« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Rick Perry comes up with a winner in just unveiled tax plan

Folks, I really hope he starts gaining his feet again.  The longer he stays in the race, the better he is going to get.  The plans that Perry is putting out are solid and simple to understand.  These plans will not be difficult to articulate and sell to the American public.  Also, they are simple enough that he will be able to debate effectively without having to cram in debate preparation.

The latest:

KEY POINTS

      1. The plan starts with giving Americans a choice between a new, flat tax rate of 20% or their current income tax rate. The new flat tax preserves mortgage interest, charitable and state and local tax exemptions for families earning less than $500,000 annually, and it increases the standard deduction to $12,500 for individuals and dependents.  This simple 20% flat tax will allow Americans to file their taxes on a postcard, saving up to $483 billion in compliance costs. By eliminating the dozens of carve-outs that make the current code so incomprehensible, we will renew incentives for entrepreneurial risk-taking and investment that creates jobs, inspires Americans to work hard and forms the foundation of a strong economy. My plan also abolishes the death tax once and for all, providing needed certainty to American family farms and small businesses.  .
      2. My plan restores American competitiveness in the global marketplace and provides strong incentives for U.S.-based employers to build new factories and create thousands of jobs here at home. First, we will lower the corporate tax rate to 20%—dropping it from the second highest in the developed world to a rate on par with our global competitors. Second, we will encourage the swift repatriation of some of the $1.4 trillion estimated to be parked overseas by temporarily lowering the rate to 5.25%. And third, we will transition to a “territorial tax system”—as seen in Hong Kong and France, for example—that only taxes in-country income.  The mind-boggling complexity of the current tax code helps large corporations with lawyers and accountants devise the best tax-avoidance strategies money can buy. That is why Cut, Balance and Grow also phases out corporate loopholes and special-interest tax breaks to provide a level playing field for employers of all sizes.
      3. To help older Americans, we will eliminate the tax on Social Security benefits, boosting the incomes of 17 million current beneficiaries who see their benefits taxed if they continue to work and earn income in addition to Social Security earnings. We will eliminate the tax on qualified dividends and long-term capital gains to free up the billions of dollars Americans are sitting on to avoid taxes on the gain….Cut, Balance and Grow also gives younger workers the option to own their Social Security contributions through personal retirement accounts that Washington politicians can never raid. Because young workers will own their contributions, they will be free to seek a market rate of return if they choose, and to leave their retirement savings to their dependents when they die.
      4. ObamaCare, Dodd-Frank and Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley must be quickly repealed and, if necessary, replaced by market-oriented, common-sense measures.  America must also once and for all face up to entitlement reform. To preserve benefits for current and near-term Social Security beneficiaries, my plan permanently stops politicians from raiding the program’s trust fund. Congressional IOUs are no substitute for workers’ Social Security payments. We should use the federal Highway Trust Fund as a model for protecting the integrity of a pay-as-you-go system.
      5. Cut, Balance and Grow strikes a major blow against the Washington-knows-best mindset. It takes money from spendthrift bureaucrats and returns it to families. It puts fewer job-killing regulations on employers and more restrictions on politicians. It gives more freedom to Americans to control their own destiny. And just as importantly, the Cut, Balance and Grow plan paves the way for the job creation, balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility we need to get America working again.

Simple and fantastic.  The article is worth the read.  It doesn’t pander, broadens the tax base, and gets Washington out of the way.  Of course the Democrats will say that this is going to increase the burden on the poor, blah, blah, blah.  There was a devastating and subtle point that Perry makes it very hard for the Democrats to use this age old playing card in case you missed it:  The plan starts with giving Americans a choice between a new, flat tax rate of 20% or their current income tax rate.  The fact is that current Democratic policies have made it impossible for the poor to be employed.  The plan encourages and gives incentive to people to work hard and creates a wonderful environment for employers to hire.

In closing, I have made up my mind.  I’m going to stick with Rick Perry.  It simply is because of the fact that he is and has been the most consistent in his core convictions though he has had his stumbles.  The main thing is that there is never a doubt or question in my mind where he stands.  I can’t say the same for Herman Cain.  I just hope, and will pray for him, that he starts gaining his feet on the debate stage.

COMMENTS

  • Scope

    with the addition of new nationally experienced campaign people, the Tax Plan being released today, plus his excellent Energy Plan, the Perry campaign has just kicked into high gear. He will prevail.

    • RealQuiet

      I like Herman Cain as well. The problem with him is that I don’t know if his responses to issues like abortion are catered to get the most votes possible or he is trying to sound too smart on the issue. I would be happy with him as president as well. The thing is, the plans that Perry is putting out are very, very good and I don’t see a problem with them. Cain’s 9-9-9 has some holes in it and is hard to understand in some places. I’m not seeing any of those problems with Perry. Bottom line, I’ll happily cast my vote for either in the general election. But in the primary, I’m fully behind Perry.

      • Scope

        that Cain’s confusing comments on abortion were to try to gain more votes. In saying that it is the families decision, it appeases the libertarian leaning voters, and maybe some more moderate Democrats. His first comments were in a John Stossel interview, and everyone knows Stossel is a libertarian. The Piers Morgan comments were probably to appease the moderate Democrats.

        In short, this is what happens when you try to be everything to everyone. Isn’t there some saying about those trying to be everything to everyone, and they wind up being nothing to everyone, or some such thing?

        • cwilson

          but it sure seemed to me, that in the initial “gaffe” he and the interviewer were talking past each other. The interviewer was, in that particular discussion, talking solely about abortion (“you would force a raped woman to raise her rapist’s child?” or some such) as a binary choice: raise the rapist’s child, or abort. But it appeared that Cain was talking about adoption: e.g. a “personal choice” between “raising the rapist’s child” and “giving him/her up for adoption”.

          His later “clarifications” simply muddied the waters, but the original interview seemed pretty clear to me, unless one was deliberately trying to misinterpret Cain for maximum damage. Which, of course, the MSM was — so that became the Standard Storyline(tm).

  • bzip

    This is the meat and potatoes. I would give anything for voters to support a candidate that has: a) a good prior record to judge them on and b) what there vision and policies are. Clearly Perry meets and exceeds those expectations.

    Perry has proven by over a decade of governing he has a strong conservative record filled with experience and good judgement. He is proving by his visions, his energy policy and his flat tax plan that Perry can lead this country out of its disastrous direction.

    This is the start of the Perry domination :-) .

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    This plan will raise so little revenue that even with the cuts in the Ryan plan, it won’t come close to balancing the budget. Second, if you believe that corporate “loopholes” will ever be phased out, I have a bridge to sell you. The only way to get rid of corporate “loopholes” is to go cold turkey. Third, how exactly is he going to fund his privatized social security system? Social security is essentially breaking even/in the hole now with ALL of the contributions going into it, any take away from that increases the hole (and if the private contributions aren’t big enough, you never can get rid of social security anyways). In conclusion, while it sounds nice (so did Cain’s plan), once again, the math doesn’t work.

    • izoneguy

      That is what the democrats have killed…..
      Why keep propping up the Dead Donkey.
      The only thing that has been stimulated by Obama is the public sector.
      Harry Reid says the private sector is doing fine but gosh darn it
      we need more taxpayer money so your daughter, sister & mother
      don’t get raped in the streets because you were to cheap to hire
      more cops that want full benefits and paychecks to retire when they
      are 50 years old…..

      Math is hard – for democrats…..

      • Death_of_the_Donkey

        once again, you are unable to show me how Perry’s plan generates even close to enough revenue to support 18% GDP government spending. There is also no reason to believe that this plan would lead to the substantially higher growth rates in the US that would be needed to offset the revenue shortfall it would engender.

        • iidvbii

          In a full employment economy the revenue pours into the treasury. See the decade of the 90′s as evidence. Lower tax rates inspire investment spurs economic activity and ultimately hiring. See the decades of the 80′s and 90′s. While your attack line is adequate for mindless dumbacrats and independents it doesn’t fly here with informed users. Might I suggest you join the tards on the MSNBC blog donkey? You will find it easier to sell Mittens talking points there.

  • gekster

    and is wrong as usual.

    • gekster

      ….

    • Death_of_the_Donkey

      but, with the sparseness of your initial reply I am guessing you don’t have one.

      • gekster

        that’s not fully out there yet.
        I see you have no problem with that.
        I can’t see how you can evaluate something when all the details are not out yet.
        And from your past posts on the economy, it’s a safe bet you are wrong.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    I was hoping Perry would turn it around, but I can’t support someone that wants to raise my taxes. If government were reduced to the size it should really be, no one should have to have a tax increase.

    I don’t see raising taxes on the middle class to be a winning message in this election.

    • bzip

      Oh and you think adding a new national sales tax like Cain’s 999 plan is a good thing.

      I don’t see Perry flat tax plan increasing taxes and in fact it decreases taxes considerably.

      • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

        When did I ever say I liked Cain’s tax plan? I think I’ve been very clear that I hate it. All you had to do was look at my comment history, but that’s too much work for a candi-bot.

        And I did the math. If Perry’s plan were in effect (and not optional), my taxes would go up.

        • acat

          If it can be told, how are you paying more under the Perry plan?

          I mean, you get an increased personal deduction, one per household member, and unless you’re earning more than $500k you get to keep your mortgage and charitable deductions …

          I have to assume that your current rate is below 20% .. so you’re both either in the 15% or 10% bracket – those are the only two brackets below 20% currently – and the additional individual deduction should reduce your gross enough to compensate for the higher rate.

          Just trying to understand, not trying to pry into your finances…

          Mew

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            I just took last year’s income, deducted $50K for four household members, and got a number that I compared with what I paid last year. It’s significantly more. If my healthcare premiums and 401k contributions aren’t pre-tax anymore, it will go up even more.

          • acat

            or something else here is strange.

            Take your gross reported income.
            Subtract 50k for your individual deductions.
            Subtract any charitable and/or mortgage deductions (unless you’re over 500k/yr.. )
            Multiply that by 20%.
            Compare to last year’s taxes owed.

            For me, it’s close enough to a net wash….

            Mew

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            n/t

          • acat

            And I’m not trying to tick you off. You know I’m no candi-bot.

            I’ve worked through it a couple different ways and the only two groups who appear to come out owing more are empty-nesters and couples without kids.

            For anyone with more than two people at home making less than 69k adjusted under the current plan, the new plan looks better.

            Mew

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            And my kids at home are 21 and 17. Won’t be long before both are gone, so it looks like I’ll be hit both ways.

          • acat

            Because if your adjusted gross is above 69k, then *your current rate is already 20% or higher.

            Are you losing a deduction or something?

            Mew

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            I ran last year’s income before taxes through Perry’s proposal. I deducted for 4 personal exemptions (same as I had last year), charitable contributions, and the mortgage. I multiplied that by .2. I compared that number against how much I paid last year, and the number is higher. I’m not sure what more I can tell you.

          • acat

            I don’t know either. And I do not want you to put them online!

            4 deductions under Perry is $50k right off the top.

            Take out the mortgage, charitable deductions, etc. …

            If it’s coming out higher, I really don’t know what to tell you.

            Mew

          • rightwingmom52

            if the empty nesters get hit, then we’ll owe. Considering the hits we’ve already taken on our savings & investments over the last 3-4 years, I’m certainly not thrilled about taking another one.

          • carolynr

            Acat…I ran the numbers…it works for me…besides that…I’m where I am now. One big difference…it brings back jobs…when they come back…the housing market will come back and most of the neighborhoods will look like neighborhoods…not some desolate area….All of this has a ripple effect that is only good for not only national government…but the state and local ones also.

    • Aaron Gardner

      If the flat tax doesn’t work for you, then stay in the current system. Boom, no increase.

      Also, his plan does reduce the size of government.

      Sometimes I think people just want to complain.

      • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

        When it’s no longer optional, then my taxes go up.

        Why is it that people can’t stand to have their candidate’s plans evaluated on their merits (or lack thereof)? I don’t like Cain’s plan either, for the very same reason. It will raise my taxes.

        • Aaron Gardner

          I saw you say your taxes would increase, while ignoring that the Flat Tax was optional. There is no time table on the phase out of the current system. Your contention that in some future day Perry is going to raise your taxes lacks any backing in what has actually been presented.

          If you want to write up a full post explaining in detail the issues you have with the plan on the merits, I encourage you to do so.

          Hell, I’ll even recommend it.

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            Where have I heard this before? Sorry, I don’t trust politicians regardless of the letter after their name. I stated similar things about Cain’s 9-9-9 plan which will inevitably go up to higher numbers (and which already increases my taxes in its current state).

            You can say he’ll never remove the “optional”, and even if I agreed with you that doesn’t mean it couldn’t be removed at some future date. That’s really my main concern and I don’t see how writing a diary could say any more.

            You may not agree with me, but each of us has to have some set of criteria to evaluate candidates’ plans. This isn’t a deal breaker for me, but certainly a consideration as I compare and contrast the candidates.

          • Aaron Gardner

            There is a difference.

          • carolynr

            It is time that people stop taking the words of political hacks and figure this out themselves. He said he would make it simple. Wait until all the facts are in and then let people analyze it. God…we have people doing this 1 + X – X = 12. We don’t know what the x’s are and here we are with the answer. Oh…this might be somewhat simplistic and Algebra students would probably give me the answers…but the point is…we don’t have all the facts and we are giving it a grade.

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            My assumptions always play a part. Don’t yours?

          • iidvbii

            Since you have your crystal ball out and can see all future outcomes. I assume it is this knowledge of the future that you are using to persist in this “he’ll raise my taxes” line. Which plan has your crystal ball okayed? Please share with us mere mortals so we can make the right choice too.
            BTW if it doesn’t violate whatever ethics you may have would you mind giving me the pick six numbers for the upcoming Texas lottery? I would like to make that next tax bracket so Perry can at some point in the future maybe raise my taxes too.

          • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

            It’s off to work I go.

            I don’t have time for this nonsense.

            See you in August.

  • beach91

    I like this plan and it does not raise taxes on me at all! Not sure why some people’s taxes will seem to go up but geeez this is real similar to what Forbes rolled out in the late 90′s. I am on the Perry bus at this point. Here’s hoping he can articulate this plan well cause Cain’s plan is going to be demagogued to totally scare all seniors. Romney’s plan…well…I cannot make it through the 59 points to fully imagine it. This is the best (in my opinion) out there.

  • gawken

    We can’t have an open ended system of two different tax codes..otherwise it’s like a perpetual AMT. I like the idea of a phase in..say 3-5 years..to allow people to adjust to the impact, because some will find their taxes higher initially. But if you have two systems, then people will play income tax artibrage,,

    When Reagan’s tax reform was passed, lots of peopel were hit hard. Remember tax shelters? Even the good ones, that had economic viability, were instantly useless..and we eneded up with PIGS and PALS.

    Also, the existing tax code must be frozen…no changes will be permitted. It stays as is until it sunsets.

    And that’s why once you elect to file under the flat tax..you can’t revert to the old system the following year (s)

    • wacowboy

      if a large part of the thinking of the “optional” flat tax is that many people would choose it simply because it is easier.

      Perhaps all new filers will only have the flat tax — and thereby the current system will eventually go away because new workers won’t be allowed in. Just my conjecture.

      Overall, I agree that the plan has a lot to like. It doesn’t raise taxes on most of the middle class. It simplifies. It frees up growth.

      • avagreen

        Since many of his ideas were *cough* *cough* preempted tonight

      • gekster

        If people could do thier own taxes, who needs them.

  • jrmax13

    Since Perry Supporters are so big on listing things out, ava. Then please reference the sections you claim to be practically plagiarized.

    • gekster

      You don’t feel the need to back up your crap.
      Don’t ask it of others.