way to withdraw money from one's own bank account.) I get soaked some amount in taxes. If you think a $2.50 ATM fee is bad, just wait under the IRS gets their hands in there, too. If you find it hard to balance your checkbook when it's only _you_ spending your money, just wait until everyone else is, too.
Gary
it's VAT (value added tax) like what Europe has been using for years. Pay tax on what you consume. Your money is your money, until you spend it. The rich and corporation buy more and they pay more taxes, a lot more taxes. How can this be bad for the poor, if basic necessities have a lower or no VAT?
Best of all, no income tax forms!
Mikey
Although I have no issues with the government conducting a study on such a tax, I would add that there does not seem to be a concerted effort to see the black market a Consumption Tax would create. High taxes on cigarettes have already lead to interstate smuggling operations. Moreover, Hezbollah has used cigarette smuggling to raise funds in America.
Ed Z
Gary, it's _not_ a value-added-tax when they're not taxing purchases, but "non-cash transactions," meaning even just the act of withdrawing cash out of your bank account "entitles" the government to a cut of that withdrawal. Read the bill, that's in there.
Rich or poor, this bill is bad for the _individual_.
Lynx
It is not a VAT but a transaction tax - for example if you use your credit card and purchase something for $66.95 and the transaction tax is 0.5% (1/2 percent) then the tax is 0.33. The reason the tax rate can be so low is that the number of transactions that pass through the credit/banking system is something like 850 TRILLION dollars a year. Even if the number of transactions consolidate a bit because of the tax and reduces to about $500 TRILLION dollars (at 0.5%) could potentially collect about $2.5 trillion - which would replace ALL current federal taxes.
albi
So, would a megamerger generate a lot of tax revenue for the government?