Let's play Reductio ad absurdum
Business taxes are bad because they take money from consumers.
Therefore, we should eliminate all business taxes.
No corporate income taxes, no FICA contributions, no local taxes... Behold! Business prices drop and consumers get the benefit! Amazon sees sales rise!
But wait.
Revenue to national governments drop unless tax rates rise for individuals. But that's not politically popular, even though it would be "revenue neutral" according to the economists. Because the locality can't afford a police force anymore, Amazon has to hire its own security force. Roads fall into disrepair because states don't have the funds for road improvements. Amazon can't deliver packages in a timely way, so their sales fall.
Since the court system has collapsed due to lack of revenue, Amazon employees no longer have to worry about prosecution by the state, so they take what they want. The Amazon Police can't stop them, because they are understaffed and some of them are also in cahoots with the looters.
Net result - Bad.
Without any discussion of what Bill's $2/book tax would be used for, it's a senseless exercise. Government doesn't usually collect taxes to have the money sit in a vault.
How long did your phone bill stay below what it was in 2006 when 26 U.S.C. § 4251 was repealed?
http://en.wikipedia....ephone_excise_tax
If corporate taxes are
always paid by consumers, then corporate tax rate reductions are
always passed on to consumers, right?
I don't think so. Things are more complicated than that.
As I mentioned earlier, and as Krugman pointed out, it's much more efficient for the public to pay for a public good than for the private sector. Public goods are paid for with taxes.
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
