Posted on 10/24/2011 1:45:55 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Carl Cameron
October 24, 2011
Texas Governor Rick Perry is formally unveiling his flat tax proposal Tuesday in South Carolina. His campaign hopes the plan will gain traction with people who are fed up with the current tax system.
Sources tell Fox News it will be an optional 20% flat income tax with a $12,500.00 deduction per individual, per household. Taxpayers may otherwise choose to keep paying under existing IRS code.
(Excerpt) Read more at politics.blogs.foxnews.com ...
Why would the 16th Amendment need to be repealed in order for the government to pass a law that it no longer would assess an income tax?
I think your apparent definition of “social engineering” misses the mark.
Oh, and as an aside, on those opportunity zones: when the plan was posted on Cain’s website it listed the things a locale would have to do to be eligible for OZ status. Those things included abolishing minimum wage laws and implementing right-to-work policies. No unions!
In my view, that result would be a pretty good trade-off. It also pretty much guarantees that the unions will fight and fight and fight against ever letting their town be designated an OZ.
Agree with everything you said.
Making it optional between 20% Flat Tax vs. Current IRS Code, will only exacerbate inequities in tax collection.
Those with the ability to lobby political influence and pay armies of tax attorneys to understand the byzantine complexities of the tax code, will continue to flood the code with even more arcane exemptions and deductions for themselves, with the excuse of, “well if you don’t like it, pay the 20% flat rate, LOL!”
Duly noted.
I’ve decided to reserve judgement until Perry has put forth his speech and the specifics of his plan.
This short news blurb doesn’t tell me much, nor do I know if it’s claims are accurate.
We’ll know more by this time tomorrow.
I don’t find anything about the plan that sounds good.
A flat tax is supposed to, at the minimum, simplify the tax code and this leaves the present tax code in case — which is absolutely horrible and even more horrible since we have the chance at this time in history to stick a knife in it — and ADDS ON TOP OF THE CODE a new, separate set of tax provisions called the “optional flat tax.”
This is worse and more convoluted than what we have now!
This will do nothing to get rid of the billions wasted every year in compliance costs. In fact, it will INCREASE compliance costs, because there will be a new system to comply with, audit and enforce, and, not only that, some people will choose to be in it and others won’t.
This does not address crony capitalism.
It does not address the huge amount of federal taxes presently embedded (”hidden”) in the price of consumer goods.
It does not make everybody pay something into the system.
Not to mention that it would turn us into a nation of taxpayers (contributors) rather than what we have now, a nation divided between takers with their hand out, demanding ever-more free stuff, and producers.
And tourists would contribute, too!
Reading your post actually made me feel a little ill.
I hope your point is increasingly obvious to all.
Well, I think this “optional” new, additional tax code provision is going to produce a very “weak stream.”
Also the Fedzilla taxes, estimated at 20+%, presently embedded in the cost of consumer goods goes away under the Cain plan. They are replaced with a one-time, point-of-sale NRST of 9%.
That provides an economic advantage. But it also provides a freedom advantage. Under the NRST, everyone would contribute something.
Was Steve Forbes’ original flat tax proposal optional?
That just seems to weird and weaselly at this time in history.
We have the opportunity — moreso, the critical need — to do something bold. And this just seems so UN-bold.
It does seem as though the argument that the flat tax rate can be raised and raised and raised is much more appropriate here than in regard to Cain’s 999 plan, which built in vastly superior political accountability than what we have now.
Because a future congress could repeal that legislation and re-institute an income tax.
Cain puts finishing touches on Empowerment Zones, angering unions.
I can’t remember if the flat tax plan Steve Forbes ran for President on was optional or not.
Just read here on this thread that Gingrich put out an optional flat tax proposal weeks ago.
Sorry, but at this point in time, where we need “BOLD,” “optional” sounds weaselly. It comes off as if, as Margaret Thatcher said, Perry has “gone all wobbley on us.”
It’s almost like Steve Forbes is doing a good cop, bad cop thing. Because, in the end, this proposal ends up highlighting the strong points of 999, not detracting from it.
How do you feel about the fact that Perry’s plan would increase IRS bureaucracy (two plans to administer) and increase rather than eliminate the billions now spent on tax compliance?
Are you concerned that the flat tax proposed rate of 20% could go up — and likely would since it would likely affect smaller number of people than those filing under the present code?
Wrong.
The deduction applies to everyone whose income is at or below the poverty line.
The rate of tax may be different in an OZ. But the income subject to tax is the same everywhere.
Where I was going in a previous post, but you actually took it to the house!
And what about that 20% rate going up and up, eh? With no even marginally increased political accountability built into the system than at present, wow, the sky is the limit. Especially since taxpayers will have Libs' favorite thing: "choice."
The flip side of what you said is that as the flat tax rate gets upped and upped, Dems will simply say, "Well, pay under the old system if you don't like it."
Frankly, this is just weird.
More info...
This Fox Report does not jive with what Forbes said in this Fox Interview:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmsnGDo3qbM&feature=youtu.be
He was asked if the rate would be similar to his previous plan of 17% and he says no that it is a very low number and has higher deductions.
On first read it is a very good plan. Will study it further. Thanks goodness no idiotic national sales tax.
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.