[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
What is the general opposition to the Fair Tax comprised of?

[/ QUOTE ]
Just about all of the opposition that I have run into in regards to the FairTax plan is a function of ignorance (not stupidity, please don't misunderstand me). Much of the misunderstanding comes from the incorrect assumption that this is basically a flat tax proposal - it's not.

Let's look at some objections:

The FairTax plan is not progressive enough. It leaves to high a burden on the lower wage earners.
Yes, it's true that everybody pays the same consumption tax rate, regardless of income. But what happens is that every family of equivalent size, regardless of income, gets the same rebate check every month - a rebate equal to the tax rate of poverty level spending. So a family of 4 that spends money at the upper limit of poverty in essence pays zero percent of their money to taxes - they get the entire amount rebated. Another family of 4 who spends $2 million per year gets the exact same rebate check, which has very little effect on the overall rate at which they pay taxes. A family of 4 who spends less than the poverty threshhold will actually get a larger rebate from the government than they paid in taxes - the equivalent of the current "Earned Income Credit."

In addition to the rebate, flexible tax rates on different items allows us even more control in this area. Luxury cars, for example, can be taxed at a little higher rate than small compact cars, or even hybrids. (Expenses in certain areas, such as education and charitable donations, are not taxed at all.) Also, since paying off debts is not "buying" anything, there is nothing to tax. So a family that decides to work overtime in order to pay down debts is able to do so tax free, so to say.

The FairTax system takes away the government's ability to influence economic behavior, the way they do now through income tax breaks.
Actually, there will be greater control in this regard. Since any category can have a different tax rate than the norm, the government has a great ability to encourage/ discourage behavior. Cigarettes and alcohol can be taxed as high or as low as we'd like, hybrid cars can be taxed much less than gas guzzlers, gas itself can be taxed at whatever rate, education is set to not be taxed at all, etc. There are no complicated tax codes for the average citizen to try and fight through understanding in order to take advantage of this, either. When you buy a car at the dealership, they automatically calculate the tax, it's very simple - no big tax returns to file.

The FairTax plan will cost hundreds of thousands of jobs if implemented.
What these people are referring to are the accountants and such that earn their livings implementing the disaster we call our income tax system. The IRS alone employs over 100,000 people, and there are tons of accountants and tax preparers all over the nation. These poeple will lose their jobs if this code is implemented. But I hope you can understand that just because jobs exist, doesn't mean they should. The money spent on this is a complete drag on our economy, and hurts us overall. I think the estimated number (by an independant organization, not related to FairTax at all) was that last year, it cost the US economy $250 billion dollars for businesses and individuals to plan, prepare, and collect income tax. When that money kicks back into our economy plenty of jobs will be created. Hell, put these people to work helping to implement the system! The point is that it is a huge drag on our economy, and the people whose jobs depend on the debacle of a tax code we currently have will find new ones.

The FairTax proposal is too radical, it will never have enough support to go anywhere, so why should I support it?
Well, I hope everybody smart enough to get through this much of my post understand how stupid this argument is. Everything starts small, even the most obvious and beneficial plans. And the more complicated and embedded (am I using that word alright?, to mean "been around for a long time") a system is, the longer it will take people to get used to the idea of changing it.

There are more objections, but there are - in my opinion - more than adequate responses to all of them individually. That is to say that each individual objection has been answered suffeciently, not just that it's better overall, specific problems notwithstanding.

[ QUOTE ]
But the elephant in the room seems to be if this is such a superior system, why the difficulty in enacting it?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think I just answered that above. But another thing to consider is this. Most Americans have no idea about any detail of the FairTax, and are immediately skeptical of any change as radical as this. So for a politician to be willing to put his name on something such a high percentage of constituents are bound to misunderstand, is a pretty big risk. As more citizens get behind, and contact their representatives letting him/her know they support the FairTax proposal, the more confident politicians will be putting their names on it.