There are ways of varying rates under retail sales, as under VAT. State sales taxes are a swiss cheese of exceptions.
I happen to think the regressive extent of VATs is overstated. I'd be in favor of a VAT if it meant an expanded revenue system, since the distributional impact of the spending it finances is likely to offset the tax-side impact. A retail sales tax at levels required to replace current taxes is probably unenforceable, a VAT is somewhat more plausible.
There is a sticker shock issue. Would people pay a 20% VAT on top of the price of a car or house? When you back out stuff that probably could not be taxed, the consumption tax base shrinks by about 50 percent. (Figs available upon request.)
It is our lack of a VAT that distinguishes the U.S. revenue system from social democracies. Our other taxes are roughly similar in size (as % of GDP).
mbs
Max:
Gravel spoke up for a particular type of consumption tax -- the so-called "FairTax," really a retail sales tax and the favorite of wingnuts.
[WS:] Yes, but let's for the sake of argument focus on the VAT proper. Unlike sales tax, VAT taxes only the value added rather than the sale price i.e. sale price less intermediate consumption (i.e. value of the input used in the production process.) That means that items with high value added i.e. high profit margin (or high compensation of employees for that matter) are taxed more heavily than those with low value added. That itself is a tax on profits and high executive salaries.
Furthermore, VAT rate varies by kind of goods, luxury items being taxed at a higher rate (up to 22% in EU). By implication, certain goods, like basic necessities can be taxed at lower rate (7% in EU if memory serves) or exempt from VAT altogether.
For these reasons, VAT has features that may prevent it from being regressive and, at the same time, can provide disincentive for wasteful consumption. What is wrong with that?
Moreover, sales tax is collected by the merchant at the point of sale, therefore all internet out of state sales evade it - which makes it by implication more regressive (on the assumption that low income buyers have limited internet access.) VAT, by contrast, is already built into the retail price of the good, i.e. paid by the merchant before the good is sold. Therefore, the potential of evasion seems lower for VAT than for sales tax.
With that in mind, VAT in principle should be preferable to any tax scheme that exists in the US, no? Therefore, if the likes of Mr. Gravel limited themselves to proposing VAT instead of the current taxation, it should be a good thing from a progressive point of view, no?
Wojtek
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/929 - Release Date: 7/31/2007 5:26 PM
-- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 52373 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.0/929 - Release Date: 7/31/2007 5:26 PM