Trump floats eliminating U.S. income tax and replacing it with tariffs on imports

[Anti Federalist]

I was already gonna vote for him, you don't have to keep trying to convince me.




Trump floats eliminating U.S. income tax and replacing it with tariffs on imports

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/13/trump-all-tariff-policy-to-replace-income-tax.html

Donald Trump on Thursday brought up the idea of imposing an “all tariff policy” that would ultimately enable the U.S. to get rid of the income tax, sources in a private meeting with the Republican presidential candidate told CNBC.

Trump, in the meeting with GOP lawmakers at the Capitol Hill Club in Washington, D.C., also talked about using tariffs to leverage negotiating power over bad actors, according to another source in the room.

The remarks show Trump, who championed tariffs as a foreign policy multi-tool during his first term in office, is considering a drastically more protectionist trade agenda if he defeats President Joe Biden in November.

Spokespeople for Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to CNBC’s requests for comment. Trump in a Truth Social post later Thursday morning said there was “lots discussed, all positive” in the meeting, without providing any more details.

Ron Paul has asserted that Congress had no power to impose a direct income tax and supports the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment.

Rather than taxing personal income, which he says assumes that the government owns individuals' lives and labor, he prefers the federal government to be funded through excise taxes and/or uniform, non-protectionist tariffs.

At 17 minutes in, among other places.

 

[PAF]

He wants and got your vote, and a whole lot of others, but don't surprised when he does all of the other things instead, but not this.

Trump is going save us! And he's going to make government save us too!

 

[CCTelander]

Yippee. More central planning to “fix” the problems created by central planning. Kiss what remains of the middle class goodbye.

 

[PAF]

Yippee. More central planning to “fix” the problems created by central -landing. Kiss what remains of the middle class goodbye.

I didn't want to say that way because people loves them their central planning solutions. To them it's a plus.

Either way, it still isn’t going to happen.

 

[TheCount]

Anyone who thinks this could actually work is high on their own supply

 

[unknown]

While many may still object, I believe that this is the correct constitutional position, excise and tariffs.

Income theft was ruled unconstitutional.

 

[Anti Federalist]

While many may still object, I believe that this is the correct constitutional position, excise and tariffs.

Income theft was ruled unconstitutional.

Exactly right. Three times in fact.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Yippee. More central planning to “fix” the problems created by central planning. Kiss what remains of the middle class goodbye.

You know brother, sometimes I forgot these things myself...almost twenty years gone and a lot of turbulent water under the bridge...

Ron Paul has asserted that Congress had no power to impose a direct income tax and supports the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment.

Rather than taxing personal income, which he says assumes that the government owns individuals' lives and labor, he prefers the federal government to be funded through excise taxes and/or uniform, non-protectionist tariffs.

At 17 minutes in, among other places.

 

[jmdrake]

Anyone who thinks this could actually work is high on their own supply

Explain. Why do you think the income tax is necessary?

 

[jmdrake]

Yippee. More central planning to “fix” the problems created by central planning. Kiss what remains of the middle class goodbye.

I didn't want to say that way because people loves them their central planning solutions. To them it's a plus.

Either way, it still isn’t going to happen.

Getting rid of the income tax is a net positive even if it means higher tariffs. Individuals should not be required to report to the government how much they make every year. This is a much bigger problem for individual liberty now with more and more people moving into the "gig" economy where their wages are reported to the government but their taxes are not withheld. Lots of people are making barely enough to survive and simultaneously running up huge tax bills that they may never be able to pay. That's also why Biden is now going after people's CashApp and PayPal receipts.

 

[acptulsa]

Getting rid of the income tax is a net positive even if it means higher tariffs.

It absolutely would be. But most of these are bait-and-switch operations, and we wind up with both income tax and jacked up tariffs. Which outcome would do a fine job of siphoning all the remaining wealth to the wealthiest.

This is a pretty obvious gambit, because it's an idea that has been advanced by those demonic crackpot libertarians. So when they jack tariffs up without regard to what we can and can't produce ourselves right this minute, and it does enough to harm the economy, they "prove" income taxes are "necessary" and" discredit" us. Remember, these are the problem -> reaction -> solution people.

 

[CaptUSA]

Explain. Why do you think the income tax is necessary?

Because it's a more certain principle to enslave the next generations to our debts.

SPENDING IS THE REAL TAX

The rest are just methods to pretend like our government can pay it back eventually. Tariffs and excise taxes can be avoided... The regressive inflation tax has limits and can spiral out of control... But the labor of the next generations??! That's as good as gold!

 

[fisharmor]

Explain. Why do you think the income tax is necessary?

The man's face was in two different stills on this very thread, and yet nobody remembers when Ron Paul told us that we could completely eliminate the individual income tax if we simply dialed back federal spending to what it was 8 years prior.

The income tax is necessary because it is conditioning. You are a slave who owes your labor to your country.
You have the summer off from high school so you go flip burgers for a couple weeks of afternoons and give up youth and experiences you're never going to get back for a pittance that would be gone in a week if you were allowed to keep it all, and then the federal government takes a LOT of that pittance from you, and if you complain about it to anyone, then all the other monkeys in the 5 monkeys experiment attack you because if you try to take that banana we're all going to get hosed.

It's absolutely necessary, exactly the way it is. The tax structure is absolutely necessary, exactly the way it is. The tax filing process is absolutely necessary, exactly the way it is. The audit process is absolutely necessary, exactly the way it is. The extra-legislative, extra-judicial nature of the IRS is absolutely necessary, exactly the way it is.

This is all axiomatic based on the fact that we were told, point blank, 16 years ago, that all we had to do to end it all immediately, literally make it go away forever, is to stop filling cargo ships with dollars and gasoline and lighting them on fire every single day. If we even dialed that back to a hundred semi trailers of dollars lit on fire, none of us would have to do this crap ever again.

THAT is why there's never going to be a change to the tax code. It is exactly what we need because it is programming us to believe that.

 

[PAF]

Getting rid of the income tax is a net positive even if it means higher tariffs. Individuals should not be required to report to the government how much they make every year. This is a much bigger problem for individual liberty now with more and more people moving into the "gig" economy where their wages are reported to the government but their taxes are not withheld. Lots of people are making barely enough to survive and simultaneously running up huge tax bills that they may never be able to pay. That's also why Biden is now going after people's CashApp and PayPal receipts.

Yet I don't see any calls or sincere efforts to DEFUND any programs. Sure, in a world where things make logical sense, I would be all over this. But things don't make logical sense, and I am not interested in trading in my Bill of Rights. And now aside from Trump's plan to federalize nationwide "Stop and Frisk", MTG of all people is stating "federal government must step up assistance to help protect Microsoft, other businesses and regular Americans".

While I get your point, I don't need a crash course in Economics 101 ;-)

 

[jmdrake]

Yet I don't see any calls or sincere efforts to DEFUND any programs. Sure, in a world where things make logical sense, I would be all over this. But things don't make logical sense, and I am not interested in trading in my Bill of Rights. And now aside from Trump's plan to federalize nationwide "Stop and Frisk", MTG of all people is stating "federal government must step up assistance to help protect Microsoft, other businesses and regular Americans".

While I get your point, I don't need a crash course in Economics 101 ;-)

You're not interested in trading your bill of rights? Which rights are still left? The 3rd amendment against quartering soldiers? I'm still not voting for Trump. But, at least on the campaign trail, adopting Ron Paul proposals as [MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] has pointed out is a good thing. Do I think Trump will actually follow through? Nope. But the fact that these ideas are being mainstreamed is a positive. And unlike some people on this forum I give Obama credit for the few things he got right. (The Iran nuclear deal. Letting schools opt out of No Child Left Behind. Curbing funding for gain of function research in 2014. Letting guns be carried on Amtrack trains and in National Parks). A broken clock is right twice a day, but it's still not worth buying.

 

[Anti Federalist]

You're not interested in trading your bill of rights? Which rights are still left? The 3rd amendment against quartering soldiers? I'm still not voting for Trump. But, at least on the campaign trail, adopting Ron Paul proposals as [MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] has pointed out is a good thing. Do I think Trump will actually follow through? Nope. But the fact that these ideas are being mainstreamed is a positive. And unlike some people on this forum I give Obama credit for the few things he got right. (The Iran nuclear deal. Letting schools opt out of No Child Left Behind. Curbing funding for gain of function research in 2014. Letting guns be carried on Amtrack trains and in National Parks). A broken clock is right twice a day, but it's still not worth buying.

That is exactly where I am at on this as well.

There is no denying that an across the board, "non protectionist" tariff that replaces the income tax would be a net "good thing" for numerous reasons.

And that having the currently leading candidate for president talking about the idea, is a net good thing as well.

And I can recall giving Obama credit for banning GoF research as well, although due to traitorous snakes like Fauci, look where that got us.

 

[69360]

Great. Now Trump needs to describe how as president he could effect this change.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

Exactly right. Three times in fact.

Wrong. The only time a federal income tax was ever held unconstitutional was the tax on investment income addressed in the 1895 Pollock decision. This result was overturned by the 16th Amendment. A tax on personal compensation had previously been upheld by a unanimous Supreme Court in 1881, based on the general taxing power granted to Congress in I.8.1 of the Constitution.

 

[Madison320]

Anyone who thinks this could actually work is high on their own supply

Like Ron Paul?

 

[ClaytonB]

Anyone who thinks this could actually work is high on their own supply

So, what you're saying is that there was no America before 1913?