Four Conservative Tax Plans with Equivalent Economic Results

Over the past three decades, conservatives have proposed four different types of consumption taxes: A national sales tax, A business transfer tax, The Hall–Rabushka–Armey–Forbes flat tax, and The “new flat tax,” also known as an expenditure tax, consumed income tax, inflow-outflow tax, or cash flow tax. Few understand that, despite their administrative differences, they are economically equivalent consumption taxes.[1]

Related Keywords

Australia ,Japan ,United States ,New Zealand ,Canada ,Japanese ,America ,John Stuart Mill ,Alvin Rabushka ,Rob Woodall ,Robert Hall ,Nicholas Kaldor ,Michael Burgess ,Pete Domenici ,David Bradford ,John Linder ,Richard Shelby ,Sam Nunn ,Irving Fisher ,Cecil Heftel ,Dennis Deconcini ,Steve Forbes ,Dick Armey ,Steven Symms ,Paul Ryan ,Jim Demint ,National Sales Tax ,Heritage Foundation ,European Union ,Tauzin National Retail Sales Tax ,Brief History ,Conservative Tax Reform Plans ,Tauzin National Retail Sales Tax Act ,Representative John Linder ,United States Tax ,Senator Sam Nunn ,Senator Pete Domenici ,Senator Jim Demint ,Rabushka Flat ,Senator Dennis Deconcini ,Senator Steven Symms ,House Majority Leader Dick Armey ,Senator Richard Shelby ,President George ,Advisory Panel ,Federal Tax Reform ,Representative Michael Burgess ,New Flat ,John Stuart ,Representative Cecil Heftel ,Senator Nunn ,Senator Domenici ,Consumption Tax Bases ,Consumption Tax ,Flat Tax ,Sales Tax ,Business Transfer Tax ,Tax Reform ,