What we are saying is an end-use consumption tax. That means, for example, the farmer goes out and buys a tractor and seeds, and he pays no tax under our bill. He plants his seeds and produces the wheat. He pays no tax. He ships the wheat to a miller. From the miller it goes to a baker, and from a baker it goes to the retail outlet. All the way along the line now, there has been no tax under our bill. Is that a correct statement?
Discussing the implications of an end-use consumption tax during a debate.
Share
More from Charles Norwood
in conclusion, I will simply say to my friend, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) that this is not an amendment that justifies or does not justify the previous amendment. This is an effort to get the facts on what we already know. If…
If I had lost a son or a father in one of those mines, I would be just like they are. I would be hammering the tables, saying why aren't you doing something in Washington? But the truth is, when we do do something, it needs to be the right…
44. Lance Corporal Russell P. White 45. Private First Class Daniel B. McClenney 46. Lance Corporal Juston Tyler Thacker 47. Staff Sergeant Robert K. McGee 48. Specialist Julie R. Hickey 49. Specialist Juan Torres 50. Sergeant Bobby E…
the Norwood amendment would definitely clarify the existing authority, existing authority of State and local law enforcement personnel in assisting in the apprehension, detention, and transport of illegal aliens in the routine course of…
Other voices in this conversation
