Posted on 11/23/2015 6:49:54 AM PST by SeekAndFind
As we've cheerfully noted on these pages, the good news on the presidential campaign trail is that almost all Republicans are now for serious pro-growth tax reform and simplification. Every candidate wants lower rates (some a one-rate flat tax), fewer loopholes and carve-outs, and a reduced role for an abusive IRS.
What a contrast with Bernie Sanders, who declared at last week's Democratic debate that he could live with a 90% tax rate on the rich. Why not take it all, Bernie?
All the GOP tax plans look good to us — though some are admittedly better than others. The danger now is that too many conservatives have formed a circular firing squad and are shooting down nearly all proposals on purity grounds or attacking trivial differences. This is the surest way to derail tax reform altogether.
If Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp and Bill Bradley had held to such a "my way or the highway" approach, the epic 1986 tax reform that collapsed tax rates to 15% and 28% never would have happened.
Which brings us to Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. The two of us helped craft their low-rate flat tax plans. The plans are similar: Paul's rates are 14.5% on business net sales and wages and salaries. Cruz has a 16% business net sales tax and a 10% wage and salary tax.
These would be the lowest tax rates since the income tax was devised 100 years ago. Both are estimated by the Tax Foundation to grow the economy by a gigantic $2 trillion in extra GDP per year after 10 years.
Both eliminate almost all deductions and special-interest carve-outs. (Against our wishes, they retain the tax write-off for charitable organizations and have family deductions that are too big. But no one's perfect.)
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
They completely kill the corporate tax, the estate tax and the FICA payroll tax.
However, one note to be concerned with, BOTH Cruz and Paul add a VAT TAX.
Cruz 16% business tax replaces corporate and payroll taxes that were a higher percentage rate. It is not Adding a VAT tax, it is replacing two higher taxes with a 16% flat tax on business. It also allows the business owner to take off the full cost of business improvements in one year.
Cruz’s plan does NOT include a VAT tax. You have posted that over and over so you will keep doing that even though you are wrong.
Where are you getting this VAT thing?
Vat tax is a big flop in EU.
Here the internet e-commerce would wilt if VAT is levied, for many people saving 8% average sales tax is the first reason they buy online.
That means less sales online, and I think since they are not used to going shopping at stores, it won’t translate to a lot more foot traffic at the malls. People will just lock up their wallets and spend less.
This article mentions “Tax Foundation”.
http://taxfoundation.org/blog/ted-cruz-s-business-flat-tax-primer
I always get a chuckle out of posters who feel the need to regularly use all capitals to shout so others hear the important stuff they have to say.
Rather than using scare caps, how about actually discussing what Laffer and Moore say about the VAT? Are their arguments valid? Is Art Laffer trustworthy on his knowledge of taxes and how taxation works? Is Stephen Moore?
1) Flat tax plans do NOTHING to reduce the size/scope of Fedzilla to its Constitutional constraints, still requires compliance (IRS) and allows ‘tinkering’ by D.C.
2) Flat tax plans still do no encompass ALL residents when those that do NOT pay income taxes utilize the most services.
3) All funding SHOULD follow Fed < State < Biz < User as to keep the people/biz as protected/secure as possible and where their eyes/votes can best correct any deviation.
4) Unless the tax is VOLUNTARY (IE: national sales tax [NST]), any tax plan is still antithesis to our founding and Constitution (a slave tax: anti-4th/5th/13th).
If we had ONLY had #1 (following the Constitution), there would be VERY little that would REQUIRE funding and our debate would be practically moot.
Unfortunately, we/’our side’ begins with the Leftists’ premise...and loses the battle before word one.
Sure. But it appears to be a straw man. I don’t see it in Cruz proposal.
That was my point - you wouldn't see a VAT tax on your purchase. I have paid VAT taxes many times in England as I went there numerous times over twenty years. Whatever I bought had the tax added to my bill - right there to see. I kept all the receipts. Since I was not a citizen of England, when I left the country I went to a VAT tax location at the airport and they refunded to me all the VAT tax I had paid on purchases.
Further into that article they identify the difference with the the European VAT.
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.