In some states. they have what is called a sales and use tax, if the seller does not collect the tax the buyer is suppose to send the tax in. I suspect that usually does not get sent in.--- In [email protected], Jon Roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > People seem to be stuck on the idea of a "sales" tax, payable by the > seller, which the "fair tax" is. Better would be a "purchase tax", > payable by the purchaser, not by the seller. But, to satisfy the > Apportionment Clause, it would not be payable by the final purchaser, > who can't pass on the tax to another purchaser in the form of a higher > price. That makes it a kind of "value-added" tax, which is what most > other nations use. If that approach is thought through, most people > should recognize it is better than a "sales" tax. > > Repealing the Income Tax Amendment would be acceptance that it had been > ratified, which it was not. Congress should simply pass a concurrent > resolution finding that it had never been ratified. Much easier to do > than adopt an amendment. > > -- Jon > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 > 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ---------------------------------------------------------------- >
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/SISQkA/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
