« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Livestream of the Perry Flat Tax program presentation.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  October 25th, 2011 at 11:18 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Plan here.

[UPDATE]: Speech done; copy can be found here.  Lots of good stuff in it: to quote @DrewMTips…

Shorter Rick Perry: “What’s my plan? Just about every popular conservative idea that’s been floating around for 30 years”.

Pretty much, pretty much.  I like ending baseline spending, myself.  A lot.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Tags:

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • jaykali

    I understand you still get some deductions. I would think higher incomes would like that but a lot of middle class people pay an overall rate of much lower, maybe around 10%-ish.

  • acat

    are 10% and 15%.

    They cover people earning up to $69k, married filing jointly.

    The bill for someone whose net (after deductions) is 69k would be $10,350.

    The Perry plan increases the individual deduction so if that’s you last year, assuming no other changes, under Perry you’re looking at something like $11,000, depending on the number of kids able to be claimed.

    For a couple with no kids, that’s an increase of $600 or so. For a couple with two kids, it’s actually a decrease.

    Mew

  • malachi45

    Unlike 9-9-9, this plan not only looks good, it looks politically possible. Phasing it in as an option is not only the best way to go; it’s the only way to pull it off. It disarms people by reassuring them that they don’t have to accept a radical change they may be nervous about. It also disarms the left who will try and demagogue it as hurting the poor.

  • Spartan4Life

    It is a tax cut, plain and simple. One I happen to agree with, btw. Tax cuts grow the economy.

    People are going to figure out which plan they pay less taxes under and that is what they are going to choose. The net result is they are going to pay less taxes which is a good thing.

    The libs are attacking this plan by saying it is going to “blow a hole in the deficit in the short term.” Who cares? We are already running up huge debt and deficits. If that is the case anyway, wouldn’t it be better to let the people keep more of their money? Wouldn’t you rather be running a deficit where the people get the money rather than send it to the black hole that is Washington, DC?

  • redmymind

    That’s all I can say. Perry’s our man!

  • jonerik

    This is an amazingly level-headed plan. Imagine, no more Sarbannes-Oxley, no more Dodd-Frank, being able to pass your business along to future generations (instead of shutting the doors and killing jobs) without the crushing estate taxes. The corporate tax solutions are spot-on to spur growth…jobs, jobs and more jobs.

    This plan is masterful.

  • adamd

    This is a great plan that will play well.

    I am still a believer that once the ad war begins Perry will be the Republican nominee.

    This is a much better plan than anything Romney has proposed.

  • retire05

    a married couple whose AGI is $69K now has a tax burden of $9500.

    10% on the first $17,000 and 15% on the rest. The standard deduction for a married couple is now $10,500. for 2011. The personal deduction is less than $4000/per person.

    If your deductions (mortgage interest, charitible deductions, property taxes) do not exceed $10,500.00 you currently have to take the standard deduction.

  • beach91

    have so much ‘credibility’ when it comes to blowing up the deficit! If that is their only excuse they only need a mirror!

  • retire05

    Currently, if you are drawing Social Security, but your spouse is still working, your SS payments are added to your spouse’s income for a total income. Your SS then becomes taxable. Perry’s plan would eliminate taxes on SS.

    Also, seniors often supplement their SS checks with dividends from their IRAs. Those dividends are now taxed as earned income. The Perry plan would also emilinate that.

  • onemovoter

    And that is pushing to get rid of the Base line budgeting. I was wondering how he was going to get to a balanced budget in 8 years or less, and found out that is how.

    Getting rid of that one thing will make the balanced budget amendment completely possible. I am so freaking happy that Perry has included both ideas into his plans. This makes me sure that he is VERY serious in reforming government.

  • runner12

    Perry bandwagon. This plan has everything I wanted to see. No more baseline budgeting, entitlement reform, moratoriums on regulations to judge their impact, repeal of ObamaCare, and the list goes on and on.

    This plan is a clear winner for me.

  • jaykali

    Which makes sense. Bc my feeling is that if you make under 100k you aren’t paying overall 20%. I like the idea of a GOOD alternative tax rate as opposed to the AMT.

    I just know we haven’t ever paid over like maybe 11% overall (according to Turbotax) with varying level of income. I would think you’d need to be in the 100s to pay over 20 overall.

  • jaykali

    Throwing out the whole thing is a pipe-dream. That doesn’t mean you can’t have bigtime reform and simplify the thing. I like lowering rates and removing deductions which we’ve seen in few iterations now. The president is too gutless to offer anything even tho he could have a big win with the public if he accomplished tax reform.

  • jaykali

    Let me ask the liberal-esque question as to how tax-cuts get paid for since Democrats agree that it’s the govt’s money first. I’m guessing that this plan is either revenue neutral or estimates that increased revenues will pay for it.

  • jaykali

    Early reviews sound good. I look forward to reading/seeing some breakdowns.

  • tyman

    I remember in ’93 when they passed the Clinton tax increase that the tax on SS benefits went up by 90%.

    No wonder the issue of prescription drugs came up! I wish Bush had been smart enough to do this instead of giving the prescription drugs benefit.

    Perry gets it!

  • acat

    the AGI of 69k today becomes the AGI of 52k with the new deduction rate.

    Assuming no other deductions, the tax load goes from your $9500 to $10400.

    An increase of $900.

    If they can claim a kid, they’re actually doing *better* under the new plan. ($12500 &gt $900)

    I’ll admit, it’s not ideal, and it is going to hit the empty-nesters pretty hard, but – again – it’s optional. So, if the empty-nesters are better off under the old plan, they can stay with it until they reach retirement.

    Mew

  • flteng8251

    I’m dissapointed that he did not include the elimination of military pensions being taxed as income on the list. Taxes on all pensions should be eliminated regardless of source or political popularity.

  • Spartan4Life

    Perry wants to cap Federal spending at 18% of GDP. Based on the the current economy that is a 25% cut(about $900B/year).

  • romeg

    1) There is a clear need for reform of the tax code. The proposals put forth by Cain and Perry reveal the hunger for that reform and an opportunity for conservatives to control the debate.

    2) Base line budgeting should NEVER have been allowed in the first place. Zero Sum is the way all government budgeting should be done so that every dollar allocated is challenged and justified beforehand.

    As for tax reform, no matter what form any proposal takes the Usual Suspects are going to howl beginning with the usual Red Herring arguments: Regressiveness and Fairness.

    Ignoring, for the moment, the dangers of giving Congress yet another revenue stream on which to levy a tax, Cain’s proposal was ripped for the Sales Tax component on the Regressiveness argument wherein those attacking him while they completely ignored the elimination of the 14% payroll tax, which clearly offset any regressive effects of a 9% sales tax.

    Perry’s critics rail about how everyone will choose the option that results in the lowest possible tax obligation. Well DUH. That’s what they do now only we, as a nation, misallocate BILLIONS of $$$ hiring consultants and tax specialists to accomplish that end. Even simple 1040 taxpayers hire tax preparation firms to do their taxes, yet no cries of injustice falls from the lips of these protectors of the downtrodden.

    Regardless of who wins the nomination (may the MOST CONSERVATIVE MAN BE OUR NOMINEE) this issue MUST BE front and center.It will require a phased in approach: a short-term fix in the form of legislation and a permanent fix in the form of 1 or more Constitutional Amendments. The power to tinker with the economy is such that it can no longer be left in the hands of a simple majority of politicians elected in a fit of rage by a disenchanted few swing voters.