Of all the tax plans yet presented, Senator Paul’s is, out of the rest, the most economically sound.
Trump recently announced his tax plan – and although it is nice to hear something other than nativist rants out of Trump, the tax plan he offers should be explored a bit.
First, let’s look at the details. Instead of seven tax brackets, there would only be four. Individuals making under $25,000 per year or couples making under $50,000 would be exempt from any income tax. That’s actually not a bad idea.
Trump also proposes to end the marriage penalty tax, the alternative minimum tax, and the estate tax. Also, not a bad idea.
Also, no business under the Trump plan will pay more than 15% of income in taxes. Not a bad idea either.
How does he intend to “make up for it”? “By closing loopholes available to the very rich.”
Not as if that is anything outrageous, besides the fact that the new conservative darling is using a typical left-wing line. And I would be surprised if closing a few loopholes would have any effect at all. After all, that line has been used for years but the “loopholes” remain.
It has been intriguing to see the media reaction on this tax plan.
Most news outlets try and estimate the “cost” of such a tax plan; Trump’s tax plan would cost, according to NBC, 10.2 trillion dollars, added to the deficit. Rand Paul’s, according to U.S. News and World Report, would cost the “economy” 3 trillion dollars over ten years.
Have we forgotten the concept of the Laffer curve? Typically attributed to the era of “Reaganomics” the concept – government tax revenues increasing when tax rates are decreased – goes back nearly two centuries.
Say what you will about “Reaganomics” or “Trickle-Down economics” (which isn’t actually a legitimate economic theory) – it is absurd to say that tax cuts on anyone could negatively impact the economy. But that’s what the media will have us think.