So, even in your meandering example, the taxes collected are nowhere near original purchase price?
And I'm not sure what fairness have to do with it? By what definition would it be fair?
I did say it was unlikely, only if a car sold a lot when new for high amounts.
My main complaint against sales tax on EVERY sale is that I feel it is unfair for two exact same original value cars to generate such vastly different amount of tax revenue.
These numbers are often VERY different.
You could say it is a fair as it all comes out in the wash or equalizes...but some are subsidizing the tax base more than others...vehicles that is.
I don't think there should be any tax on any USED possessions -even vehicles- OF course the ONLY reason this doesn't exist is the power car manufacturers have in govt.
IF only new cars were taxed (which I claim is fair because each car gives its exact "correctly determined" amount), there would be a huge disincentive to buy new cars.
The market for slightly used, almost new care would skyrocket!
If I buy a 2000 sectional for my living room and sell it in 10 years for 200, I should not be taxed on it. I decide in 2 months I don't like it and sell it for 1400...I should not be taxed on it.
Now there is sales tax ans income tax.
I don't think either should be on these examples. States vary in laws.
Another big issue...sometimes good; sometimes bad: states! While I support states' rights, I think a country should have a law of the land.
I like consistency a lot too!!
Thing you do all the time in one state could make you a criminal (at least a law breaker) across a state line.
No one could ever agree though.
I want the most lenient, least invasive, tax and fee happy state's rules imposed everywhere, but I don't see that happening and it long term would more than likely be detrimental to economy and possible other things. (as if we haven;t had enough things detrimental to economy and life etc in the past 60 or so years)