GovernmentExecutive.com

A flat tax rate may look fair on paper, but in reality it is quite the contrary. In response to MGug's example, I think we all can agree that a person making $1,000,000 a year can afford to pay $100,000 in taxes (net $900,000) and still live "comfortably". On the other hand, a person making $50,000 would be affected much more if they paid $5,000 in taxes (net $45,000). A person such as this already has to "count their pennies". Having a flat tax rate will only burden the lower-classes and middle-classes.

Federal Employee  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  12:15 PM

---

I'm beginning to wonder if this guy is a serious candidate. Sounds like he's starting to implode

dan ketter  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  11:37 AM

---

Bad idea! What about implementing a flat tax fee in order to reduce the size of the IRS? What we don’t need is “bigger government” and more taxes. Nothing is free in this society; therefore, someone will have to pay for the additional services. And I for one am up to my eyeballs in debt. Next…

M Thompson  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  10:42 AM

---

You've GOT to be kidding!

Wise old owl  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  08:38 AM

---

Great idea, Obama -- transfer the preparation burden to the IRS. Then who pays for all that extra work the IRS is doing? We, the taxpayers. I would rather we get serious about a flat tax rate than some harebrained idea like this.

Cathleen  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  08:35 AM

---

Before you go bash the IRS on this one, consider what this statement really means. The proposal is not for the complicated returns with investments, personnel businesses, overseas ventures, etc. These people do not go to the H&R Block, Jackson Hewitt, etc's of the world. They have their own CPA who provide a service worth their fees. This idea targets the working poor who many times are single parents making $15K a year with one W-2 to file and nothing else. Something that could be done at any home or library computer in 5 minutes or less... You could even stop at the post office and pick up the 1040 and write it out in a half hour... Instead, these people go these unethical tax services, pay outrageious fees, and get lured into astronomical 'loans' for next day refunds amounting to annual interest rates in the thousands of percentage. I am a governmental accountant and worked for one evening at one of these tax services... And driving home that night made me feel like I needed to take a shower for what I did to those couple of poor people who left 10 minutes later with $200-$300 in tax prep and loan fees...Great idea Obama!!!

This isn't rocket science  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  08:21 AM

---

Oh, I have an idea. Just take a flat tax out of my weekly pay check and be done with it. Take 10% from everyone no matter how they choose to invest/defer the income. Think of all the money and headach that could be saved. No more IRS audits, a sentence tax code. I am sure others could come up with more benefits. Just remember a person making $1,000,000/year would pay $100,000 in taxes and a person making $30,000 would only pay $3,000 in taxes. Seems fair. Your thoughts.

MGug  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  08:13 AM

---

And the political posturing continues... Mainstream politicians will never truly embrace the idea of a flat tax because it would be too disruptive to the "professional tax preparation industry." Block, Hewitt, and Intuit could move forward with tools to prepare flat tax "simplified returns" and still make money: If these firms were real industry leaders they would already be doing so.

Veteran  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  07:45 AM

---

Another example one the oldest lies: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you". Agree with the flat tax. Every person I know has to live within their means..the government should do the same. I know, I know...must be dreaming.

orphandog  | Thursday, September 20, 2007 |  07:38 AM

---

Oh yeah, I can already see H&R Block and Jackson-Hewitt, attornies at the ready. And like "31 years" inferred, the American Taxpayer will never fully trust the IRS.

It seems like everyone I know, including myself, is more than willing to switch to a flat rate, earned income-based tax. Can someone explain why we haven't switched to this method? I'm guessing that someone, somewhere in a position of power, is going to lose bigtime if we switch.

Chris  | Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |  05:32 PM

---

yeah...right...trust the IRS with my taxes. To date they've screwed up more times than my tax preparer. I can't forsee them getting any more accurate when their work load quintuples.

blasterguam  | Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |  03:18 PM

---

Sounds like another democrat proposal. Just take the money and then let the people justify why you should give some of it back. There would probably be enough extra taxes, undeserved taxes, collected from the poor to pay for the program. I thought the democrats were out to help the poor. I guess they want to help them out of their money.

davidschow  | Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |  02:40 PM

---

Just be honest...abolishing the 16th Amendment and go to a fair tax that does not make me a criminal on April 16th. Imagine…April 15 becomes just another day. H&R Block or Jackson-Hewitt could then focus their knowledge on building wealth and not parsing the tax code. You know why the IRS calls the tax law “Code”? So no one will ever figure it out!

Do the right things…free the slaves! I know, politics is not a bed of roses!

ColReb_69  | Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |  02:11 PM

---

Reminds me of the old cartoon that circulated among employees years ago. A copy of a tax return with just 2 lines: "1. How much did you make this year?" 2. Send it in". I think the American public is too cynical to trust IRS that completely!

31 yrs at IRS  | Wednesday, September 19, 2007 |  01:17 PM

---