top of page

FAIRtax (FT) INCREASES Tax Welfare 

 

Download/Print pdf

2024 Poverty Guidelines

 

Poverty Guidelines are issued (as adjusted for inflation) annually by the US Department of Health and Human Services - See 2024 Guidelines. 

The "family" is considered to live in poverty if they spend no more than the following guideline amounts for residents of the 48 contiguous States and the District of Columbia - separate tables are provided for residents of Hawaii (15% higher) and for Alaska (25% higher). 

HHS Poverty Guidelines (in dollars)

 

 # of 
Persons   2018      2019     2020     2021     2022     2023  
  2024

                                 

      1     $ 12,140   12,490  12,760  12,880  13,590  14,580  15,060

      2        16,460   16,910  17,240  17,420  18,310  19,720  20,440

      3        20,780   21,330  21,720  21,960  23,030  24,860  25,820

      4        25,100   25,750  26,200  26,500  27,750  30,000  31,200

      5        29,420   30,170  30,680  31,040  32,470  35,140  36,580

      6        33,740   34,590  35,160  35,580  37,190  40,280  41,960                  7        38,060   39,010  39,640  40,120  41,910  45,420  47,340

      8        42,380   43,430  44,120  44,660  46,630  50,560  52,720

Note: For each additional person, add (for 2024) $5,380. 
 

2024 FT Prebate   

      FAIRtax's Annual Spending & Prebate - 2024                                                      

             1 Adult     Prebate**       2 Adults* Prebate**          

             $15,060       $3,464           $30,120   $6,928

+1          20,440        4,701             35,500     8.165                                            +2          25,820        5,939             40,880     9,402                                              +3          31,200        7,176             46,260   10,640            

+4          36,380        8,367             51,640   11,877                                            +5          41,760        9,605             57,020   13,115                                         

+6          47,140      10,842             62,400   14,352                                            +7          52,520      12,080             67,780   15,589

               

                                                                                                               

 *FAIRtax gratuitously "corrects" for a non-existent "marriage penalty" and so it pays an extra  $2,227 (see above, 2 adults = $6,928 versus $4,701 for 1 adult + 1 non-spouse "person").
 

HHS Guidelines use "PERSON", while FAIRtax uses "Adults" + "children" – see illustration, below.
 

**For residents of the lower 48 States & DC. For Hawaii, add 15%, for Alaska add 25%

                                          

 

ILLUSTRATION   

The FT’s Prebate is a tax WELFARE check that leaves many dependent upon the govt for a large portion of their monthly income – a very bad idea.  Although FT’ers often claim that it is a  return of money “wrongfully” taken from taxpayers, the Prebate is not a refund of FT paid but a new independent $700+B ENTITLEMENT, that will only increase in the future –  it is the very last thing we can afford and would be yet another Cloward-Piven step towards the destruction of our Republic.

The Prebate is rationalized by its marketers as being needed to ensure that the poor pay no FT, assuming (incorrectly) that we all agree with that goal. This Illustration exposes that the Prebate goes much further – it gives the poor a large FT PROFIT, i.e., more tax welfare.

The Prebate gives every family a monthly check purportedly to cover the FT they would pay on the highest level of “poverty level purchases” as defined by the US HHS Dept.’s Poverty Guidelines. FT then artificially inflates that amount  (i.e., it is not based upon purchases of specific items of necessities).

The Prebate next “assumes” that EVERY family of each size spends the same number of specified dollars (for 202
4; $15,060/adult, $5,380 "child") which times 23% (i.e., FT's tax-INCLUSIVE rate) yields the Prebate that will reimburse them for 100% of the FT ($3,464/adult, $1,237/"child") that they THEORETICALLY paid.

To illustrate, assume a family of 5; Husband, Wife, 2 kids, and the Wife’s Sister lives with them. They would be “assumed” to spend a total of $55,940 ($15,060 x 3, plus $5,380 x 2).  Their 2024 Prebate would be $12,866 ($55,940 x  23%, i.e., “tax-inclusive” FT rate) or  (Prebates $3,464 x 3 + $1,237 x 2, rounding difference). The $12,866 Prebate is calculated to pay back 100% of the FT THEORETICALLY paid by the family, but as shown below it greatly OVERPAYS the amount of FT ACTUALLY paid by the family.

Point 1.  The FT corrects for a non-existent  “Marriage Penalty”

 

There is NO “Marriage Penalty” in the underlying HHS Guidelines – they were developed as impervious to age or marital status. They provide $14,580 in spending for the 1st PERSON in the household (who is assumed to pay the “rent”) and $5,140 for each added PERSON – it does not matter whether a PERSON is an adult or a child or whether they are married or not. The Prebate “makes believe” that the HHS Guidelines say “Adult” & “Child” and then is more generous to marrieds – the Prebate generously gives away more money, YOURS.

RESULT: The Prebate assumes this family spends $9,680 MORE than the Poverty Guidelines (i.e., $15,060 - $5,380) and thus OVERPAYS them by $2,226 ($9,680 x 23%).

 

Point 2.  The Prebate more generously defines “family”

 

FT’s more limited (than the HHS guidelines’) definition of “Family” allows for more FT “families” in a single physical household than the underlying HHS Guidelines would allow. An FT “family” includes only lineal ancestors/descendants (plus adopted). Thus, the Wife’s Sister would be treated as a separate family under FT, and thus as an adult (this would NOT occur if the HHS Guidelines were followed).     

    

RESULT: The Prebate assumes this family pays $9,680 MORE (i.e., $15,060 - $5,380) and OVERPAYS them by $2,226 ($9,680 x 23%).       

  

Point 3.  The Prebate “assumes” that ALL spending is made AT the poverty dollar limit

If the family ACTUALLY spends LESS than the maximum amount a family can spend and still be at the HHS Guidelines’ limit, they will be overpaid. This family is “assumed” to spend $55,940 ($15,060 x 3 + $5,380 x 2).

RESULT # 1: If they ACTUALLY spend $5,000 less than the limit, the Prebate OVERPAY them by $1,150 ($5,000 x 23%).

RESULT # 2: For Points 1-3, The Prebate assumes $24,360 MORE spending and OVERPAYS their Prebate by $5,602.

Point 4.  The Prebate OVERPAYS for USED goods 

If the family buys some goods USED (and can prove the seller paid FT, and that certain credits were not claimed) they will not have to pay FT.  Yet the Prebate “makes believe” that they DID pay FT.

 

RESULT: If the family bought $5,000 of USED goods, the Prebate would OVERPAY  them by $1,150

 

Point 5.  The Prebate OVERPAYS for Black Market purchases

 

If the family buys some goods on the Black Market, they will pay no FT.     The FT “makes believe” that all is spent legally so that full FT is paid.

 

RESULT: If the family spends $5,000 in the Black Market, the Prebate OVERPAYS them by $1,150.

Point 6. The Prebate OVERPAYS for In-Kind  (as well as cash) Welfare

Welfare is paid in cash and IN KIND (e.g., Medicaid, Housing Assistance). The poor would NOT effectively pay FT – WE WOULD, either directly (in-kind welfare) or indirectly (cash welfare).  The FT “makes believe” that the poor actually paid the FT and repays THEM for FT that WE  gave them the money to pay or paid for them directly. The poor would likely also get a raise in their welfare (due to FT 30% price increases) AND they would even be more than fully reimbursed by the Prebate, a second time.

RESULT: If in-kind welfare is $6,000, the Prebate OVERPAYS by $1,380.

Point 7. The Prebate OVERPAYS for Other Exempt  Spending

If the family spends money on tuition, property, and other taxes/licenses, etc., they will not pay FT, but the FT “assumes” that they would.

RESULT # 1: If this family spent $3,000 on such items, the FT would OVERPAY them by $690.

RESULT # 2: Points 4-7, Prebate incorrectly “assumes” FT was paid on $19,000 and OVERPAYS $4,370.

RESULT # 3: Points 1-3,  Prebate assumes $23,880 MORE spending and OVERPAYS by $5,492.

RESULT # 4: New goods purchased - $11,140 (see below): FT actually paid is only $2,563 (see below).

RESULT # 5: Grand Total OVERPAID Prebate for Points 1-7 = $9,862.

 

ILLUSTRATION SUMMARY          

 

Assumptions: H + W + 2 kids + W's Sister               SPENDING     PREBATE

1. FT Assumed "family" spends and Prebate             $55,940            $12,866
2. "Marriage Penalty"                                                       -9,680               -2.226

3.  Extra Adult                                                                   -9,680               -2,226

4.  Spend below Limit                                                      -5,000              - 1,150

5.  Total over-assumed spending (L. 2+3+4)                -24,360              - 5,602

6.  Remaining FT assumed spending (L.1 minus L.5)  31,580                7,264

7.  Used goods                                                                 - 5,000               -1,150 8.  Black Market                                                               - 5,000               -1,150

9.  In-Kind welfare                                                           -  6,000               -1,380

10. Other Exempt Items                                                    -3,000               -   690

11. Total purchases where NO FT paid (L's 7-10)        - 19,000             - 4,370

12. Net spending where FT paid (L.6 minus L.11)        $12,580             $2,894

13. Total FT overpaid (L.1 minus L.12)                                                  $9,972  


That $9,972 overpayment is only an illustrative guess because the real numbers cannot be accurately predicted. However, I would question the insanity of giving the poor a check for several thousands of dollars ($0-$12,866), plus, free SS/Medicare, and have them pay no FairTax.

                                                                        

To  this point, senior AFFT Board Members have made only two comments about this illustration.

 

Initially, they had no criticism of any of the 7 points illustrated above. All they could say was “we have to give the poor a ladder out of poverty” - Translation: We need to make welfare even more attractive than work than it already is (Really?).

 

An AFFT Director criticized my Point # 6 about welfare. He claimed that once we give people cash welfare the money "belongs to them" and so they "pay" the FT, even though we gave them the money to pay that FT – INCREDIBLE!  - he did not address in-kind welfare. See article comments (if still available). 

bottom of page