A ‘Goals-Based’ analysis of tax reform proposals
avatar

Scoring tax reform on goals rather than politicsThose of varying political persuasions, be they liberal or conservative, will try to tell us why their chosen tax reform proposal is better than any other. But in most cases, the proponents of the various tax reform proposals limit their talking points to only a very narrow spectrum of economic analysis; specifically an area where their chosen proposal appears to hold an advantage. But when we take a broader look at how these proposals affect the rest of the economy, in a point-by-point analysis, most tax reform proposals fall apart.

So at “The Rich Don’t Pay Tax! …Or Do They?” (http://TheRichDontPayTax.com/), we decided to address tax reform from a “Goals-Based” perspective. This is how successful businesses make major decisions. Before trying to solve a complex problem, they define what will constitute success by establishing goals that are based on known and possible problems. Only then, after the goals have been defined, do they evaluate each potential solution, against those previously established goals. The method that best meets each of the previously established goals is the solution that they go with. This quantitative approach consistently provides the best possible solution, by eliminating any bias that certain people in management may have toward a particular plan or strategy.

Therefore, since “Goals’Based” evaluation of potential solutions is a time-tested and proven methodology, that’s the method that we decided to use to approach tax reform.

Interestingly, when we applied this proven “Goals-Based” methodology to tax reform, one proposal stood out far above the rest. In fact, the next best tax reform proposal scored only half as well.

The tax reform proposals that we examined were:

  1. the current progressive income tax (included only because it’s the benchmark against which any other tax reform will be measured),
  2. a flatter, less progressive income tax,
  3. a more progressive income tax (making the rich pay a larger share of their income in taxes),
  4. a flat income tax with a corporate income tax and/or payroll tax component,
  5. a flat income tax with no corporate income tax or payroll tax component,
  6. Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 proposal, and
  7. the FairTax.

Note: For the purpose of this evaluation, we assume that in any flat income tax, there will still be a dependent deduction and that savings and investments won’t be taxed. Granted, this assumption may be expecting a lot of our lawmakers. But otherwise, a flat income tax would meet few of the goals for successful tax reform.

In the book, “The Rich Don’t Pay Tax! …Or Do They?“, 13 goals for successful tax reform were established and evaluated, using this method. Reader feedback indicated that this was considered to be one of the most persuasive parts of the book. As a result of this feedback, I decided to compress those chapters into a single abbreviated article. But before doing so, I submitted those goals to readers of our blog and asked for more suggested goals. Readers then contributed three more goals to the list. Although there is not space in this article to go into great detail, the results are still clear. Those goals are:

  1. Clear and Simple
  2. Transparent
  3. Unintrusive
  4. Fair to All
  5. Un-Tax the Cost of Living
  6. Increase Compliance
  7. Reduce Compliance Costs
  8. Reward Savings and Investment
  9. Tax the Underground Economy
  10. Repatriate Off-Shored Jobs
  11. Repatriate Lost Wealth
  12. Encourage Foreign Investment
  13. Make Favoritism Difficult
  14. Revenue Neutral
  15. Have a Chance of Becoming Law
  16. Make Raising Taxes Difficult

We invite you to add any reasonable goals for tax reform to this list and then compare the above tax reform proposals to those new goals. These should be general goals related to the economy. Then we invite you to go a step further and fairly compare any other tax reform proposal to these goals and any other goals that you can come up with. Regardless of the goals you choose and the types of proposals you evaluate against them, you’ll find that one of the above proposals leaves all the others behind.

Note: In order to take out any bias, be sure to add any additional goals that you think important, before you start your evaluation.

This quantitative methodology takes the politics and spin out of tax reform and makes it clear what will work and what won’t.

For the record, a number of years ago, when I first became interested in tax reform, the method that I thought best was different than what I believe to be best today. The change came a couple of years after I started looking into tax reform options, when I decided to use this proven problem-solving method to evaluate the various proposals. The results of my comparison, like you’ll see in this list, were so conclusive that I had no choice but to abandon the tax reform plan that I had previously championed. My own quantitative evaluation had made it suddenly clear what method of tax reform was needed. When you apply this proven method yourself, I’m sure you’ll agree, even if like me when I did it, you have to swallow your pride and change directions.

Use our star-ratings or apply your own star-ratings to the various proposals on this list. Either way, you may be quite surprised at the outcome.

In the end, there is one and only one type of tax reform that both qualifies as substantive and equitable tax reform and that will produce the kind of positive economic results that we need to see. Click through the steps on this list to learn what it is. Each of the following pages covers just one of the goals listed above, with the last page being a summary.

Next »
1 30 31 32 33 34 42

Follow us on social media
Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

Obamanomics drives formal renunciations of U.S. citizenship to yet another record high.
avatar

In only the second quarter of 2013, the official number of U.S. citizens who chose to renounce their citizenship (1130) reached a level almost three times higher than the worst single quarter for renunciations under George W. Bush (416 in Q2 of 2005). But what’s worse is that the total for this single quarter, under Obama, amounts to one and a half times the number of renunciations in the worst whole year under George W. Bush (762 in all of 2005).

Obamanomics forces more wealthy Americans to renounce citizenship
Obamanomics forces more wealthy Americans to renounce citizenship
(click image to open full size image in new window)

Why is this important? Well rather than answer that question directly, I’ll let you answer it, by asking you another question, which has an obvious answer. “How many of those U.S. expats do you think were poor?”

Common sense tells us that poor people don’t renounce U.S. citizenship. They can’t afford to leave behind all of the freebies that more affluent Americans provide for them, through an abusive tax and income redistribution regime. By contrast, the rich are being punished for all of the hard work that produced their success. Not only are they taxed a punitive levels, but an abusive IRS gets to choose which conflicting piece of tax code they expect the taxpayer to use and it’s almost never the one the taxpayer thought most reasonable. Yet these are precisely the people who can most easily afford to live wherever in the world they choose.

While some people see those who are leaving as unpatriotic, those who are leaving see renouncing as an undesirable, but necessary strategy, to protect what they have worked so hard to build. But the point is that the negative opinion that some may have of these expats doesn’t change the fact that they still see leaving as their only option and they’re leaving in alarming numbers.

However, there’s more to it than the fact that these expats are rich. The important fact to consider is that those who are leaving are the people who pay the lion’s share of the taxes in the U.S. and who create the lion’s share of the jobs. Without them, taxes on the rest of us will have to rise to make up the difference. But since there will be fewer jobs, those who still have jobs will have to pay even higher taxes to make up for those who no longer have jobs. (See “The Rich Don’t Pay Tax! …Or Do They?” for more on this subject. ISBN: 0615624375 http://www.amazon.com/dp/0615624375/)

Today we see a renunciation total for the second quarter of this year that is more than nine times higher than the worst quarter (123) of the last year that Bush was in office. Obama inherited from Bush an expatriation rate of just 231 in all of 2008. So what this means is that just the second quarter of 2013 saw five times more renunciations than in the whole of 2008.

Expatriations have been on a dramatic rise since Obama took office, with only a slight drop in 2012, as many wealthy people put their expatriation plans on hold, awaiting the outcome of the 2012 election. But after the election, renunciations continued their meteoric climb.

It is any wonder that it’s the rich who are leaving the USA in droves?

Is it any wonder, as Obama continues to malign success and promises to further “Soak the Rich”, that the number of wealthy Americans who are leaving is setting new records almost every quarter?

However, the problem isn’t all Obama. He wouldn’t be able to create the conditions that drive our producers and job creators offshore, if it were not for our convoluted income tax system and its abusive collection agency, the IRS. Any time a government is allowed to tax income, it leaves the door wide open for an incompetent leadership to make the kind of mistakes that will drive out its best and brightest.

By contrast, if taxes were collected only on retail sales, there would be no way for the mistakes of an incompetent president to force our most prolific taxpayers to turn in their passports, in favor of one from a more wealth-friendly nation. There would be no abusive IRS that could be used by presidents from both parties, to reward or punish certain groups.

A tax system should be for collecting revenue only and not be used as a political tool.

It’s clear that we can no longer wait. It’s time that we have a tax system that can’t be used by either party to play politics, at our expense. It’s time for the FairTax. Not only will the FairTax eliminate the IRS, but it’s also a tax system that can’t be used by either party, to favor certain groups and punish others. Better yet, instead of driving job creators and taxpayers out of the USA, it will attract massive amounts of foreign investment, which will create many new jobs. As the tax base swells, the tax rate will decline. With the FairTax, the only losers will be the politicians, who can no longer use the tax code as a political tool.

Follow us on social media
Facebooktwitterrssyoutube