« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Michele Bachmann’s Dishonesty Re: Cain’s 9-9-9 Tax Plan

First off, I’d like to say that last night’s GOP debate was the most entertaining yet. I think it is important that primary debates be substantive and that the candidates challenge each other on their weaknesses. This is how the candidates, which (hopefully) includes the eventual nominee, improve themselves and their responses in preparation for the general election title match.

I do take exception, however, to outright dishonesty and deception being paraded as fact. This has unfortunately become a feature of Michele Bachmann’s campaign, and was on full display in last night’s debate. The other candidates took exception to Herman Cain’s “9-9-9″ tax plan on the basis that it would impose a new federal sales tax without repealing existing revenue streams. Bachmann took the criticism one step further. It is that last step that lands her into the outright dishonesty category.

While it is legitimate to criticize Cain’s decision to propose that payroll expenses be non-deductible, it is absolutely and fundamentally dishonest to characterize the business tax as a value-added tax.

Bachmann extended her criticism of Cain’s plan by claiming that the “business” tax portion of the plan was actually a value added tax (or “VAT” tax) masquerading in disguise. According to Bachmann, then, Cain’s plan not only creates a national sales tax as a ‘new’ revenue stream, but also creates a European-style VAT tax, a tax widely accepted to be one of the worst offenders of open and honest taxation transparency.

The only problem is that this is an outright lie. Apparently, Bachmann knows that it is a lie. The “business tax” portion of Cain’s plan is absolutely not a VAT tax. The overall Cain plan proposes a 9 percent personal income tax, a 9 percent national sales tax, and a 9 percent business tax. The business tax portion of Cain’s plan absolutely does not resemble a VAT tax. In order to demonstrate this point, it is important to understand what a VAT tax actually is, and what Cain’s business tax is designed to replace.

A VAT tax is essentially a sales tax, with the caveat that it is levied at every stage of production, on the increase in value of production, instead of on the final retail product. For a detailed comparison of VAT to other types of taxes, see Wikipedia’s article on the subject. In the United States, in most states the end consumer pays a state sales tax on the final retail product at the checkout counter. Manufacturers and other ‘production line’ businesses do not pay sales tax on wholesale purchases. For example, a gas station that buys a carton of cigarettes at Costco or Sam’s Club for resale at their operation location is exempt from paying the sales tax.

As an example of what a VAT tax involves, consider R.J. Reynolds, manufacturer of cigarettes. Hypothetically, R.J. Reynolds purchases a pound of tobacco for $5.00, filters for $10.00 and paper to roll cigarettes for $1.00. These products are used to create a carton of cigarettes, which is then sold to Costco or Sam’s Club for $20.00. The VAT tax would be paid by R.J. Reynolds on the $4.00 profit realized during the manufacturing and eventual sale of the cigarettes. $4.00 is considered to be the “value added” to the product by R.J. Reynolds. In Europe, this VAT tax is levied on top of the consumer’s end-product sales tax and the corporate income tax on net profits (for which the VAT tax is a deduction).

Cain’s “9-9-9″ business tax is absolutely not a VAT tax. Stated succinctly, Cain proposes that businesses pay a flat 9 percent tax on “net” income, basically calculated as gross revenue minus raw material costs, with other deductions. The only difference between today’s thirty five percent corporate income tax and Cain’s 9 percent business tax is that certain deductible expenses would be eliminated, the most important of which is payroll expenses. However, the basic structure of the income tax on businesses remains intact. The tax is NOT collected on inter-business sales, but rather is reported and collected in the same way as the personal income tax; the main difference being that a different deduction rule set applies. While VAT taxes look just like sales taxes, Cain’s business tax does not. It looks just like an income tax.

Most importantly, however, is to consider what Cain’s business tax replaces. Cain’s plan is designed to replace the destructive thirty five percent corporate income tax.

While it is legitimate to criticize Cain’s decision to propose that payroll expenses be non-deductible, it is absolutely and fundamentally dishonest to characterize the business tax as a value-added tax, and then imply that this would be levied on top of the income tax and sales tax. Cain’s business tax would replace the income tax, and businesses typically don’t pay sales taxes on production-line purchases. Fundamentally, VAT taxes are reported and collected using entirely different mechanisms.

Michele Bachmann’s disturbing history of distorting and outright lying about her opponents’ records should be denounced in the strongest terms. Like Cain said at the debate, “apples and oranges.”

(cross-post)

COMMENTS

  • streiff

    is the fact that supporters of this ludicrous 9-9-9 plan which may or may not now me modified to include a payroll tax is that the supporters of the plan don’t understand what is in the plan. It is only a Rorschach test for their own beliefs.

    Today Ace explains why the 9% National Sales Tax IS a form of VAT using info available on Cain’s own website.

    • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

      Besides, I trust Herman Cain. Something I can’t say of Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, and to a greater degree every day, Rick Perry.

      • izoneguy

        Not ready for primetime Cain would be a disaster.
        Perry has been gov of Texas for 10 years and has
        a proven track record. Herman was out sweeping
        the parking lot.

        • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

          Seriously? Whether you support Cain or not, that’s a ridiculous statement. He has a very impressive resume with some serious executive business experience.

          • izoneguy

            He was very proud of the fact that he did sweep the parking lots of some Godfathers Pizza joints. I don’t have a problem with people doing that kind of work. I have also swept my share fair of parking lots.

          • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

            and yes, I know he is proud of how hard he worked to turn Godfather’s around. but the way you phrased it in your post above was dismissive. You act like the guy has accomplished nothing other than a tidier patch of asphalt. Not true.

    • avgjo

      I know Cain’s not stupid; they don’t give math degrees to dummies. But to say that this tax is not a VAT is to be either stupid (as defined by ignorance/lack of understanding of one’s own policy) or dishonest. It’s not hard for me to conclude he’s being dishonest, given his track record of saying things, being called out on them, and then trying to cover his backside by lying about being misunderstood, taken out of context or joking. Oh yeah, and then there’s the whole race-baiting of an innocent man.

      • JSobieski

        http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

        “9% Business Flat Tax
        ?Gross income less all purchases from other U.S. located businesses, all capital investment, and net exports.
        ?Empowerment Zones will offer deductions for the payroll of those employed in the zone”

        The 9% business tax is a tax on “GROSS” income, not net income.

        The people who keep saying that the sales tax isn’t a VAT are missing the point. The sales tax isn’t a VAT, but the business tax is a de facto VAT.

        Cain must realize that point himself. He doesn’t seem to be as sharp as many of us had hoped.

        • bzip

          Thank goodness Perry is coming out with a true flat tax plan and Forbes aided Perry on it. I believe next Tuesday Perry will be givibng us details.

          http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66384.html

          I hear it will be far easier and better than what has been hashed out with this 999 plan.

          • bzip

            Of course Ryan was misquoted, the Cain fanatics would like you to believe it is why.

            Thank goodness Perry is coming out with a true flat tax plan and Forbes aided Perry on it. I believe next Tuesday Perry will be givibng us details.

            http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66384.html

            I hear it will be far easier and better than what has been hashed out with this 999 plan.

          • avgjo

            If Gov. Perry can keep hitting the right notes (going after Romney, going after Obama, showing that Mr. 999 doesn’t know what he’s talking about, flat tax, shriking government) he’ll wind up on top again.

            I’ve been saying for a month now to my family and friends, it’s Newt or Perry. Hmmm, I’d better head on over to intrade…

          • Scope

            putting that Perry has a “fair tax plan” coming out. It is misleading and not a help in any way for Perry’s Flat Tax plan. Perry’s plan will be fair, but your comment titles are misleading.

      • timkellogg

        Cain is what he is. It bugs me, people claiming to be conservatives calling a flat tax plan “regressive” because that’s what liberals say. Just because they all say that doesn’t make it not a lie. If it was regressive, the lower income folks would pay a higher rate, not the same rate. It bugs me when they attack 9-9-9 by quoting folks who find fault with ANY plan that doesn’t make more folks NOT taxpayers and increase taxes on higher incomes. I’m tired of “my side” arguing from the other side’s ridiculous point of view as if it weren’t ridiculous. I’m tired of vague, shifty answers to questions because some people can read things into a sentence that are simply not there, and of people on “my side” reading things into sentences that aren’t there to show that some candidate can’t be trusted to not say stupid things (or intelligent things that stupid people can take wrong if they try).

        As for Perry coming-out with a flat tax plan, now that Cain has shown him that there is widespread support for bold, real reform as-opposed to Romney(or Gingrich, for that matter)-style fiddling with the old code, that’s great. I’ll be happy if we get anybody willing to do real changes rather than fiddling with the status quo and offering lip service, but I find it more likely to happen with someone who was willing to try before Herman showed that people want something more serious even if everybody who loves the power the current tax code will go out of their way to stop it, rather than after.

        • timkellogg

          “they enjoy due to” between “power” and “the current tax code”, to make the last sentence make more sense…

        • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

          I agree 100%. Whether its a “flat tax” “fair tax” or “9-9-9″ we need to do SOMETHING bold and drastic. One of the major reasons I am not looking to Newt for solutions atm.

          Maybe he will “get it” and put something out that is worthy of second consideration?

  • izoneguy
  • izoneguy

    84% would pay more under Cain’s 9-9-9 plan

    According to the Tax Policy Center, households with incomes below $30,000 would have, on average, between 16% and 20% less in after-tax income than they do today.

    By contrast, households making more than $200,000 would see their after-tax income grow by between 5% and 22% on average.

    There are two reasons for that discrepancy between the poor and the rich.
    First, while the Cain campaign has said it is working on ways to lessen the tax burden on low-income households, the Tax Policy Center said it didn’t have enough detail to assume what that change would be. One way to address regressivity is to offer a rebate to low-income households.

    The second reason has to do with how Cain would restructure taxes.

    Under the current system, most of the lowest income households end up owing no federal income tax. That’s because their incomes are so low that they’re exempt, or because their tax liability is canceled out by the standard deduction and tax breaks, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit.

    The Cain plan doesn’t exempt very low incomes from taxation. And while it would eliminate the payroll tax, which is the heaviest tax for low-income families, that tax relief would be offset for many by the elimination of the EITC and other tax breaks they qualify for now.

    But the majority of the highest income households would get a tax cut. For instance, 95% of those with more than $1 million in income would receive an average tax cut of $487,300.

    Under Cain, capital gains — a notable source of income for the wealthiest Americans — would be tax-free. He would also preserve the charitable deduction. And taxing all non-capital gains income at 9% would amount to a considerable break from today’s top rate of 35%.

    Cain’s plan has been criticized by those on the left, who say it would hurt the poor, and those on the right, who worry a new national sales tax is an invitation for the government to raise taxes over time.

    Cain has said his plan would raise the same amount of revenue as the current system. The Tax Policy Center generally concurs with that assertion.
    In 2013, the group estimates that Cain’s plan could raise about $2.55 trillion. That represents 15.4% of expected GDP, well below the historical average for tax receipts.

    But Cain’s plan would not raise as much revenue as the current system if he decided to offer a rebate to low-income households to lessen their tax burden.

    Herman Cain

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    Bachmann’s conveniently leaves out any mention of the current 15.3% payroll tax (a direct tax on labor) that is in the current tax system (and that Cain totally emliminates that tax).

    Even if you grant her point that Cain introduces a 9% tax on labor, how can someone rail against a 9% tax on labor, yet be OK with a 15.3% tax on labor?

  • http://nerds4cain.com Brookhaven

    In 1984 it was only 18%. It has steadily grown, under both Republicans and Democrats, to where it is 47% now.

    Every GOP candidate, save Cain, is promising big tax cuts. And what will happen when their implemented? 47% will go to 51, 53, or even 55%.

    We can’t survive as a nation if 55% of voters pay nothing in taxes and can vote themselves increases in benefits without any worry about where the money comes from.

    It’s a hard sell, but we need to redistribute the tax load more evenly over the voter base. Cain’s plan does that.

    If we raise the percent of non-taxpaying voters to 55% (as most of the current GOP candidates would do) we might as well get ready for Obama’s second term–in 2016–because he’ll be the one promising the free goodies to the 55% that won’t be worrying about who has to pay for it.

  • http://www.flaliberty.org scorpio0679

    I see you really think for yourself, what great, insightful, original analysis you have there.

    Oh yeah, and I think one of the features of Cain’s plan is that everyone would have skin in the game, as Bachmann said at last night’s debate. Everyone should pay something, otherwise as soon as 51% of the country can get what they want for free, the Republic is over.

  • Craigpennsylvania

    1. The Tax Policy Center prides itself on being a “progressive” think tank. This means a left wing organization. Their numbers are cooked. Check them for yourself.

    2. Conservatives have been pointing out that the upper 10 percent of income earners have been paying the vast majority of taxes.

    This is true. Every honest study shows this.

    3. Under a 999 plan, it would be easy to figure out what each of us is paying. The bottom 50% of income earners would actually see a REAL incentive to make more money. It is human nature.

    These people only will be looking at two of the three 9′s. Each person can see that he/she keeps 91 percent of what he/she makes.

    We all get to make decisions about what we purchase. When we need a replacement car, if we buy new, we pay the 9%. If we buy used, we don’t.

    999 is, for someone looking at it with some maturity, a plan that treats us like independent, free thinking adults.

    4. Let’s look at it another way. Let’s stipulate that the Left Wing Tax Policy Center is correct. Let’s say it does raise taxes on the “poor”.

    Let’s ignore that it eliminates the current 15.3 percent payroll tax on ALL of the income on the poor and replaces it with a 9 % tax (something the TPC likes to ignore).

    Can anyone possibly say that charging 9% of one’s gross income for all the government services one receives is overcharging anyone?

    The $10,000 income guy pays $900.

    The $10,000,000 income guy pays $900,000.

    This is not fair? Really, TPC?

  • timkellogg

    of who the Tax Policy Center are, where they come from, and how they are anything BUT “non-partisan”…using their bogus claims doesn’t help your argument.

  • noprisoners49

    Michelle, let me say woman-to-woman, GET OFF THE STAGE! You are adding nothing to the debate, have put forth no real solutions, and are generally annoying.

  • noprisoners49

    Great stuff, Craig!

  • http://www.sunshinestatesarah.com SunshineStateSarah

    She has lost all credibility with me.

  • circlegranch

    Where Mr. Cain is concerned, he gets an enormous amount of breaks from Fox and its radio broadcasters. Today on Hannity’s radio show, Cain got a big slot of time to sell his wares. At the end, Hannity asked him to clarify the abortion thing and he stated what’s printed here in this article. All of a sudden now, we’re supposed to feel really confident that this was just a misstatement and misunderstanding. It’s either that as an excuse or he is joking or he says something without having any requisite knowledge. Every few days there’s a walk-back on his part.

    He has not been the CEO of Godfather’s for 15 years. He’s been talking on the radio and taking alot of liberties by being able to say about anything and beyond getting some emails that discredit a comment here and there, he really hasn’t had to answer for his rhetoric. He can mis-speak and make blunders on the radio and its not a big deal. This job will be much, much different. Every day in the Oval Office isn’t going to be a rehearsal for Comedy Central. The media will destroy his presidency if he’s constantly restating or taking back something he’s said without prior counsel and fact checking. We need to take this election a little more seriously than just Anybody but Obama and Anybody but Perry.

    Here are some facts; real time action that has occurred and not just promises.

    RICK PERRY SIGNED LEGISLATION IN JULY 2011 THAT DEFUNDS TEXAS PLANNED PARENTHOOD. HE ISN’T PROMISING TO DO IT; HE HAS DONE IT.

    RICK PERRY SIGNED LEGISLATION IN JULY 2011 THAT REQUIRES WOMEN SCHEDULED FOR ELECTIVE ABORTION MUST HAVE A SONOGRAM FIRST.

    RICK PERRY HAS APPOINTED TEXAS JUDGES THAT THE LEFT HAVE OFTEN CRITICIZED ABOUT THEIR STANDING ON THIS ISSUE.

    RICK PERRY HAS NEVER FLIP FLOPPED ON THE LIFE ISSUE. HE CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTION ABOUT IT STRAIGHT UP. HE DOES NOT HAVE A MIDDLE OF THE ROAD ANSWER FOR A LIBERAL TV AUDIENCE AND A HARD LINE PRO-LIFE NO MATTER WHAT ANSWER FOR A CONSERVATIVE AUDIENCE. HE HAS A RECORD ON PRO-LIFE AND HE WON’T BE WALKING THAT RECORD BACK ANY TIME SOON.

  • timkellogg

    with anyone I know of. It’s anybody but Romney. Perry just hasn’t done much to make himself a “someone”

  • bzip

    If it isn’t anybody but Perry why in the world is there a cirus running around Cain. Shouldn’t we be focuing on the most conservative candidate that has:
    Experience
    Good policies coming (energy plan, flat tax plan soon to be released)
    A record to go by
    Resources, money backers to win

    Instead of someone that seems to be inspiring….