Posted on 10/31/2015 6:58:17 AM PDT by Isara
Post-Obama tax reform for the 21st century.
The Republican Party woke up new and fresh, and ahead of the curve, yesterday morning, leaving the Democrats stale and old back in the 20th century (Keynesian 1930s), if not the 19th (1870s, when Marx was new and cutting edge).
History books will note the turning point of the 2016 election as the evening of October 28, 2015. At the Republican debate that night in Colorado, Texas Senator Ted Cruz emerged from the Republican Presidential field as the modern 2016 embodiment of Ronald Reagan.
The tax reform plan he unveiled at that debate is as new, exciting, and politically and economically revolutionary as the historic Kemp-Roth tax rate cuts were in 1980. And that was just one plank in an extremely promising economic growth plan that Cruz intimated that night.
The Cruz tax reform proposal would scrap the current income tax code entirely, and replace it with a Simple Flat Tax with the same 10% rate for all forms of individual income. That same 10% rate would apply to wages, profits, capital gains, dividends, rent, and interest income. No one would be able to claim that billionaires are paying lower tax rates than their secretaries, or that the system is rigged to favor the rich over the middle class.
...
The payroll tax, the biggest tax for the poor and the middle class, would be abolished altogether, with Social Security and Medicare financed in full with no deficits. This new system is consequently rigged to favor the poor and the middle class. Taxpayers could file their income taxes under this simple tax system on a postcard. That means that we can abolish the Internal Revenue Service as we know it, Cruz thundered at the debate.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Bump to send to others.
I agree with simplifying the tax code and lowering rates.
I am not certain what to do with the statement on his website that taxes on profits earned abroad will be eliminated. This seems to me incentive to do business elsewhere, not an incentive to bring business home. Expect this to become an issue for debate/discussion. Ted’s team may have inadvertently left a door open they didn’t intend to, but then again maybe it’d completely intentional and the explanation is forthcoming.
Also modernizing EITC isn’t eliminating. EITC is backdoor welfare.
This is now the second proposal that touts a return so simple it can be filed on a postcard.
Finally, management is the issue with IRS targeting, not the tax code. The Lerner lesson highlights necessary reforms, but in the end the laws were not the problem, the people interpreting and enforcing them were the issue.
Good, better than most, but I still see room for improvement from all candidates on this issue.
Haha, I love it!
This should be uncontroversial. Money earned overseas gets taxed overseas.Apple is a prime example of a company that earns billion$ overseas - and declines to bring that money to the US ( in the form of, say, payments of dividends to shareholders, or investment in US plant and equipment) for the simple reason that it would get hammered with taxes again here. At the very least, if paid out in dividends, corporate income earned overseas should be taxed only to the shareholder. That would put big bucks into the US economy from abroad.
Of course, the same logic would make sense for money earned within the US. Cruz proposes to allow US corporations to “expense†capital investments - that is, to write them off in the year they are paid for, making them simply deductible instantly rather than over a period of time. Radically simpler, radically pro-growth. Especially good for high-tech.
I didn’t say I didn’t understand, I am not certain that it’s as simple as that blurb makes it sound.
Go Cruz! I would love a flat tax.
People would be upset about losing the mortgage interest deduction, but we should not be rewarding and encouraging debt. Been there and done that and crashed the housing market.
Someone has to go after the universities for charging so much tuition and fees. What does Marxist social studies have to do with getting a job in America? There should be no student loans for nonsense courses that do not lead to real job creation and filling. Students who want to learn to be racists and sexists and gaze at their belly buttons, can do it on their own dime and not on government loan debt.
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.