Fair Tax and black markets

[420]

how, under the FairTax, would jimbob paying derrick from down the road to mow his law pay taxes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRpWir4eDrs

or Ashikabob in Pakistanilandstan selling flutes for bitcoin get taxes from people buying them?

[1715681944]

1715681944

[Richy_T]

how, under the FairTax, would jimbob paying derrick from down the road to mow his law pay taxes?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRpWir4eDrs

or Ashikabob in Pakistanilandstan selling flutes for bitcoin get taxes from people buying them?

How are either of those black market? And what's your point anyway?

[Topazan]

Those guys wouldn't pay income tax anyway.

At least under fair tax they pay tax when they spend the money, if they do so at a taxpaying business.

But I still think the best tax is land tax.  It requires no invasion of financial privacy, no control over currency, and there's no easy loophole.  Philosophically it's a little more justifiable for me, because the government defends your claim to your land.

[420]

Those guys wouldn't pay income tax anyway.

At least under fair tax they pay tax when they spend the money, if they do so at a taxpaying business.

But I still think the best tax is land tax.  It requires no invasion of financial privacy, no control over currency, and there's no easy loophole.  Philosophically it's a little more justifiable for me, because the government defends your claim to your land.

explain land tax

my point was the commercial was being retarded saying its harder to avoid taxes, when is ome cases it's easier, if you work for big business, pay no income tax, but if you buy at household businesses without a name or license, pay no fairtax...haha maybe a libertarian's secret wet dream to defund the government slowly

[Topazan]

Land Tax - If you own land, you pay a percentage of its value to the government every year, or you stop owning it.  It differs from property tax because improvements to the land are not counted as part of its value.  There are probably multiple ways of calculating value, but I don't know which one is best.  Basically, all land is leased from the government.  I believe Hong Kong has a system somewhat similar to this.

Unlike sales in income tax, it doesn't act as a disincentive to productive economic activity.  Instead, it acts as a disincentive to urban sprawl and the destruction of wilderness.

I think it's consistent with the principles of self ownership, because land is neither your self nor the result of your labor.

my point was the commercial was being retarded saying its harder to avoid taxes, when is ome cases it's easier, if you work for big business, pay no income tax, but if you buy at household businesses without a name or license, pay no fairtax...haha maybe a libertarian's secret wet dream to defund the government slowly

Income tax:
-Employees of registered businesses pay tax when they're paid.
-Black marketers pay no tax.

Sales tax:
-Employees of registered businesses pay tax when they buy stuff in stores.
-Black marketers pay tax when they buy stuff in stores.

It's no more difficult to prosecute a store for tax dodging than it is an individual.  Black market or not, I doubt there are many people who never go to supermarkets, pharmacies, clothing boutiques, and such.

EDIT:  Sorry, I didn't see the link to the commercial.  Watching now.

Ok, watched it, and I think I see your point.  Going back to your original post, no, the labor of "Derrick from down the road" would not be taxed, but he would pay taxes when he spends the money he earns.  "Ashikabob in Pakistanilandstan" is guilty of tax-dodging.  Even if he isn't prosecuted, he at least probably paid taxes on some of the materials for his flutes, and will pay more when he spends the money HE makes.

[420]

Interesting, I'm not fully onboard though

[Topazan]

That's it?  No discussion or anything?

Ok, whatever you say.

[420]

That's it?  No discussion or anything?

Ok, whatever you say.

if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes.

and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its  a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me

[grantbdev]

On the topic of land taxes, Thomas Paine wrote an interesting (Enlightenment/State of Nature style) argument for them in his pamphlet Agrarian Justice:

'The work is based on the contention that in the state of nature, "the earth, in its natural uncultivated state... was the common property of the human race"; the concept of private ownership arose as a necessary result of the development of agriculture, since it was impossible to distinguish the possession of improvements to the land from the possession of the land itself. Thus Paine views private property as necessary, but that the basic needs of all humanity must be provided for by those with property, who have originally taken it from the general public. This in some sense is their "payment" to non-property holders for the right to hold private property.' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_Justice

[Topazan]

That's it?  No discussion or anything?

Ok, whatever you say.

if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes.

and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its  a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me

Some people think that some or all of the tax should be redistributed to the community.  The idea being, as grantbdev's post suggested, that the landholders must pay rent to those who don't hold land. 

I have one problem with that idea: It requires us to define who is and isn't a member of the community.  I'm against citizenship and restricting immigration.  That's why I would prefer it be spent on  defense and infrastructure, including the public spaces you mentioned, and if there's some left over, maybe even some (gasp) anti-poverty spending.

I'm not sure how well this fits in with what other geolibertarians would say, but my position is that you would still own your land in one sense: You get to decide who has first priority in leasing the land after you leave.  Thus, you can still sell your house when you move.  It's like domain names on the internet.  If you want to register a new one, you just have to pay a registration fee to an ICANN accredited registrar.  If you want to buy an existing domain name, say because someone built a popular site with it, you'll have to buy it from its current owner.

I'm not sure what you meant when you said "if the landowners want you to move".  You mean if you default on your taxes?  Then you would need to find a buyer within a certain period.  If you mean eminent domain, presumably there would be some kind of required compensation, as there is now.  If you mean being evicted because you broke some rule, well, that would probably be a matter for a civil case with your neighbors or in severe cases a criminal court to decide.

[420]

That's it?  No discussion or anything?

Ok, whatever you say.

if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes.

and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its  a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me

Some people think that some or all of the tax should be redistributed to the community.  The idea being, as grantbdev's post suggested, that the landholders must pay rent to those who don't hold land. 

I have one problem with that idea: It requires us to define who is and isn't a member of the community.  I'm against citizenship and restricting immigration.  That's why I would prefer it be spent on  defense and infrastructure, including the public spaces you mentioned, and if there's some left over, maybe even some (gasp) anti-poverty spending.

I'm not sure how well this fits in with what other geolibertarians would say, but my position is that you would still own your land in one sense: You get to decide who has first priority in leasing the land after you leave.  Thus, you can still sell your house when you move.  It's like domain names on the internet.  If you want to register a new one, you just have to pay a registration fee to an ICANN accredited registrar.  If you want to buy an existing domain name, say because someone built a popular site with it, you'll have to buy it from its current owner.

I'm not sure what you meant when you said "if the landowners want you to move".  You mean if you default on your taxes?  Then you would need to find a buyer within a certain period.  If you mean eminent domain, presumably there would be some kind of required compensation, as there is now.  If you mean being evicted because you broke some rule, well, that would probably be a matter for a civil case with your neighbors or in severe cases a criminal court to decide.

Why can't all the taxes just be incorporated into the purchase price and paid up front? (like normal bank can loan u money, they pay full up front to old owner, you pay bank the loan according to their terms)

[Topazan]

That's it?  No discussion or anything?

Ok, whatever you say.

if we dont own the land, at the least id want general widespread land designated as public for us landless (hint, homeless) people to be on legally without taxes.

and how does that jive with the notion, its not your land but your house is on it? unless its  a mobile home on wheels then you can't really MOVE your house if the land owners want you to move...so not owning the land doesn't really make sense to me

Some people think that some or all of the tax should be redistributed to the community.  The idea being, as grantbdev's post suggested, that the landholders must pay rent to those who don't hold land. 

I have one problem with that idea: It requires us to define who is and isn't a member of the community.  I'm against citizenship and restricting immigration.  That's why I would prefer it be spent on  defense and infrastructure, including the public spaces you mentioned, and if there's some left over, maybe even some (gasp) anti-poverty spending.

I'm not sure how well this fits in with what other geolibertarians would say, but my position is that you would still own your land in one sense: You get to decide who has first priority in leasing the land after you leave.  Thus, you can still sell your house when you move.  It's like domain names on the internet.  If you want to register a new one, you just have to pay a registration fee to an ICANN accredited registrar.  If you want to buy an existing domain name, say because someone built a popular site with it, you'll have to buy it from its current owner.

I'm not sure what you meant when you said "if the landowners want you to move".  You mean if you default on your taxes?  Then you would need to find a buyer within a certain period.  If you mean eminent domain, presumably there would be some kind of required compensation, as there is now.  If you mean being evicted because you broke some rule, well, that would probably be a matter for a civil case with your neighbors or in severe cases a criminal court to decide.

Why can't all the taxes just be incorporated into the purchase price and paid up front? (like normal bank can loan u money, they pay full up front to old owner, you pay bank the loan according to their terms)

The taxes are recurring, so if your stay is indefinite, then you won't know how much you'll eventually end up owing.  Even if you do know how many years you want to stay, the land value may change, and with it the amount of taxes you owe.

Still, if enough people demand this kind of stability, I'm sure the market can provide something.  Maybe if you want a place to retire to, you can sign a contract with someone saying they'll pay all the taxes on your house for the rest of your life, but upon your death they inherit your house.  There could be a whole industry of "tax insurance" where the company will pay your taxes for the next few decades in return for a large down payment now.

FYI, these answers are coming off the top of my head.  This is a concept I've only become interested recently, so I haven't read the existing literature in depth.

[420]

Why can't all the taxes just be incorporated into the purchase price and paid up front? (like normal bank can loan u money, they pay full up front to old owner, you pay bank the loan according to their terms)
The taxes are recurring, so if your stay is indefinite, then you won't know how much you'll eventually end up owing.  Even if you do know how many years you want to stay, the land value may change, and with it the amount of taxes you owe.

Still, if enough people demand this kind of stability, I'm sure the market can provide something.  Maybe if you want a place to retire to, you can sign a contract with someone saying they'll pay all the taxes on your house for the rest of your life, but upon your death they inherit your house.  There could be a whole industry of "tax insurance" where the company will pay your taxes for the next few decades in return for a large down payment now.

FYI, these answers are coming off the top of my head.  This is a concept I've only become interested recently, so I haven't read the existing literature in depth.

do you have a youtube channel with your type of thinking?

[Bitcoin Oz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnznB2g_La0  Here is a good video describing land tax and how a lack of one causes housing bubbles. You also end up with empty houses while lots of people are homeless.

[Topazan]

do you have a youtube channel with your type of thinking?

I don't know of any, but terms to search for would be "Georgism" and "geolibertarianism".

@bitcoin.me - Thanks, I'll check it out.

[Richy_T]

Land Value Tax is interesting but it definitely has issues of its own. The whole land ownership thing has a lot of depth and subtleties that many people don't even consider because they're used to the perspective they're in (consider nomadic people for example.) I think there may never actually be a good answer.

[Topazan]

The problem of reconciling different ideas about land ownership isn't unique to a land tax system.  What problems would nomadic peoples encounter under a land tax system that they wouldn't encounter in the current system?  What solutions does the current system offer that a land tax system could not?

[Richy_T]

The problem of reconciling different ideas about land ownership isn't unique to a land tax system.  What problems would nomadic peoples encounter under a land tax system that they wouldn't encounter in the current system?  What solutions does the current system offer that a land tax system could not?

Oh, I was just going off on a tangent.

[420]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnznB2g_La0  Here is a good video describing land tax and how a lack of one causes housing bubbles. You also end up with empty houses while lots of people are homeless.

thanks a lot for that. a different perspective I have not heard in a documentary before!

[firefop]

Land Value Tax is interesting but it definitely has issues of its own. The whole land ownership thing has a lot of depth and subtleties that many people don't even consider because they're used to the perspective they're in (consider nomadic people for example.) I think there may never actually be a good answer.

My primary issue with switching to a land tax is that the valuation has to be set somehow... and some entity has control over how it's set, when and at what value. Unless is was based on the purchase price of the land when you bought it (which has it's own issues, fraud selling something for a dollar, etc) there's no way it wouldn't get out of control by constantly growing.

Property tax already does this... increasing by a percentage per year.

I'd much rather see a staged sales tax for a flat percentage at each stage.