Perry's tax plan: Take that 9-9-9

[DiamondDave]

It's a knee slapping joke. Perry's flat tax is optional, you can pay it or pay the way you're paying now,

which means for starters you'll have to do your taxes TWICE to figure out which is better for you.

lolol. Simplicity.

I agree with you here...

And if you have the option to do it the 'old' way, how do you cut IRS expenses??

Would you pay $40 more to spend 10 minutes preparing your taxes vs. 2 hours? I would. So would a lot of people. Simpler tax returns mean less necessity to audit, thus fewer people employed.

Not me PERSONALLY cutting IRS expenses.. the government cutting IRS expenses.. if you still have to support the 'old' way, you're not gonna cut shit in operating expenses

 

[NYcarbineer]

I agree with you here...

And if you have the option to do it the 'old' way, how do you cut IRS expenses??

Plus, mathematically speaking in terms of revenues, if everyone is allowed to pick the lower tax bill, between now and Perry's tax plan,

obviously everyone will take the lower one, which makes this plan, as I said originally,

a laughable budget buster.

As explained, not everyone will pick the lowest tax bill.
Would you want to spend 2 hours doing taxes or 10 minutes? How much isthat time worth to you? If you do it the old way you will need to buy comp programs or take it to a professional. How much does that cost?
The increased efficiency alone makes this plan attractive and a winner.

I paid an effective tax rate of 10% on my gross income last year,and did my own taxes. I'm not about to pay more to save time.

 

[Maple]

It's a knee slapping joke. Perry's flat tax is optional, you can pay it or pay the way you're paying now,

which means for starters you'll have to do your taxes TWICE to figure out which is better for you.

lolol. Simplicity.

I agree with you here...

And if you have the option to do it the 'old' way, how do you cut IRS expenses??

Yes, that optional deal is what bothers me, I love a flat tax, but want a 10% flat tax on everyone, he still includes the deductions etc, which makes it NOT a flat tax.

 

[Avorysuds]

Perry is done, it wouldn't matter if he was the best candidate (he is more than clearly not) he is a drunk on stage.

Even if Perry’s plan is good it ain’t better than Paul’s and Perry has proven to still just be another liberal Neocon.

Newt or Paul for me… Cain/Mitt/Perry are all the worst the party can offer atm, that’s why the media tells us 1 of them must win.

 

[Navy1960]

A few things, one is the premise that taxes are too high, that's untrue. Taxes are the lowest since 1950. "Taxes are too high, too complex, and too riddled with special interest loopholes." So the first part of that statement is untrue. The second part, of that I could not agree more, and I think you would have a hard time finding anyone who would disagree that the tax code is so large and complex that reforming just that would not be a bad thing. As for the special interest loopholes, again, many would agree those are in need of a look as well.

A few more things, the flat tax will decrease revenue to the Federal Govt. and amount to a tax cut for high income individuals and I will tell you why. The option for an individual to consider the flat tax or 20% of their income rate. If your am indivdual making less than 500,000 dollars why would you take pay the 20% flat tax? If you can retain the standard mortgage deduction? So what it does is for those making over 500K allows them to take the flat tax and the rest of of us to stay where we are.

As for the Social Security opt. out, I will say a few things, first, in doing so it will underfund the SS Trust fund to the point where it wont be able to sustain itself leaving Seniors and the disabled with nothing. Second, for those who do opt. out and DO NOT save over their life times you will end up having a poor Senior population much the same as you did prior to Social Security. Third, Social Security is not an issue at the moment until 2036 when it needs to be funded more and even then until 2075 new funding options need to be looked it. The last issue here, is this, in doing so he will never win a national election with this agenda on Social Security.

One more thing his plan does completely underfund the Govt. to the point where the budget is smashed and deficits as well as debt grow and do not decrease. This plan in short while it might appeal to a few will never win an election and do not address the issues facing this nation.

 

[Avorysuds]

Did Perry produce any meaningfull cuts or does he plan on Government staying Huge and liberal as always?

 

[Old Rocks]

From what I see of this plan, it is just another attempt to releive the very wealthy of any taxes at all. I am beginning to think that by the time this field of candidates gets done, they will be proposing that we pay the very wealthy out of government funds because they 'create jobs'.

 

[Avatar4321]

still too high. but he's on the right track at least.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Income earned out of the country is tax free? Why? Seems an incentive to move more jobs overseas. Income tax must be progressive, a flat tax will create a "landed gentry" and finish our nations devoluiton (de-evolution) to a nation of halfs and half-nots.

Some of the ideas in the Op-Ed make sense, others are foolish. The fact remains if the tax code is rewritten, it will be rewritten by a Congress beholden to the power elite who have bought and paid every member of Congress. Unless and until CU v. FEC is rescinded we are and will continue to be a Plutocracy, a nation where the rich and powerful write and enforce the laws.

The US is the only country that double taxes corporate profits: once by the host country and once when it is repatriated to the U.S. The result of that is that no money earned overseas gets repatriated here.
How will a flat tax create a "landed gentry"? That is the most absurd thing you've said in at least 3 posts.
Do you think members are not bought and paid for by unions, trial lawyers, etc today? Do you think today's tax code is not the product of special interest pleading? Please.

It's not absurd; it's simply a conclusion based on historical facts and contemporary observations. Consider, homes today in default are purchased by investors whose income is earned by rent, who can rehab homes and deduct expenses. How is that not a landed gentry? As more jobs move off shore fewer Americans will be able to buy homes, and more will become renters - increasing the small class of investors whose income is derived from the labor of others. And those renters, as they become less able to legally bargin collectively for wages, will have less disposable income, which will have a negative impact on small and large business in America.

You may consider my conclusions silly, as I consider those who support a flat tax and believe progressive tax schedules are 'unfair'. But I can see no positve end if we continue on the road to a nation ruled by the wealthy. Not postive for the many and not positve for the few.

 

[Maple]

Did Perry produce any meaningfull cuts or does he plan on Government staying Huge and liberal as always?

Read the link, it states right in there what he proposes to do about spending. Good grief. Perry is late to the trough on this, I don't think it will do much to boast his ratings.

 

[Full-Auto]

It's a laughable budget buster.

For starters, with bigger standard deductions, under Perry's plan, a family of four making 50,000

would pay ZERO in federal income tax.

Let's see how the 'skin in the game' crowd likes that.

Make that figure a family of 5 and they qualify for welfare.

GET A DAMN GRIP.

 

[Salt Jones]

It's a laughable budget buster.

For starters, with bigger standard deductions, under Perry's plan, a family of four making 50,000

would pay ZERO in federal income tax.

Let's see how the 'skin in the game' crowd likes that.

Since when do you care about budget busting?? That's laughable right there.

I notice you didn't address the point.

 

[ladyliberal]

I like almost none of this. I predict that the various entities that like scoring new tax plans are going to tear this apart. I'm sure Perry knows that, and is only offering the plan to appeal to his base as he struggles to get out of Romney's shadow.

-- Perry's claim that taxes could be done on a postcard seems a gross exaggeration. If you look at even a very simple current tax return and take out all of the parts having to do with calculating rates, it would still run to much more than a postcard.

-- A flat tax of 20% is of course a huge payout to the wealthy.

-- Adding more options doesn't simplify things, it complicates them. If one option is clearly better it should be the only option, otherwise taxpayers will have to consider both.

-- Perry talks about eliminating loopholes and lowering corporate taxes. If he actually lowers corporate tax rates to 20% he would be dramatically raising taxes on many corporations. So either he's wrong about eliminating loopholes or he's wrong about lowering taxes.

-- Perry's repatriation plan has failed in the past. It's a massive tax handout to corporations who hide assets overseas, and it just encourages them to do it again so they can get the good rate the next time.

-- Perry seems to be proposing a 0% tax rate on anything done overseas. That seems to be a massive tax handout to corporations every time they outsource anything. Why would we want to pay for that?

-- In addition to eliminating loopholes/deductions and lowering rates, Perry offers a number of particular tax cuts. This will just add to the deficit. I know some people who have posted in this thread believe lowering rates raises revenues, but that's just wrong.

-- Perry's particular tax cuts tend to favor the rich. Most egregiously, he wants to make much of investment income entirely untaxed.

-- Weird super-high tax rates. Perry's plan as written allows certain deductions only for those making less than $500,000. So if you make $499,999, making an extra dollar could effectively be taxed at something like 1000000% since it would take away substantial deductions.

My prediction is that Perry's plan will get torn into by the experts about as badly as Cain's was, but will be more popular among the Republican base mainly because it does not include a sales tax. Perry's plan will give him a new avenue of attack against Romney, but his attempt to unseat him will fail anyway.

 

[Navy1960]

Here's the problem, theres a couple of them actually, you can pass a balanced budget amendment all you want too, however, if you still don't address a 14 plus trillion dollar deficit your balaned budget doesn't mean a thing, especially if you plan on reducing revenue into the Govt.. the other thing and this is the biggest issue, when a candidate proposes things like opt. out programs on Social Securuty, as well as plans that seem to benefit everyone except the majoirty of American's, while it may appeal to a small segment of the base of your party, it won't get you elected. So if the plan is to appeal to the base then you have actually accomplished what you set out to do, however, in order to win the White House one needs to understand the following;


Eight in 10 Americans think Social Security has been good for the country, with 70 percent of young adults agreeing and almost nine in 10 senior citizens saying the same.

Though large majorities of both parties believe the 75-year-old program instituted by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt has been good, about one-third of all Republicans think it is unconstitutional.


Poll: Social Security still popular - Maggie Haberman - POLITICO.com

Im the face of statistics like that, your appealing to that 1/3 and not the 80% who will elect you.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Perry's plan will probably be more favorable to more people because it offers a NEW tax option while still maintaining favorite old options....instead of turning the whole code upside down...

It may work if Perry holds spending to 18% of GDP as he promises.....

a good sign......the Left is already screaming bloody murder.......

 

[Maple]

Perry's plan will probably be more favorable to more people because it offers a NEW tax option while still maintaining favorite old options....instead of turning the whole code upside down...

It may work if Perry holds spending to 18% of GDP as he promises.....

a good sign......the Left is already screaming bloody murder.......[/QUOTE

Anytime the government spends more than 20% of the GDP, we go into a decline, unemployment rises. I like a flat tax, but a 10% one on everyone, with out all of the loopholes, deductions etc. It's only fair to make everyone pay a fair share. If he keeps all the deductions in there, which it appears he does, then it is a neither a fair tax or a flat one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This plan is a big free lunch so politically it might hurt Herman Cain, whose plan is not nearly as big a free lunch.

Perry needs to get Cain out of the race somehow and make himself the only viable alternative for the anyone-but-Romney crowd.

 

[BOBO]

I'd take Ron Paul's tax plan over Rick's ANYTIME!!!

 

[DiamondDave]

I really have not liked any of them.. each and every one is coddling someone... adding exceptions for votes in some way, shape or form...

I am waiting for someone to step up and put forth the simplest of simple plans... the only one that makes sense and treats every citizen and every dollar earned as equal... until then, even if/when I vote for someone over Obama or someone over my current representatives, I will not say I support anyone's tax plan

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I'd take Ron Paul's tax plan over Rick's ANYTIME!!!

me too.....eliminate income tax altogether....but there is no way Congress today will eliminate almost 50% of their receipts....and close down half the government...

at least Perry's plan is a doable step in the right direction.....Cain's plan is kinda scary.....i have my doubts about a plan coming from a former FED man...