By John Palm, Editor
GCN Live.com
Republican presidential candidates’ tax codes explained.
GOP candidates are giving the media and the American public a good show, but are falling in the same trap nearly every political race falls for: attacks over the facts.
Recent debates have been soaked with bickering attacks aimed to tear down fellow Republican presidential candidates instead of explaining the ins-and-outs of their own policies.
I can only assume the slandering that is occurring right now – during the GOP presidential primary – will pale in comparison to the war-of-words we’ll see between the Republican nominee and President Obama during the 2012 election.
Wouldn’t it be nice if a candidate took the time to explain their own plan, in detail, for once? It’s not like we can bank on the national media, no matter its slant, to deliver a fair representation of a candidate’s policy.
We all know anyone who claims to be objective and unbiased are full of Ed Schultz. You see, I acknowledge my slant leads me to roll my eyes at the Schultzs and Maddows of the world – although conservative hosts and analysts can often be as nauseating. Slant and opinion should not be removed from the media, but the first task should be to inform the audience of the facts – in this case, one’s policies – before shredding it to pieces.
However, my political bias does not have to stop me from actually taking the time to go to a candidate’s website and read their views on various policies and issues. It is the public’s responsibility to understand not every policy change a candidate wants will be passed. But in a world where we must choose between trusting the national media or a presidential candidate on what their own policy is, I think I’ll go with information from an unprocessed and un-analyzed primary source.
This brings me to one of the most discussed topics buzzing around GOP presidential candidates: Tax codes. All of the information provided below is straight from the candidates’ website. The tax policies from the top four Republican presidential candidates will be explained, free from analysis – I’ll leave that up to the “professionals.”
Rick Perry
Clearly, Perry’s flat tax rate of 20 percent has been heavily discussed in the news – a tax policy that Michele Bachmann claims is a duplication of hers (see video below). What the media fails to explain is the specifics of the flat tax and Perry’s elimination of additional taxes.
First, it is the individual’s choice to follow the 20 percent flat tax or the existing tax code. Deductions for mortgage interest, charity, and state/local taxes will remain. The flat tax would include a standard exemption for individuals and dependents of $12,500 to protect the lower-class. In addition, standard exemptions and other deductions are phased out for tax filers with annual incomes above $500,000.
Next, Perry proposes a series of tax eliminations. He would eliminate tax on social security benefits for seniors, dividends and capital gains for investors, and the death/estate tax. Unlike Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, Perry proposes no federal sales tax or value-added tax.
The final policy Perry offers is to reduce the corporate income tax rate to 20 percent to “enhance American competitiveness.” This would include: eliminating corporate loopholes and special-interest tax breaks; transitioning to a territorial tax system meaning income made outside of the U.S. would not be taxed; and allowing capital kept overseas to be brought back to the U.S. at a reduced tax rate of 5.25 percent.
“Innocent taxpayers are being held hostage by a monstrous system of taxation that only grows worse with each passing year,” states Perry’s website. “American families deserve a system that is low, flat, and fair. They should be able to file their taxes on a postcard instead of a massive novel-length document.”
Herman Cain
The majority of the media have destroyed the content of Cain’s 9-9-9 plan. Many analysts say their researchers believe the plan would help the rich and hurt the poor; meanwhile Cain claims his data shows his policy change would serve no such negative effect. Instead, he believes the new tax code would limit the government and help all people.
Cain’s website states, “Government spending is like taking a bucket of water from the deep end of the pool, pouring it in the shallow end. Then they HOPE that the water level will CHANGE.”
On Cain’s website, he states he understands the differences between parties, but that everyone, politicians and citizens, must unite around something that everyone wants: economic growth. This leads Cain to his 9-9-9 plan.
“The 9-9-9 plan gets Washington D.C. out of the business of picking winners and losers, using the tax code to dole out favors, and dividing the country with class warfare,” states Cain’s website. “It is fair, simple, transparent, and efficient. It taxes everything once and nothing twice.”
The first 9 is a flat business tax that would tax all gross income less all purchases from other U.S. located businesses, all capital investment, and net exports. The second 9 is a flat individual tax that would tax gross income less charitable deductions. The third 9 is a flat national sales tax that Cain claims is a replacement tax and value-added tax. According to his website, “It replaces taxes that are already embedded in selling prices.” All three flat taxes offer additional deductions for those living and/or working in the Empowerment Zones. These zones are selected inner-city zones that need extra financial assistance.
Cain, citing former Reagan Treasury official Gary Robbins, claims that under 9-9-9 the economy’s GDP will expand by $2 trillion, create 6 million new jobs (none being government jobs), increase business investment by one third, and increase wages by 10 percent. And like Perry’s simpler tax code, it would do away with the $430 billion spent on tax code compliance, enforcement, and collection.
Ron Paul
While Perry and Cain have tangible numbers such as 20 percent or 9-9-9, Paul has provided numerous policy changes that coincide with his main mantra: limited government.
Paul’s website states that he “will never support higher taxes… With the government spending nearly $2 trillion more per year than it collects, the American people should not have to pay for Washington’s reckless and out-of-control appetite for debt.” Paul continues, “High taxes stifle innovation, prevent savings, destroy production, crush the middle class and the poor, and discourage investment.”
Paul will support a Liberty Amendment to the Constitution to abolish the income and death tax, and ultimately do away with the IRS. Paul supports eliminating tax on employee’s tips, more tax credits and deductions towards educational costs, alternative energy, and health care, as well as believes it is “immoral” to tax senior citizens twice on their Social Security benefits.
Bottom line: Paul wants to “return to a constitutionally limited government.”
Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney has not introduced his tax policies – his website covers jobs, health care, foreign policy, and fiscal policy.
His fiscal policy reads:
“The mission to restore America begins with getting our fiscal house in order. President Obama has put our nation on an unsustainable course. Spending is out of control. Yearly deficits are massive. And unless we curb Washington’s appetite for spending, the national debt will grow to the size of our entire economy this year.
As President, Mitt Romney will cut federal spending and bring much-needed reforms to entitlement programs. Mitt will work toward balancing the budget, reducing the size and reach of the federal government, and returning power to states and the people.”
Like GCN Live on Facebook and follow on Twitter for more great news, opinions, and announcements from GCN Live’s hosts and staff.
The poster on the right is indistinguishable from an OWS placard.
See something, say something. 
