jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (14 posts)

A Simple Flat Tax Plan by Ted Cruz

  1. colorfulone profile image86
    colorfuloneposted 2 years ago

    It would put more money in the hands of the working class, and provide growth and opportunities. It would eliminate taxes that are ridiculous (example: Obamacare). It would end the IRS and Washing cartel.  It would be post-card size filing, a real simple form. 

    To me, it looks like what our tax plan should have been all along.

    https://www.tedcruz.org/tax_plan_summary/

    1. Credence2 profile image82
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I am not an expert on fiscal matters, but at least he has a plan outhere. I would like to see how it stands up to scrutiny by those that know a little more about this than myself. Let's hear what they have to say.  I don't trust Rightwing candidates, implicitely and often times the devil is in the details that may not be plain and evident in his proposal.

      1. colorfulone profile image86
        colorfuloneposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        There you have it, "often times the devil is in the details".   I do like the idea of abolishing the IRS organization, very much.  Now they can add the IRS Tea-Party scandal to their list of tax-invasion schemes and most likely get away with it.

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      The description doesn't seem quite complete.  For instance, line 4 asks for "itemized deductions", but it sounds like there aren't any.  I also question the child tax and earned income "credits"; these are nothing more than grants and should be listed as such if we're going to continue making them.  Nor do I like tax free overseas income unless the same amount was already paid there.  And no, it is not a "postcard" filing - there will be many additional pages.

      I also don't like a single $10,000 deduction for a married couple.  Or would each file their own taxes without any penalty?

      Finally, I don't see his plan as providing but a good sized fraction of what we currently take in.  Where does the rest come from?

      1. colorfulone profile image86
        colorfuloneposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I do not know the answers to your questions since it is only a future plan without having more details.  You are right, there will need to be many more pages to cover all the different forms of filings.  I get excited when I think a tree's life might be saved.  I'd like to get a peek at all the candidate's outlined plans. Only so much time in a day.  So! I appreciate your input.

    3. GA Anderson profile image84
      GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Hello colorfulone, I have followed many of your forum posts and as always, your comments are lively and live up to your name, sparking some interesting exchanges.

      I looked at your link, and I think Wilderness was really generous in his description. I think the baloney in this piece starts at the tile; it isn't even close to what a flat tax really is, and then the baloney continues to the end.

      Just look at the pot-o-gold in the  opening statement;
      "Imagine 4.9 million new jobs. Instead of Obama’s income stagnation, imagine average wages rising 12.2 percent over the next decade. Capital investment rising 43.9 percent. And every income-level seeing double-digit increases in after-tax income. Imagine exports and manufacturing jobs booming. Our trade deficit falling as the tax bias against American made goods is eliminated. Imagine a 10 percent income tax, with every American filling out his or her taxes on a postcard or iPhone app. And abolishing the IRS as we know it.” – Ted Cruz

      ... and a chicken in every pot too!


      "...The Child Tax Credit will remain in place...deductions for charitable contributions and mortgage interest payments are preserved... The IRS will cease to exist as we know it..."

      If there are still deductions and credits, then it is not a flat tax. And with the IRS gone, who will handle those tasks associated with tax deductions and credits. Is he promoting a tax honor system?

      I started looking at some of his opposition's criticisms of his plan, but then let it go because, whether I agreed with their criticisms or not, it only took a couple opposing perspectives to confirm, (to me), my initial impression.

      Look a little deeper colorfulone, you might find several reasons to consider the details behind the bullet points.

      GA

      1. colorfulone profile image86
        colorfuloneposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Okey dokey, GA.  I will look deeper with my limited amount of time, and that is why I appreciate your input.

        The flat tax rate of 10% to be paid by all tax payers on ...
        wages
        profits
        capital gains
        dividends
        rent
        interest
        individual income

        I think it would close (edited: some) loop-holes on the millionaires and billionaires who end up paying lower taxes than their employees and the system would not be rigged in favor of  the rich who keep getting richer. Instead it would be in favor of the poor and middle class.  I am in favor of that.  Certainly that would come with some hash critiques.

        Added:  Most individuals likely could file their taxes on a "postcard flat tax form".  That would end the IRS as we know it, which needs great reform.

    4. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      The biggest chore of any tax policy is how it relates to the general condition of upward mobility between the classes. Does a tax policy that puts a relatively small amount of "extra" income warrant any optimism in spending habits of our consumer economy? Going by short term windfall tax refunds it would not seem so. Most save the money they receive as a tax refund. Another group almost as large pay down their debt. The next highest is people who use it to pay for everyday expenses. [1]

      What makes a difference in economic growth is opportunity to increase earnings through higher earning jobs. But with the evacuation of jobs to overseas labor pools and more recently higher educated jobs we are losing the battle to earn more and consequentially spend less. It defeats the purpose to give you what little you already earn.



      [1] http://money.cnn.com/pf/storysupplement … index.html

      1. colorfulone profile image86
        colorfuloneposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Less jobs is the big pit-fall as I see it too.  I'm disappointed that Nabisco is/has moved 600 jobs from Chicago to Mexico.  I'm done with Oreos but I might have to have a Nutter Butter once in a great while. 

        Thank you for the link to that graph. Its astonishing to think of how many are trapped in the credit-card-wheel going round and round and never seem to really get ahead. A friend once told me that he thought that was normal ... so it has become normal.

  2. Kathleen Cochran profile image83
    Kathleen Cochranposted 2 years ago

    I greatly prefer the Fair Tax, which is a national sales tax.  We could revert to it overnight with the flip of a switch, and the last employee out of the IRS could turn out the lights. 

    We put this action into place  every year when we have a sales tax holiday for back to school. The tax is taken away for a weekend and turned back on the next Monday.  So why not turn it on at a new rate, leave it on, and eliminate income tax?  Let everyone who visits the US, everyone who runs an illegal business, everyone who pays their employees under the table, everyone who lives off their wealth and doesn't need a paycheck, pay their fair share whenever they buy something?  The Fair Tax - watch for candidates who support it.

    1. Credence2 profile image82
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Is that anything like the VAT Value Added Taxes that they have in Europet?

      If that is the only tax it tends to be regressive as those will lower incomes will spend a larger percentage of their income on necessities. Maybe some of our forum tax experts can ring in with their thoughts...

    2. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      This has a major problem in that it is a "regressive" tax, meaning everyone will contribute something to the operating costs of the country.  An awful lot of people disagree with this, feeling that half the population should not be required to contribute anything.

    3. rhamson profile image76
      rhamsonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Without a decent income it becomes a moot point. How does an increased tax (as the tax will increase on an item to waylay the loss of the income tax) help buying a car when you are in the same income bracket? None of it will help the loss of wages to the middle class adjusted for inflation over the last thirty years. People who get their taxes back or get a reduction historically put it in savings or pay living expenses slowing down the economy while they keep the money out of the marketplace. [1]

      [1] http://money.cnn.com/pf/storysupplement … index.html

    4. GA Anderson profile image84
      GA Andersonposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Kathleen, I too like what I have seen of the Fair Tax plan. For one, it doesn't contain the smoke and mirrors gruel that the Cruz Plan serves up, and secondly it is a fair distribution of tax liability for everyone - rich and poor. (should I dare t o also say legal and illegal?)

      The Cruz plan still contains some of the social engineering aspects, (charitable donations deductions), that most folks squawk about in our current system.   

      His endorsement from The Tax Foundation is a weak scaffold that I doubt will hold up to a closer look at the details and assumptions of their evaluation of his plan.

      Personally, I think Cruz's plan, as promoted so far, says a lot about his opinion of the intelligence of Republican voters.

      GA

 
working