Posted on 10/19/2011 8:15:23 AM PDT by Brookhaven
Herman Cain eliminates the current 35% corporate income tax plus the current 15.3% payroll tax, and replaces them with a 9% corporate income tax.
I normally don’t go after candidates personally, because I think the best route is to present your ideas in a positive fashion, but Michele Bachmann went so far over the line in the Las Vegas debate that I can’t just let it pass without comment. Look at the first line of this story. You need to understand those numbers to comprehend just how disingenuous Bachmann’s comments were.
Bachmann attempted to paint the 9% corporate income tax in Cain’s 999 plan as a VAT (value added tax), because it doesn’t exempt labor and thus is in effect a 9% tax on labor. I don’t agree with her (because Cain’s plan treats capital and labor the same to level business expenses), but let’s grant her the point for the sake of this debate and say Cain’s plan includes a 9% tax on labor. Now let’s look at the current tax system:
* 35% corporate income tax
* 15.3% payroll tax (a direct tax on labor)
Michele Bachmann stood on stage making accusations about the damage a 9% tax on labor would cause; even claiming it was a VAT. Yet, she never mentioned that the current tax code contains a 15.3% direct tax on labor—a higher tax on labor that Cain’s.
I don’t mind people going after the 999 plan. The sales tax criticism in Las Vegas, for example, was perfectly legitimate in my opinion. We need to have honest, vigorous debates over tax policies, and any change as big as Cain is suggestion should be thoroughly vetted before it is implemented.
But, what Michele Bachmann did was not honest. She deliberately withheld information in an attempt to mischaracterize Cain’s plan as a VAT, and confuse people over the effects of the 999 plan vs. the current tax system. A lie by omission is still a lie. Michele Bachmann crossed the line in Las Vegas.
PS
Yes, I know the payroll tax is deductible for businesses, but that just lowers the amount they have to pay by their current income tax rate (35%), it does not eliminate their tax expense. When a company writes off that 15.3%, it still ends up being a direct cost to the company of 9.95% of their payroll amount—still more than Cain’s 9%.
Right, and while it’s not a true VAT, the other candidates were teeing off on it by scaring people they will be seeing a 9% sales tax on everything.
That’s a valid point, except he eliminates and lowers other taxes, and you don’t pay the 9% on everything.
No, she was talking about the 9% corporate tax.
There was a paper issued by the CATO institute a couple of days ago that made the same argument. That's where Bachmann got the talking point from. It also made the same omission Bachmann did. It never mentioned the current 15.3% payroll tax.
Thanks for the correction.
You're absolutely right. Soundbites and clever quips are not enough. We need specific plans on the economy, immigration, healthcare and social security/medicare reform.
She is either dumber than a box of rocks Or extremely disingenuous. She like all the other Tax Attorneys She claims to have a Masters in Taxation.
will be out of business w/ 999.
Michelle in her career in Minnesota (and I know her well)points to problems. She started with school board then found a way to be a media attention getter and parlayed it into a state legislative seat and then to the Congress. Yes she is conservative but she is no leader as Pawlenty said rightly so. She is a political opportunist that points at the crap but rarely has a plan to get dirty while cleaning it up. True she is a “Conservative Crap Pointer Outter” though. She needs to get back to work in the house just to save her seat. However she may have enough money to stave off a challenge but folks will be notified about her truancy in the House.
Cain has at least breached the line by offering a plan with specifics for systemic change to taxation, and Bachman surely knows bottom lines herself. Palin and others want policy revelations now, but as soon as anything meaningful is laid out, like specifics, you open yourself up to mortal combat on each jot and tittle and it is no longer about you or Obama, but line 1007 on page 92. This is before you have even fully introduced yourself to the country. Primaries are dog fights and Palin and other critics have no experience in a presidential primary and can hardly expect an entirely general election campaign platform to be the nucleus of a primary campaign with nine different candidates. It seems to me that not until the general election can we expect to see detailed a policy plan for every issue, particularly on taxation. Look for Republicans to join together, fix imperfections, and try to move this boulder uphill in congress. True enough, that it will likely be years before we get anywhere if the past is an indication.
And Perry is toast. How in the heck did he ever get elected once (for ANYTHING!) is beyond me.
So this whole campaign has now turned into a debate on Federal Tax Policy. So we are fighting about how the Federal Government can extract the money it requires to harass us with and pay themselves a better living than the people who produce that living.
And all they had to do was get some guy to say nine three times.
...without having their own plan...
_____________________________________________________________
All of them except Perry have revealed a tax plan. Not sure what you mean.
I think Cain’s and Bachmann’s plans should be combined I agree, you can throw in Ron Paul’s $1 trillion in cuts too.
Add to that Perry’s Energy plan. Drill Baby Drill
We need:
Cain’s tax plan will see 10% growth in 3 years
Perry’s energy plan on top of that we could see nation economy grow by 20% in 3 years.
Unemployement would be at the minimum 2% that just find a reason not to work.
All these arguments are crap.
The best tax plan is Paul’s - eliminate the IRS make the income tax 0
The company doesn't pay 15.3%, the employee has to pay half of that. Also the FICA part is capped at something like 100K in income after that there is no FICA just Medicare. I don't think the nerd's calculations are accurate.
Yeah, that the thing. I like parts of all the candidate plans but Romney’s.
In a practical sense, Cain is the only one that has a plan, because everyone else takes the current tax system as as starting point and just tweaks it around the edges. A lower tax here, a tax deduction there, etc...
Cain’s is the only plan that changes the direction we’re going (although to be fair, Newt does propose a flat tax as an alternative system to live by the current system).
Where would Paul get the revenue to operate the government?
And please, don't say import taxes. Let's have a serious discussion.
The more I hear her, the more I dislike her.
But, what Michele Bachmann did was not honest. She deliberately withheld information in an attempt to mischaracterize Cain’s plan as a VAT, and confuse people over the effects of the 999 plan vs. the current tax system. A lie by omission is still a lie. Michele Bachmann crossed the line in Las Vegas.
Good point. I'd also like to see, in the legislation installing 9-9-9, a requirement that any attempt to raise any of the three taxes has to pass BOTH houses of Congress by a 2/3rds vote.
Great post. You hit the nail on the head.
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.