Spotted at Forbes, in an endorsement for Rick Perry’s flat tax plan:
The plan’s central feature, as Perry explained in today’s Wall Street Journal, is an optional flat tax of 20 percent, in which those opting for the flat tax will be able to deduct $12,500 for each household member, along with mortgage interest, charitable and state and local tax exemptions for families earning less than $500,000 a year.
Some conservative policy bloggers are apoplectic about the optional nature of the Perry plan. But these critics appear to be entirely ignoring the central political flaw of a mandatory flat tax: that a mandatory flat tax necessarily raises taxes on lower- and middle-income earners. The only way to rebut this political criticism is to make the flat tax optional, so that the middle class doesn’t face higher taxes. This is especially important for those who depend on the employer tax exclusion for their health benefits.
See, the fact that lower- and middle-income earners would have to pay more to make up for the tax cuts of the rich is only a political flaw, which is solved by telling the peasants that they don’t have to pay the higher tax if they don’t want to. Now, what could possibly go wrong there?
This is my favorite part:
On the other side, some wonks are complaining that the Perry plan will reduce tax revenues, and thereby expand the deficit. But this, again, is asking too much of comprehensive tax reform. The only way to propose a deficit-neutral flat tax is to massively raise taxes on lower- and middle-class earners. As Voltaire once suggested, it’s unwise to make the perfect the enemy of the good.
In other words, it is asking too much of comprehensive tax reform to provide adequate revenue to keep the country going.
And now we come to it …
It’s worth mentioning that the plan also lowers the corporate tax rate to 20% and moves to a territorial tax system, provisions that will have a huge impact on the U.S. pharmaceutical industry, allowing biotech and pharmaceutical companies to repatriate their overseas profits without penalty, thereby increasing investment in domestic pharmaceutical R&D.
Of course.
I followed the link, wanting to see what dumbass it was who wrote that tripe.
The entire column is worth reading – for comedy.
Say what you will about the Old Queen, but at least Malcolm Forbes was fun.
His son, lacking his Dad’s flair and ostentation, has allowed the writers at the rag he inherited to turn it into the financial version of “The Onion” – only without the veritas and fact-checking.
Uhm, Forbes – how is something “mandatory” and at the same time ‘optional?’
Is this an attempt to update Conservative cognitive dissonance for the 21st Century?
Do they know that George Carlin is still dead? That he doesn’t need to update his routing about ‘Oxymorons:”
Military Intelligence
Jumbo Shrimp
Optional mandatory, or mandatory optional is as good as either or those!
Sheesh!
“the financial version of “The Onion†– only without the veritas and fact-checking”
I’LL SEND YOU THE CLEANING BILL FOR THE DIET-SODA THAT CAME OUT OF MY NOSE AND ONTO MY NEW SHIRT AFTER READING THAT LINE!
“On the other side, some wonks are complaining that the Perry plan will reduce tax revenues”
RIGHT SO ONLY A WONK WOULD CONSIDER THE FINACIAL ASPECTS OF TAX REFORM? THESE IDIOTS MUST THINK WE ARE AS STUPID AS THEY ARE!
Right, because a flat tax that the people whose taxes would be raised can opt out of is COMPLETELY different from a tax cut for rich people. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
Morons.