Posted on 10/26/2011 6:30:50 PM PDT by fightinJAG
Governor Rick Perry of Texas has announced a plan, which he outlines in the Wall Street Journal, to replace the corrupt and inefficient internal revenue code with a flat tax. Let’s review his proposal, using the principles of good tax policy as a benchmark.
(Excerpt) Read more at cato-at-liberty.org ...
This is the same guy that slammed Cain’s plan for “opening up a new revenue stream” (even thought it replaces 5 other revenue streams) and yet, he is okay with Perry’s opening up a complete new arm of the IRS.
NO THANKS
For starters, this analysis proceeds as if ALL Perry’s plan does is implement a flat tax.
But it does nothing of the sort. It implements a flat tax mini-me code while leaving the Fedzilla tax code in place indefinitely — and suspectible to all the usual changes and entrenchment of crony capitalism, etc.
The author completely misses the boat by focusing only on the effects of the flat tax portion of Perry’s plan. The effect of leaving in place the Fedzilla code can’t just be ignored.
There is a completely different impact on the nation in implementing a flat tax system, period, compared to offering an optional flat tax system while maintaining the monstrosity we already have indefinitely.
This point should be discussed.
The author wildly misrepresented Cain’s 999 plan by saying it created a VAT and a NST.
What an embarrassing lack of acquaintance with the facts.
Even though the author seems charmed by Perry’s plan, interesting he still only gives it a B+. What is that about?
Where are the Perry plan supporters?
bump.
You can like something, but realize that it’s still not perfect.
A flat tax still needs to be fleshed out to be perfect.
“Where are the Perry plan supporters?”
I support the Perry plan, there just didn’t seem to be much on this thread to argue about. True, it is an ‘optional’ flat tax that keeps the current code in place, and I would rather just do away with it entirely. However, in order to make this politically viable, I think you almost have to keep the old code in place (at least in the beginning), otherwise you’ll have loads of complaints from people who will claim (and sometimes it’s only just a claim using ‘creative’ math) that they pay much less under the old code. Doing it this way allows people to choose which one they like best. The thinking being that most will migrate to the simple flat tax. Over time, the idea of eliminating the old tax code and maybe tweaking whatever needs to be tweaked with the new one can be revisited.
BTW-this is not unlike Cain’s 9/9/9 plan in that respect. Cain’s own website mention that 9/9/9/ is just a first step in a desired transition over to a fair tax, which is what he prefers. He just doesn’t believe it’s politically viable to scrap the entire IRS and move over totally to a national sales tax right away. Unfortunately for Cain, this has given his plan a bad rap cause it opens up the criticism that he is adding a new revenue stream for the govn’t without shutting off the old one. But his real intentions are to eventually get rid of the income tax entirely and replace it with a higher percentage sales tax.
Is it a flat tax or are there exemptions and/or deductions. If there are then it is not a flat tax and will not provide much of the benefits of a flat tax. It only takes one exemption to justify the IRS and all its works and armies of spies and thugs.
A 9% true flat tax and 90% deregulation of business would unleash unbounded prosperity.
CATO is libertarian. He probably wants Ron Paul’s plan and grades accordingly.
Rush Limbaugh also missed the boat today, when he openly gushed about Rick Perry's flat tax plan that leaves the Fedzilla code intact.
You could have knocked me over with a feather while I was listening to that. I was so stunned, that I don't think I heard another word he said, for the entire show.
“A Flat tax is flat, a single rate from dollar one with no exemptions or deductions. 9% would raise as much net revenue to the government as all the monstrosity we have now with the liability that in succeeding years it wold give Congress progressively much more money to build socialism with. Any variation on the flat tax theme negates the benefits of a flat tax.
A 9% true flat tax and 90% deregulation of business would unleash unbounded prosperity.”
You may be correct about this-I haven’t done any calculations on the difference between a ‘true’ flat tax without deductions and the current one being proposed by Perry. I’ll take your word that a ‘true’ flat tax of around 9% with massive de-regulation would work best. The problem of course-is it politically possible to get to such a system right away? I’m not sure-because everybody would be complaining about having their deductions taken away. I just don’t see it happening, but it is probably the best way to go.
I wonder if you know the answer to this-it’s my understanding that under Cain’s 9/9/9 plan, the social security tax is eliminated, but under Perry’s flat(ter) tax plan, you still pay social security and medicare. Do I understand this correctly? If true, then as a self-employed person, I think I come out far better off personally under 9/9/9.
Newt has a somewhat similar, possibly better plan, and is compared to Perry’s here-
http://www.newt.org/news/lets-bump-plans-comparison-gingrich-and-perrys-flat-tax-plans
I didn’t hear Rush today, but I can assure you I would have had the same reaction!
It seems Levin went off on a bee in a bonnet as well, gushing about the mini-me flat tax part of the plan, without seemingly realizing or having a care in the world about the disaster of leaving the Fedzilla tax code in place.
Disappointing. And somewhat . . . shocking.
This is hugely important.
I won't repeat here, but for the record and in case you're interested, some of my comments relevant to your arguments on the "good" things about leaving the old code in place:
It seems Levin went off on a bee in a bonnet as well, gushing about the mini-me flat tax part of the plan, without seemingly realizing or having a care in the world about the disaster of leaving the Fedzilla tax code in place.
Something tells me that the penny's going to drop for Rush and Mark very soon. When it does, I expect to hear a "wait just a doggone minute..."
At least I hope that's the case. I respect both of them a great deal, and expect better from them.
I just don’t understand how they miss this — both of them!
Also they don’t seem to be focusing at all on tax reform except in economic terms.
I am convinced that tax reform is basically our last chance to preserve our freedom. It is the only way to immediately get more people as stakeholders in the tax system. Which is the only way to immediately stave off the growth of the parasite class to over 50%, at which time it would be GAME OVER.
This freedom rationale is and must be paramount.
In a way, I view tax reform as our first shot at entitlement reform. We have to reform those policies that make almost 50% of our population “entitled” to contribute no taxes to the federal system.
Cain’s plan does that. I don’t see the Perry plan doing that at all. It rearranges the deck chairs very nicely for present taxpayers. But it does nothing to broaden the tax base, i.e. ultimately make most nontaxpayers into taxpayers.
How Rush and Levin have missed this elephant in the room, I don’t know.
(Although Rush seems quite distracted and sometimes like he’s phoning in it over the last months.)
I wonder if Hannity is getting it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.