Study: Romney plan raises taxes on poor families

[blueapplepaste]

WASHINGTON (AP) — A new independent study says Republican Mitt Romney's tax plan would increase taxes on low-income families while cutting taxes for the middle-class and the rich.

The study by the Tax Policy Center says, on average, households making less than $20,000 would see their taxes increase by more than 60 percent by letting tax cuts enacted under President Barack Obama expire. Those tax cuts target low-income families.

The study by the independent research group says people making more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging 15 percent.

Apparently Romney supports a reverse Robin Hood economic policy. Increases taxes on the poor, so the rich can get more tax breaks.

Oh yeah, and the plan also adds $600 billion to the deficit. Clearly the GOP is not the party of the rich and are fiscal conservatives.

 

[Miami Marlins 2012]

Who funded this "independent study?" I think I'll rather do my own research into Romney's plans than hear what someone else has to say. The same goes for every candidate running for the nomination. In an era of super PACs and groups with hidden agendas, I personally don't believe most of what gets tossed around in ads and the media. There is no substitute for personal research.

In other words, I can't comment on the so called "independent study" until I my own research a little more thoroughly on these allegations. Once I've formed my own well-researched opinion, I'll get back to you with what I think about this.

 

[jpcedotal]

flat sales tax, no income tax...now the poor, middle, and rich are on the same playing field.

 

[circa02]

I'm poor, and I don't care.

 

[disciple2011]

flat sales tax, no income tax...now the poor, middle, and rich are on the same playing field.

A VAT will hurt the poor more than it would the rich.

 

[Maren]

A VAT will hurt the poor more than it would the rich.

Depends on how it is implemented. If you implement a VAT, I think you have to exempt grocery items and housing (at least on the primary residence). If you take these types of steps, the poor are not hurt by the change in tax structures.

More to the point, it actually encourages saving and investing, which helps all Americans.

 

[lordbt]

Apparently Romney supports a reverse Robin Hood economic policy. Increases taxes on the poor, so the rich can get more tax breaks.

Oh yeah, and the plan also adds $600 billion to the deficit. Clearly the GOP is not the party of the rich and are fiscal conservatives.

People making under $20,000 dont pay income taxes. They do, however, pay into Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid. What Obama did was temporarily cut those payroll taxes. If those taxes arent raised to the level they have been at for decades, what will happen is the Social Security will simply be underfunded. Not sure how that is a good thing.

So, I suspect that Romneys plan simply ends the Obama tax cut that was supposed to be a temporary one year deal anyway.

 

[Wolseley]

I agree with the Russian Jew who emigrated to America and became a citizen:

"It's true that in this country we get stuck with taxes. But in the old country, we got stuck with bayonets."

 

[Umaro]

People making under $20,000 dont pay income taxes. They do, however, pay into Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid. What Obama did was temporarily cut those payroll taxes. If those taxes arent raised to the level they have been at for decades, what will happen is the Social Security will simply be underfunded. Not sure how that is a good thing.

So, I suspect that Romneys plan simply ends the Obama tax cut that was supposed to be a temporary one year deal anyway.

So then why is he also cutting taxes at the top? We're pretty underfunded in most other areas too, with the Bush/Obama cuts contributing significantly.

 

[lordbt]

So then why is he also cutting taxes at the top? We're pretty underfunded in most other areas too, with the Bush/Obama cuts contributing significantly.

Frankly, I dont think there should be tax cuts when the deficit is a high as it is. What needs to happen is a frank discussion of what the role of the federal government should be and how it should be funded. This conversation is going to take place sooner or later, but unfortunately, Obama will not lead in that respect. Will Romney if he is elected? Who knows? If neither man is up to the task, the decision will be forced upon us the way it is being forced upon Europe, whose welfare states are going bankrupt.

 

[blueapplepaste]

Frankly, I dont think there should be tax cuts when the deficit is a high as it is. What needs to happen is a frank discussion of what the role of the federal government should be and how it should be funded. This conversation is going to take place sooner or later, but unfortunately, Obama will not lead in that respect. Will Romney if he is elected? Who knows? If neither man is up to the task, the decision will be forced upon us the way it is being forced upon Europe, whose welfare states are going bankrupt.

Lets be honest, neither side will have an honest discussion. Repubs say we need to reform entitlements, and Dems scream that Repubs hate old people and the poor. Dems say we need to reform taxes and cut defense, and Repubs scream that Dems hate the rich and want terrorists to win. How can we have a grown up conversation when children are running the show?

As far as Obama goes, he was willing to put up some of the Dems sacred cows in the debt ceiling debate, the Repubs, however, were unwilling to follow suit and also sacrifice theirs.

 

[disciple2011]

Depends on how it is implemented. If you implement a VAT, I think you have to exempt grocery items and housing (at least on the primary residence). If you take these types of steps, the poor are not hurt by the change in tax structures.

More to the point, it actually encourages saving and investing, which helps all Americans.

Add to that clothes, health items and services that treat people's health issues and then it would be fair to the poor.

You see VAT draws in a huge variety of goods and services that cane be taxed.

Also then the VAt would be on top of existing state sales taxes.

In the end you might be paying anywhere between 9-20 percent on a good or service.

Not a great boost to the economy when incomes do not increase to the pace of cost.

 

[Maren]

Add to that clothes, health items and services that treat people's health issues and then it would be fair to the poor.

You see VAT draws in a huge variety of goods and services that cane be taxed.

Also then the VAt would be on top of existing state sales taxes.

In the end you might be paying anywhere between 9-20 percent on a good or service.

Not a great boost to the economy when incomes do not increase to the pace of cost.

Sure, you'll be paying more for "non-essentials". Yet people would see a "pay increase", in terms of take home pay, since they would no longer have income taxes deducted from their paychecks.

 

[disciple2011]

Sure, you'll be paying more for "non-essentials". Yet people would see a "pay increase", in terms of take home pay, since they would no longer have income taxes deducted from their paychecks.

They would not see a pay increase. They would see a decrease as they pay a state tax and a federal one on their everyday basic needs.

The amount the government takes each check from you FICA is not that much. And then at the end fo the year most low income get a greta deal of it back.

With a VAT they will get none of it back. It is regressive and a burden to the poor.

 

[Maren]

They would not see a pay increase. They would see a decrease as they pay a state tax and a federal one on their everyday basic needs.

The amount the government takes each check from you FICA is not that much. And then at the end fo the year most low income get a greta deal of it back.

With a VAT they will get none of it back. It is regressive and a burden to the poor.

But again, if "necessities" are not taxed, they still won't really be taxed. If done correctly, the only difference is that people won't get extra money back in April, they will just get a little extra money throughout the year and have to pay more for things they don't need.

Actually, the biggest economic threat with a VAT tax is that it could lower spending as people start to save or invest more of their money since that money is not taxed.

 

[Viren]

Lets be honest, neither side will have an honest discussion. Repubs say we need to reform entitlements, and Dems scream that Repubs hate old people and the poor. Dems say we need to reform taxes and cut defense, and Repubs scream that Dems hate the rich and want terrorists to win. How can we have a grown up conversation when children are running the show?

As far as Obama goes, he was willing to put up some of the Dems sacred cows in the debt ceiling debate, the Repubs, however, were unwilling to follow suit and also sacrifice theirs.

Over half the members of congress are millionaires. The reason an honest dicussion never happens is because the status quo system works well for the wealthy who are in control.

 

[Assuredcw]

Study: Romney plan raises taxes on poor families

It isn't just people just above or below the poverty line, it's middle class folks who would pay more. And it isn't just Romney, because all of the GOP candidates are going to propose something very similar to Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan. They'll sell it as being "fair," except that there's one thing they aren't telling you -- only the rich will actually end up paying LESS.

 

[Harpuia]

Surely someone could create a calculator for his tax idea.