Posted on 11/03/2015 3:44:11 AM PST by SeekAndFind
The Republican presidential candidates talked a lot about their tax plans at last week’s debate, but most of the conversation was not very illuminating. Here are some details you may have missed about the candidates who did mention plans.
TED CRUZ He noted his just-announced tax plan involved “the lowest personal rate any candidate up here has.†That’s true: His plan calls for a 10 percent flat personal income tax rate. But that’s not where his plan gets most of its tax revenue.
The biggest tax in his plan is a 16 percent value added tax. Mr. Cruz describes this tax as a “business flat tax,†but it’s not a tax on business profits. Businesses would pay the tax on their total sales, minus the cost of the things they bought to produce the thing they sold. They would not be able to deduct wages, meaning they would pay the 16 percent tax on an amount far greater than their profits. The conservative Tax Foundation estimates this tax would generate $25 trillion in revenue over a decade, making it about six times bigger than the existing corporate income tax, which Mr. Cruz would repeal, and more than twice as big as his proposed personal income tax.
Added up across the whole economy, Mr. Cruz’s VAT would be equivalent to a very broadly based sales tax, applying even to services like health care that are ordinarily exempt from sales taxes. Like a sales tax, this tax would be built into prices and paid by consumers — and for many lower-income households, it would be a far greater burden than the income tax.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
This is why the press is so eager for candidates to cite specifics regarding their programs: so they can nitpick them to death.
I have not look at the Tax Foundation’s take on the Cruz plan but I also don’t trust the NY Times to give fair and balanced reporting on things conservative.
I also am not awake yet. That was supposed to be “looked”.
Ted is smart. Liberals always claim businesses can’t pass on taxes, so he seems to be taxing the evil buisinesses, parially blunting their criticism or forcing them to admit the truth; in reality he is ensuring that everyone has skin in the game. As I recall, it takes a ~22% flat tax to fund government at current levels, so reducing it to 10% and making illegals and slackers, and assorted corporate welfare types pay as well is a good start. Would be better to eliminate income tax altogether of course, because of the possibility of increases in both in the future, but this would give us the kind of economic stimulation we so desperately need.
I don’t think I want to take tax and /or economic advise from a company that employees Paul Krugman.
Some flack at the NYT beating his gums.
Again.
The so called “poor” will never ever have “skin in the game” there will always be some form of the current E.I.T.C., to make sure of that.
.....hilarious, the NY SLIMES trying to paint Ted Cruz as a guy pushing for massive tax increases!
Obamacare? Shhhh...
When will the Slimes question SWMNBN and Sanders spending increases and tax increases?
Waiting ........
If it was a good idea Ted Cruz would be telling you all about it instead of basically omitting it from the conversation. Earth to Ted, we need to promote business growth not kill it.
Trump’s plan is a lot more business friendly from what I can see.
The problem with politicians is that almost none of them have ever run a business. That includes Ted Cruz.
I owned and ran a small business for 17 years. Its a beach.
You get to deduct investment in equipment but not labor under this plan. This would seem to encourage more mechanization of labor intensive industries, such as more terminals and fewer wait staff in restaurants.
Looks like it would increase the demand for H1B visa holders too if payroll cannot be deducted. Have to go with the cheapest labor force.
10% flat, no deduction, income tax, at all levels without a ‘sliding scale’?
It would ruin the tax lawyers, and all of those tax service places, because this might just be a simple mathematics problem on a post card.
A 16% value added tax, i.e., sales tax on everything? Yes, ‘every business’ would pad the cost onto the sales price of everything, and then, ‘the consumer’ would be paying 16% on top of that new price.
I like Trump’s better.
I'm just wondering why The 'Slimes', wasn't so wee-wee'd up about the infamous 'We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it' lunacy from Tight-Skinned Nancy.
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.