This morning, there’s a side-by-side comparison on Newt’s website comparing his tax plan with Mitt’s plan. Predictably, the “verdict” in each of the categories is that Newt’s plan is better than Mitt’s. I don’t care about the “verdict.” I care about the information.

Personal Income Tax Rates

Newt’s plan offers people a “choice of current system or 15% flat tax with personal, homeowner, and charitable deductions.”

Mitt’s plan keeps tax rates the same as they are now.

Newt would eliminate the personal and corporate capital gains taxes. Mitt’s plan is complicated:

Depends how much money the taxpayer makes. Romney’s plan eliminates capital gains taxes for those making less than $200,000/year, but maintains the current system, with rates of up to 35%, for the rest.

Mitt’s defense of his policy is pure class warfare. He said that “the rich are doing just fine” before saying that he’s looking out for the middle class. Small businesses making $250,000 a year aren’t rolling in the dough. Many are struggling, often staying afloat by cutting employees.

That means Newt’s plan keeps more money in the entrepreneur’s hands, which means he can afford to keep the workers he’s currently got. Mitt’s class warfare tax code won’t give job creators the capital to invest in workers.

Mitt’s corporate capital gains “maintains the current system.” That’s better than President Obama’s preference but it’s hardly dynamic.

The corporate tax rates offers the starkest contrast. Newt’s proposed corporate tax rate is 12.5%; Mitt’s is 25%.

Newt would “eventually replace payroll tax with personal accounts.” On Medicare reform, Newt would “offer a choice between the traditional system or opportunity to purchase private insurance with premium support.”

Mitt’s 59-point, 160-page plan doesn’t provide information on the payroll tax or Medicare reform. Is that because Mitt’s plan is essentially a status quo plan that assumes the US tax system is functioning properly?

Now isn’t the time for the status quo. If we don’t change things dramatically, the US will lose a decade’s worth of prosperity. That isn’t what I want from the GOP nominee.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 Responses to “Comparing Newt’s tax plan with Mitt’s tax plan”

  • Jeff says:

    Every way you slice these proposals, 9-9-9 continues to be the best one.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Is it the fact that it gives the federal government an additional revenue stream? Or is it that it’s really just a step on the way to the Fair Tax? BTW, if the Fair Tax is the final goal, which it is, has anyone thought about the possibility that repealing the Sixteenth Amendment will be impossible? Do you think that Congress won’t make any changes to 9-9-9? If you do, what galaxy do you live in?

    Newt’s plan features low marginal tax rates, eliminates capital gains & estate taxes without giving the federal pigs an additional revenue stream to grow government with. The other great thing about Newt’s economic plan is that it isn’t just about taxes. He’s serious about eliminating the EPA, the NLRB & the Department of Energy while creating millions of new jobs tapping into America’s treasure trove of natural resources.

    Newt’s plan is the only one that’s truly comprehensive.

Leave a Reply