Click the Kitteh
Happy Kitten Loves Monthly Donors
Abolish FReepathons
Go Monthly
Posted on 10/17/2011 2:29:20 PM PDT by Windy City Conservative
Herman Cain deserves credit for proposing a tax-reform plan that is specific, promotes economic growth, and has captured the imagination of conservatives nationwide. His 9-9-9 plan builds on the insight that one of the chief defects of the current tax code is its bias toward consumption over savings. But his plan’s peculiarities of design, substantive weaknesses, and political naïveté render it unworthy of conservative support.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Yeah, I noticed that the NRO staff didn’t even want to sign their names to this piece of doo-doo.
Cheers
Once again, NRO showing its Republican establishment allegiance. Raise Cain 2012!
Hit pieces like this prove it.
....and just where is Romney’s plan?
My own preference would be 17-0-0-0. 17% national retail sales tax (at final purchase, not a VAT that's invisible), and 0% on income, capital gains, and corporations. Corporations don't really pay taxes, they only collect them. Ultimately all taxes fall on people.
Having said that, I'd settle for Cain's proposal rather than demand "perfection."
So far, the list of those positively disposed toward Cain’s plan are far more impressive than unnamed NR writers: Laffer, Ryan, Moore, Club for Growth, etc.
FUNRO
COWARDS!
WHEN did Cain suggest his ultimate goal was for a "30% National Sales Tax?"
IF, his 9% flat income tax would eliminate the present income tax completely and replace it, I could support that concept and could live with a 9% sales tax, providing he could get Congress to approve it with his proviso that it would take a 2/3 majority, thereafter, to raise the rates.
Where are the tax reform proposals from the other candidates?
All these Cain haters are afraid of any "Real" Conservative getting the nod and will do/say anything to see they do not succeed.
A pox on all of them!!!
You don’t go to the NRO site very often. They always sign staff editorials that way. Please get your facts straight. What part of their editorial do you disagree with? Just insulting them does not make their article untrue.
Oh, for the days of Bill Buckley and Bill Rusher, when NR was bold, brash and relevant.
The part of this editorial I disagree with is the claim that Cain's plan includes a V.A.T. levied on corporations. That's shameless skullduggery.
His plan calls for a flat 9% corporate income tax rate. They are trying to create mischief, I suspect.
I've never been a NRO-basher. I may start now, though.
These articles that dismiss an idea in the title do not help.
The comments section at the article was a more interesting read.
“A 9 percent value-added tax would be levied on corporations.”
Where do they get this from? As I understand it, Cain’s plan goes like this:
9% tax on wages
9% tax on corporate profits (gross revenue minus expenses)
9% tax on retail sales of new goods and services.
The above 3 taxes replace ALL OTHER taxes. Where is the VAT in this scheme?
(The other thread got locked, despite having 3x more posts, but anyway I repost my comment here).
The NR is completely bonkers with this one, and I hate it when people who know better, or should know better, get things so completely wrong. The NR should have fact checkers and editors checking this stuff out.
Ping you guys to this thread since the other one got locked.
The VAT is one of the worst most regressive taxes and incredibly cumbersome. For those who don’t know how it works:
1) The farmer sells his wheat for $1 and charges VAT of, say, 15%. He collects $1.15 and send 15 cents to the IRS. 2) The flour maker buys the wheat for $1.15 and makes flour. He charges the bread maker $2 for the flour plus 15% VAT or 30 cents, for a total of $2.30. He sends the IRS 15 cents because he gets a “credit” for the 15 cents he paid to the Farmer. 3) The bread maker sells the bread for $4 plus 15% VAT or 60 cents for total of $4.60. He pays the IRS 45 cents because he collects 15 cents credit. 4) The retailer sells the bread for $8, and charges 15% VAT to the consumer. The consumer pays $9.20 which includes $1.20 in VAT taxes plus state retail tax if any. The retailer sends 60 cents to the IRS and get a credit for the 60 cents paid to the bread maker.
As you can see, it is crazy cumbersome because each chain in the production of goods has to report their use of materials and the taxes paid. It is CENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT to the 10th POWER - they want to know everything and everything you do. It is horrible. I would never support a VAT.
I don’t mind 999 because it is not a VAT. It is 9% tax on corporate profits (gross revenues minus expenses) and a 9% tax on retail sales and a 9% tax on wages. Simple. Fair.
There is no VAT in Cain’s proposals.
The VAT is in the head of some pointy-headed academics who cater to Ivy League RINO’s named WIllard.
Cain does say that the 999 plan is a “step” to the Fair Tax, which is a national sales tax. The FairTax is supposed to replace all other taxes including the 999 plan. I like simple plans but I am unsure if FairTax is workable. Go to FairTax.org to read more about that plan.
999 works well because it widens the tax base to include everyone, even tourists and visitors here on business. It eliminates all “matching payment” by employers, allowing for greater wage possibilities by as much as 10%. It eliminates taxes on capital gains so Seniors do not have to pay taxes on their savings or IRA withdrawals or other retirement moneys.
I don’t think you will ever get retirees to go for FairTax. You can’t ask them to pay 23% on their spending when they have been taxed all their lives. But if you trade their current Capital Gains and savings taxes for 9% flat sales tax, I think they will go for it. That is why I like 999 a lot. It may even be better than Fair Tax. You decide for yourself.
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.