Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1 Herman Cain's "999 Plan": The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly 
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    pretty good and fair analysis

    Herman Cain's "999 Plan": The Good, the Bad, and the UglyBy Dean Clancy

    So what about Herman Cain's 999 tax plan? Turns out it has some very good aspects -- and some others, not so good. I'd give it two rousing cheers and one bronx cheer.

    The plan is called "9, 9, 9" because it would replace today's complicated and economically burdensome federal tax code with a simple, three-part system, consisting of a 9% flat tax on individuals, a 9% flat tax on businesses, and a 9% national retail sales tax.* That's it.**

    The plan thus has three major virtues: It's bold, it's simple, and it's fair. And by proposing it, Cain is showing some political courage and imagination. Grassroots voters are hungry for just those things. No wonder this plan is fueling Cain's strong standing in the GOP presidential race.

    But there are some flaws.

    So let's consider the proposal -- the good, the bad, and the ugly.

    The Good

    Here are the Cain plan's good qualities:

    It ends nearly all deductions and special interest favors.
    It ends all payroll taxes.
    It ends the death tax.
    It eliminates the double taxation of dividends.
    It eliminates the taxation of capital gains and repatriated profits.
    It allows immediate expensing of business investments.
    It shifts the burden of taxation from production to consumption.
    It increases capital formation, which will fuel productivity and wage growth.
    In short, Cain's plan would be more fair, neutral, transparent, efficient, and pro-growth than today's system. Good stuff!

    But wait. There's more. Cain says this is just Step One. Step Two would be to repeal the personal income tax altogether. Wow!

    The Bad

    But here we come to a problem.

    Cain doesn't get rid of the income tax. Instead, he reforms it. And then he adds a new levy -- a national retail sales tax -- on top of it.

    Why? Why doesn't he just get rid of the income tax at the start? The answer, most likely, is that if he proposed to eliminate the income tax in one fell swoop, while trying to raise the same amount of revenue as we do today, he would have to set the rate for the sales tax so high -- well above 9% -- that voters would balk. My guess is a national sales tax would have to be set at something closer to 25%, to raise the same amount we currently raise with the existing income and payroll taxes.***

    Now, ask yourself: If you could be relieved of paying income and payroll taxes, would you be willing to pay a roughly 25% sales tax on everything you buy? Well, presumably that would depend on whether you'd be better or worse off, financially, right? The key here is how much you pay in income taxes under the current system.

    If you're one of the minority of people -- the top 10% of the population -- who pay 70% of the income tax revenues, you might see the change as a good deal.
    But if you're lower down the income scale, and especially if you're one of the 50% of Americans who don't pay any income taxes, then you might not see it as such a good trade.
    And if you're poor, you might really hate it.
    And that, I suspect, is why the so-called FairTax (the proposal to replace income and payroll taxes with a national retail sales tax) has never taken off as an idea. When people hear about that 25% rate, they experience a kind of sticker shock. They imagine, quite reasonably, that they could be worse off than under the current system.****

    No wonder Mr. Cain has fallen back to a two-step strategy: 9% is a teaser rate!

    The Ugly

    The second problem with Cain's plan is more serious than the first. It puts in place the infrastructure for a VAT, a Value Added Tax. That's bad.

    No, that's very bad.

    A VAT is a form of national sales tax that is collected at every stage of the process from the initial sale of raw materials to a manufacturer to the final sale of a finished product to an end-consumer. It's the most insidious of all taxes, because it is built into the price of everything and consumers can't see how much of the price is due to the tax. When taxes rise, prices rise, but consumers mistakenly assume that's just market forces at work. Politicians love a VAT: it lets them take a lot more money out of our wallets. And VATs usually exist side by side with income taxes, not in lieu of them. Taxpayers should hate VATs for the same reasons politicians love them.

    European countries have VATs; we do not. European countries collect a lot more in taxes than we do. These two facts are related. Consider this graph:



    Total receipts of the US Government since World War II have averaged about 18 percent of GDP and have never exceeded 20.9 percent (the peak, in 1944). By comparison, as the graph shows, the original European Union member countries' total tax receipts since the mid-1960s, when VATs started appearing, have not been less than 30 percent of GDP and today average a little over 40 percent. In short, thanks to VATs, European tax collections are twice as high as in the US!

    Clearly, if you want to raise taxes, support a VAT. If you want to make government permanently gargantuan, support a VAT. If you want to burden your economy and destroy jobs, support a VAT.

    "But wait, Clancy," you say. "Cain's national sales tax isn't a VAT. It's a retail sales tax, collected at the cash register. That's a big difference."

    So it is. But guess what. Cash-register sales taxes have a habit of evolving into VATs. That's what happened in Europe. And that's undoubtedly what will happen here, if we adopt Cain's plan.

    People are willing to pay a sales tax when the rate is low, but when the rate rises, they start finding ways to evade it. And sales taxes are easily evaded. So when people evade a rising sales tax, politicians respond by morphing it into a VAT.

    Conclusion

    Mr. Cain's 999 plan is on the right track with its goal of a lower, flatter, simpler, fairer, more transparent tax system. Nine percent would be a wonderful top rate for the income tax, compared to today's 35% top rate. And let's face it, abolishing the payroll tax and the death tax would simply be awesome.

    But adding a national retail sales tax on top of the federal income tax (even a flat tax) is a bad idea, because it creates the infrastructure for a federal-level, European-style VAT.

    And if Cain's 9% personal flat tax failed to remain flat (as happened with Ronald Reagan's promising but ultimately failed 1986 tax reform), we would end up with the worst of both worlds: a confiscatory income tax and a job-crushing VAT.

    Paradoxically, then, if you want higher taxes and permanently bigger government, one way to get there would be to support Herman Cain's 999 plan!

    Two rousing cheers, for boldness and imagination. And one bronx cheer, for a dangerous lack of foresight.

    Dean Clancy is FreedomWorks' Legislative Counsel and Vice President, Health Care Policy

    * The 9% Individual Flat Tax would define "income" as gross income less charitable deductions. The 9% Business Flat Tax would define "income" as gross income less all investments, all purchases from other businesses and all dividends paid to shareholders. It appears the 9% National Sales Tax would be applied to all goods and services sold in the economy, though Congress could and presumably would exempt certain "vital" goods and services (such as food, medicines, health care, education).

    cont.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11,517
    If you saw the debate last night, you saw the reaction of the audience when it was asked if they thought the numbers would stay at 9%.
    "Today, [the American voter] chooses his rulers as he buys bootleg whiskey, never knowing precisely what he is getting, only certain that it is not what it pretends to be." - H.L. Mencken
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by linda22003 View Post
    If you saw the debate last night, you saw the reaction of the audience when it was asked if they thought the numbers would stay at 9%.
    On the other hand I thought Cain's answer was complete. 9% would not change because:
    1) Within the tax code would be the requirement that 2/3rd of congress would need to approve any increase.
    2) The only way to increase taxes would be to do so transparently and every taxpayer would be aware.
    3) Cain would be President and he would not sign off on an increase. That, of course, would be temporary, but some President would have to sign off on it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by TruckerMe View Post
    On the other hand I thought Cain's answer was complete. 9% would not change because:
    1) Within the tax code would be the requirement that 2/3rd of congress would need to approve any increase.
    2) The only way to increase taxes would be to do so transparently and every taxpayer would be aware.
    3) Cain would be President and he would not sign off on an increase. That, of course, would be temporary, but some President would have to sign off on it.
    Congress is inept at most things, but they are very easily convinced to vote for more goodies from the American Taxpayer. Me thinks 2/3 vote when they need revenue is very likely.

    I'm liking a plan that both gets rid of the Income tax, and reduces the federal tax burden to very almost nil with the exception of defense. Let the states impose their own forms of taxation and fund more programs that are currently federal on the state and local level.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    SEAduced SuperMod Hawkgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    4,103
    9% national sales tax on top of state sales tax rate? In Florida, we'd be paying 15% on all purchases. I'm okay with that if my income tax rate fell to 9%, capital gains tax removed....but but...I like my tax write offs on my investment properties.

    Hmmm...?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    SEAduced SuperMod Hawkgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    4,103
    BTW...a 9% tax rate on business is genius. Corporations/Business' will be running back to the US...jobs will be plentisome.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Ape Articulate_Ape's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NJ, Exit Only
    Posts
    8,006
    I think it's gonna come down to Cain or Romney. Insiders (Dems included) and the MSM want Romney, which will make it hard for Cain, but I think most Conservatives are liking Cain more and more all the time. I think when insiders (esp. Dems) want Romney to be the nominee, then that indicates how important it is to the Tea Party movement and Conservatives in general to be saying, "Do not want!"
    "The efforts of the government alone will never be enough. In the end the people must choose and the people must help themselves" ~ JFK; from his famous inauguration speech (What Democrats sounded like before today's neo-Liberals hijacked that party)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,899
    Quote Originally Posted by Articulate_Ape View Post
    I think when insiders (esp. Dems) want Romney to be the nominee, then that indicates how important it is to the Tea Party movement and Conservatives in general to be saying, "Do not want!"
    We have to hold this attitude for a year. Let's hope Cain doesn't go all Bachmann on us!
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    812
    Hermain Cain must like Sim City games.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,899
    Quote Originally Posted by KhrushchevsShoe View Post
    Hermain Cain must like Sim City games.
    What is your point penny loafers?
    The difference between pigs and people is that when they tell you you're cured it isn't a good thing.
    http://i.imgur.com/FHvkMSE.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •