At NRO today, Jillian Kay Melchior has a very important story about how the leaders of one of my favorite…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Frightening New Report of Obamite Harassment

At NRO today, Jillian Kay Melchior has a very important story about how the leaders of one of my favorite organizations, what I have described as "the heroic True the Vote" group, have been harassed by not one, not two, not three, but four separate federal agencies that had never before done anything to look even slightly askance at those leaders -- never, that is, until just after True the Vote was formed. The IRS, the FBI, the ATF, and OSHA all have made life miserable for True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht and her husband, Bryan.

The situation escalated in 2012. That February, True the Vote received a third request for information from the IRS, which also sent its first questionnaire to King Street Patriots. Catherine says the IRS had “hundreds of questions — hundreds…[more]

May 20, 2013 • 06:18 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Here Come the VAT, the Mother of All Taxes Print
By CFIF Staff
Wednesday, April 07 2010
Consideration of a VAT here and now has but two purposes: to support the big government that has already been visited upon us and to expand the even bigger government of President Obama’s dreams.

The Value Added Tax (VAT) cat is finally creeping out of its bag.  No longer is it just those hysterical rumor-mongers like columnist Charles Krauthammer speculating on the next national tax to be imposed by the Obama administration.  Now it’s none other than Obama economic adviser Paul Volcker telling the New York Historical Society that a VAT should be considered to get the deficit under control.  For good measure, he threw in taxes on carbon and energy.

According to the Reuters report of the meeting, “Though he acknowledged that both were still unpopular ideas, he said getting entitlement costs and the U.S. budget deficit under control may require such moves.  ‘If at the end of the day we need to raise taxes, we should raise taxes,” he said.”  (Volcker’s personal fondness for a VAT has not been secret.)

Since the president former Federal Reserve Chairman Volcker now serves is likely to go down in history as American champion of both entitlements and deficits, the Volcker pronouncement should come as no surprise to anyone other than those naifs who still cling to Obama’s false promises never to raise taxes on the middle class.

A VAT is the mother of all taxes.  It was born in France (where it accounts for about 50 percent of government revenue) in 1954, with bastard children now running wild, in differing forms, in more than 100 countries around the world, at rates that range from a low of 5 percent up to 25 percent.

Think of it as it is, a national sales tax imposed on virtually everything sold, with collections at every sales point (where value is added) from origin to ultimate consumer.  Like a traditional sales tax, it is relatively efficient and inexpensive to collect, just as easy to increase as desired.  Unlike a traditional sales tax, most of it is hidden in the ultimate cost of the goods.

Were a VAT to be considered as a replacement, and only as a replacement, for all other federal taxes, then it, as a concept, would be worthy of a strenuous national debate.  But that, to the best of our knowledge, has never happened in any country that has imposed a VAT, is not contemplated by those who propound it here now and would be almost impossible to achieve.  In addition, as the imposition of ObamaCare has proven, this has become a country where the majority will of the people is accorded no merit in what passes for national debate.  Of course you don’t want to be taxed more, but you have to be taxed more, because we must spend more and now we’ve got to pay down the deficit for what we’ve already been spending, plus all that more spending, so shut up and go to your room now.

Consideration of a VAT here and now has but two purposes:  to support the big government that has already been visited upon us and to expand the even bigger government of President Obama’s dreams.  Why a VAT?  Because, as Shawn Tully has written for CNNMoney.com, “it’s the only vehicle capable of raising the money to cover the gigantic projected increases in spending and deficits.”

Other than the occasional public utterance by the likes of Paul Volcker (who, without going into detail regarding his previous role as Fed Head, Ronald Reagan had to fire) and a growing number of warnings from seers like Krauthammer, talk about a VAT is going to be downplayed until after the November Midterm elections.

But consider the true VAT nightmare scenario.  If the Democrats lose their majority in one or both sides of the Capitol come November, a VAT could be pushed through a lame duck Congress as a parting gift to their dear leader.  Why the Democrats would do that, considering Obama’s blame in such a loss, is beyond our limited capacity at reasoning, but so was so many who have already clearly walked the plank to vote for ObamaCare, against the wishes of their constituents.

Even if that does not happen, there’s a VAT proposal in your future.  Bank on it.

Question of the Week   
How long after the 1972 break-in of the DNC Watergate Headquarters did Richard Nixon resign as President of the United States?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"Chilling effect. That's the term lawyers and judges use to describe the result of government actions that deter people from exercising their right of free speech.  There have been plenty of examples in the past 10 days. ...  The IRS is assigned a lot of work by the Obamacare law. It will impose penalties on Americans who can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it. ...  The IRS was given…[more]
 
 
—Michael Barone, Washington Examiner Senior Political Analyst
— Michael Barone, Washington Examiner Senior Political Analyst
 
Liberty Poll   

Which of the Obama administration scandals are you following most closely?