[In short, it is somewhere between folly and economic suicide to implement a national salestax, even at a modest rate, without simultaneously repealing the 16th Amendment to the Constitution (which permits a national income tax.) ]
I agree completely!
I don’t like articles that compare our tax rates and Europe’s tax rates. European tax rates cover their healthcare, and lots of other social amenities...not saying it’s right to have the gov’t give those perks...just saying comparing our tax rates and European tax rates is like comparing apples and oranges.
I’d probably end up paying more taxes under his plan, but would probably end up with more money because my employer and our clients would pay fewer taxes.
Never looked at the details but it seems logical.
You must give Mr. Cain credit.
At least he is not responsible for the
Gardasil-PerryCARE fiasco or the RomneyCARE fiasco,
or the open border RINOs.
He should change it to a 999—9+9 plan. The last 2 nines when added together equals 18, symbolizing a constitutional amendment limiting federal spending to 18% of GDP.
The only real way to get tax reform is to eliminate all “Hidden” taxes and outlaw withholding from paychecks. If the citizen had to save up money to pay taxes quarterly, no politician would ever dare raise taxes ever again.
I think the 999 Plan is a good one, provided the current IRS Code goes out the window when it's implemented. Indeed, US taxpayers should insist on this as a precondition to its acceptance. Otherwise, you'll have both.
In addition the argument that you "must repeal the 16th Amendment 1st" is nonsense.
What is to prevent Congress from raising tax rates 20-30-50% right now?
The same political pressures that keep that from happening right now, apply even more so to the 9-9-9 plan
Since everyone pays the 9-9-9 tax it is impossible to demagogue raising it as "making the rich pay their fair share". Everyone know raising it means they will pay more
So rather then cling to their preconceived dogmas out of an emotional attachment to a certain candidate, the critics of 9-9-9 might want to try actually ADDRESSING THE FACTS for a change instead of engaging in this baseless demagoguery and fear mongering.
So far as I’m concerned, the VAT tax is the crack cocaine of the statist bureaucracy, insidious in that it is so hidden, and economically deadly in that it can be raised to such high rates. One of my major fears with the Obama cabal is that they would be able to introduce a VAT, which I’m sure they’d do if they were able to.
Nonetheless, I might be willing to support a 9-9-9 since it is a nice balance of taxation of income and consumption, and since it affects everyone equally (how does one keep income taxes at reasonable rates if 47% of the population pays no income tax?).
However, in order to get my support for 9-9-9, Cain (or anyone else) would have to come up with an ironclad process that would make increases in the VAT portion extremely difficult, if not impossible. I don’t know if you can bind a future Congress by requiring a 75% super majority to increase the VAT part, but if something like that could be done, I’d probably go along with it.
Don’t ever confuse how taxes are collected with how much taxes are collected. If we don’t control overspending, in the long run it won’t matter. We’re on an unsustainable trajectory right now.
Big Bro can only tax so much before the big money scrambles for cover. The gov gains nothing from that gold buried in the backyard and the gov gains nothing from unreported sales and transactions of a growing off-paper economy.
So how is the present system working? Not so good, is it...
We have to be open to new ideas....
We're close to that already, at about 18%. [link] or google "GDP" and follow the graph shown.
The only way I will support ANY national consumption tax like the FairTax, is if the Sixteenth Amendment is repealed FIRST. Not “oh, we’ll repeal it later.” Not “we promise to keep the income tax down to 9%.” The ability for the Federal government to levy an income tax AT ALL *MUST* be removed from them FIRST before a consumption tax can be implemented. Otherwise we will end up, in very short order, with crushing income taxes AND a European-style double-digit VAT (because they will quickly turn a simple sales tax into a VAT).
}:-)4
“. The plan would eliminate almost all deductions. “
This line alone tells you everything you need to understand about this writer.
He believes that your money belongs to the Washington instead of the people as Herman Cain believes. To this the current communist Progressive tax is better since it allows Washington to ONLY give you back 25 cents for SOME of your tax dollars. After all that money belongs to Washington and not to the person who earned their money.
The 9,9,9 plan is very easy and would eliminate many lobbyist. This is why the writer is against this plan.
So with Cain's plan or any of the similar flat taxes proposed by others, my taxes remain constant, and there will be no darker days on the horizon to look forward too.
Any business that has more than about 5% of the gross revenue going to overhead, things that just mind the farm, is headed for broke in my view. You can’t run a business with 20% of the revenue going to stuff that does not produce things. In the case of a government you could argue that the military, highways and such produce things but welfare DOES NOT produce anything but more welfare and more babies and more dependents that don’t produce.
Hauser’s Law, named for its creator, economist Kurt Hauser of the Hoover Institution. Hauser’s law posits that the federal government cannot take more than about 19.5% of national income through taxation and that soaking the rich (or those whom President Obama defines as rich) will not generate the tax revenue