Latest Good Reads

10 states placing the largest budget burden on residents

U.S. Presidents and their net worth

How Steinbrenner saved his heirs a $600 million tax bill

Tax extenders legislation

Should Obama Embrace the Bush Tax Cuts to Revive His Presidency?

In a new opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, Holman Jenkin suggests that if Obama wants to revive his Presidency then he should lead a coalition against untimely tax hikes. A number of Democrats in the House of Representatives are starting to call for an extension of the Bush tax cuts, and Jenkins suggests that showing his support for the group could be a “win” for Obama and the economy. You can find a section of the opinion article below.

That the economy doesn't need tax hikes on job creators and investors hanging over it right now should be obvious, so let's skip to the political benefits for the president. Leading a coalition of Republicans and moderate Democrats to ward off the danger wouldn't just be "bipartisan," and serve as a writ of divorce from the Pelosi left, but it also would show President Obama's leadership being tempered by realism, to do what is doable.

President Obama would have to withstand the hot breath of MoveOn types who'd castigate him over what Democrats lazily deride as tax cuts for the rich. He'd have to withstand a simple-minded media dwelling on the fact that bankers would keep a bigger share of their bonuses.

He'd pay a price for his unwise rhetoric of late, not to mention his short-sighted political decision to run against the bank bailout that his own administration authored and that will be remembered as his finest hour. (The rejoinder for Republicans has been just too easy: Tim Geithner.)

Continued at WSJ.com…

Senate Permits Government to Borrow an Additional $1.9T

In a slim vote of 60-40, the Senate approved legislation allowing the government to increase its debt by $1.9 trillion. The fate of the bill might have been different if newly elected Scott Brown (R) had taken his seat in the Senate. However, for now the Democrats still have a supermajority and were able to get the legislation passed.

The measure would put the government on track for a national debt of $14.3 trillion - about $45,000 for every American - and it served as a vivid reminder of the United States' dire fiscal straits.

The massive increase in the debt limit would allow majority Democrats to avoid another vote until after the midterm elections this fall. New estimates released by the Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday show that the U.S. this year could run a deficit matching last year's record $1.4 trillion shortfall.

To win the votes of moderate Democrats, President Barack Obama promised to appoint a special task force to come up with a plan for dealing with the spiraling debt.

Continue reading at Washington Post.com…

Obama Tax Cuts Likely Soon

From the Washington Post.com:

President-elect Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan will include an immediate tax cut for middle-class families, and the incoming administration hopes to enact permanent tax cuts soon thereafter, a senior adviser to Obama said Sunday.

David Axelrod said the stimulus package will be implemented soon, given the worsening economy, and could cost $675 billion to $775 billion. The massive recovery plan will seek to create or save 3 million jobs, he said in appearances Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" and CBS's "Face the Nation."

"Look, we feel it's important that middle-class people get some relief now," Axelrod said on "Meet the Press." Obama has "promised a middle-class tax cut," he added. "This package will include a portion of that tax cut that will become part of the permanent tax cut he'll have in his upcoming budget."

Giving people more spending money will "help get our economy going again," Axelrod said. He also said he is hopeful that the recovery plan will be ready for Obama to sign soon after his Jan. 20 inauguration.

Obama's Most Ostentatious Tax Promises

The election is now over and Sen. Barack Obama has assumed the role of the President Elect. The country is now waiting to see how many of his promises he keeps. Both candidates made a lot of ridiculous and—dare I say--ostentatious proposals throughout the election, but it is our job as American citizens to both critique and monitor how our elected officials follow through with said proposals. As such I have put together the following list of Obama’s most ostentatious tax promises that are most unlikely to become reality.

1. To limit tax increases to only those making over $250,000 a year.

Reality: When Obama states no tax increases, he is not including his plans to let the Bush tax cuts expire. Although letting a tax increase continue is not necessarily a "tax increase" it makes no difference to taxpayers expecting a cut. By saying he promises to only increase taxes for those making a quarter million, Obama seemed to be trying to gain votes with misleading information; another red flag of a campaign promise with the potential to flop.

2. Not to raise taxes on 95% of working Americans.

Reality: In addition to selectively expiring the Bush tax cuts, Obama has proposed to increase the cap on income payroll taxes. These tax increases could be huge for those making between $97,000 and $250,000, and the perfect candidate for this bracket is the small business owner. Therefore Obama is likely to raise taxes on much more than 5% of Americans.

3. To increase the capital gains tax rate from 15% to high 20%.

Reality: We all appreciate Obama’s efforts to make taxes fairer, but raising capital gains is not the way to do it. While 1 percent or less of Americans make over $250,000, nearly half of all Americans hold stock one way or another. Remember, the stocks in IRAs and 401(k)’s have capital gains taxes and many Americans use these to plan for retirement. That being said, raising the capital gains tax rate clearly does not target only the "fat cats" of our country.

4. To raise taxes on businesses and oil companies.

Reality: When corporate taxes go up, so do prices. This goes for oil, groceries, and motor vehicles alike. By drastically raising business taxes all Obama would be doing is passing our taxes through another outlet and right back to us. In addition, Obama has had some curious views on what constitutes as “big business” and what constitutes as “small business”, making small business owners weary of his tax policies.

5. To reform the IRS and make the way American’s file their tax returns easier.

Reality: Very early in Obama’s campaign he announced a desire to drastically simplify the way Americans file their tax returns. He even claimed that under his simplified tax code would allow anyone to complete his or her taxes in minutes as long as they take the standard deduction and have a bank account. Part of his plan includes using pre-filled out tax forms. Although his plan is more realistic then completely eliminating the IRS, it still has tribulations. In a perfect world, people could easily file their returns, as the IRS would send pre-filled tax returns. However, we do not live in a perfect world. Implementing a plan to simplify tax returns could create large problems for the IRS. Additionally, this program would open the floodgates for large-scale identity theft problems. Information contained in a taxpayers return is highly sensitive and we all know standard mail is not the most secure way to send something.

6. To eliminate income taxes on low-income senior citizens.

Reality: Although many claimed it was only an attempt to get the attention of the “senior voters” and the AARP, Obama promised massive amounts of tax relief to millions of seniors struggling to make ends meet. He planned to completely eliminate federal taxes on seniors making less then $50,000.00 per year, which would generate about $7 million dollars in total relief for seniors. However, I find it very unlikely that the country would get behind a tax break aimed specifically at one age group.

Biden Has A Pro-Tax Career

For those of you who do not know, at the end of last week Presumptive Democratic Nominee Sen. Barack Obama announced that Sen. Joe Biden will be his Vice-Presidential running mate. Biden is the current chairman of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee and actively worked on military resolutions concerning the former Yugoslavia, Georgia, and Iraq.

Many assume that Biden’s history of dealing with foreign relations and military resolutions will help ease concerns over Obama’s “lack of experience.” However, in addition to his foreign relations background Biden also has an interesting history on tax related issues. CNSNews.com has posted this interesting article on Sen. Joe Biden’s tax history, below is a snippet from the article.

“Like most Senate Democrats in 1981, Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware found President Reagan’s tax cut proposal to be an irresistible force and voted for it, after having twice voted for efforts to limit its scope.

Since then, with a few exceptions, Biden usually has supported higher taxes, although he has voted against specific tax increases when they have been advanced by Republican presidents.

In 1981, when President Reagan was pushing for across-the-board-tax cuts, Biden twice voted for bills that would have curtailed the effect of Reagan’s proposal.

First, on July 16, 1981, he voted against a measure that called for indexing the income-tax rates to inflation beginning in 1985. In a July 17, 1981 story, The Washington Post reported that the purpose of the bill was “to offset the tax increases that otherwise occur inexorably each year as incomes rise with inflation, lifting people into higher tax brackets.”

Then, on July 23, 1981, Biden supported an amendment sponsored by Sen. Bill Bradley (D-N.J.) that would have rolled back the tax cuts for anyone making over $50,000 per year. On July 17, 1981, the New York Times explained that the purpose of this amendment was “to limit personal income-tax relief to one round of rate cuts and to tilt the relief toward those who earn less than $50,000 a year.”

Nonetheless, when the full Reagan tax cuts came up for a final vote, Biden voted in favor of them, as did 88 of his Senate colleagues. Only 11 Senators voted against the Reagan bill, including 10 Democrats and 1 Republican.

The next year, Biden cast an ironic vote against a $98.3 billion tax increase supported by President Reagan and pushed through the Senate by Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.). The bill passed the Senate 52-47, with 35 other Democrats joining Biden in voting against it.”

Latest Good Reads

How the Presidential candidate’s tax plans would affect single mothers.

Recent coverage of presidential tax views.

When a tax statute needs fixing, who makes the repair?

Federal judge orders IRS to turn over data to TRAC.

Judge bars Wethersfield tax preparer from practicing.

Sometimes splurging is okay to do - it really is!

Debating the glass ceiling - is it a myth?

Q&A on self-employed health insurance.

Yet another payroll service in trouble.

10 Ways Gas Prices Affect Small Business Owners

Latest Good Reads

Political donations aren't tax deductible?

Flat is not simple, at least not with taxes.

Top 10 habits of successful small business owners.

Problems with economic stimulus checks.

Pressure builds on Cindy McCain to release her tax Returns.

The Ten Commandments of sales.

Defend your business rights – intellectual property defined

Ask-a-recruiter: when should lawyers change jobs?

Will I need to report my economic stimulus check as income?

Sen. John McCain: a Deeper Look at his Tax Views

As the fight for the Democratic nomination continues, the voters decided that Senator John McCain would get the Republican nomination months ago. Although there were a few other conservative candidates, they all dropped out early on in the election cycle. However, other Republicans frequently criticize McCain for being too liberal and not representing the whole party. Who can forget when attention-starved, political author Anne Coulter announced she would vote for Hilary Clinton over John McCain?

This is the third and final entry in my deeper look at the presidential candidate’s tax views. Unlike Clinton and Obama, McCain’s economic views represent the views of conservatives with tax cuts for higher income individuals and no tax increases.

Make Tax Increases More Difficult
One of the most radical tax views of McCain is his desire to make additional tax increases more difficult. He hopes to follow California Republicans in requiring a 3/5 super majority for any tax increases. This will, in effect, give the minority in congress more power and leverage to negotiate trades for important votes. However, in given the current economic uncertainty, such a barrier could have devastating effects. This is especially the case under McCain’s plan to increase our military presence around the world. It will cost the government billions of dollars. But without proper funding, a war cannot continue. Yet, with McCain’s plan it would be difficult to pass tax increases to cover these military expenses.

Alternative Flat Tax System
Although McCain does not support an outright switch to a flat tax, he is making strides towards one. Like any Republican, McCain is not a big fan of our current progressive tax system. His plan is to expand the 15% tax bracket to lower taxes on millions of middle income Americans. Under his plan, the ceiling for the 15% bracket would increase from $43,050 to $70,000 for married couples filing jointly, and from $25,750 to $35,000 for single taxpayers.

The more revolutionary aspect of his plan is the offering of an optional flat tax system. This system would be held out as an alternative to the current progressive system and the myriad of credits, exemptions, deductions, carryover rules, and different tax rates for different forms of income. McCain’s plan would be to tax all taxpayers on all income sources at one single rate. The flat rate would be set at 19% for first two years, 17% thereafter.

McCain’s tax cut plan is estimated to cost the federal government about $240 billion in the next five years, and over $500 in 10 years. However, these are early estimates and with current inflation levels, his plan could cost even more.

When speaking about his plan to fix the tax code, McCain claimed that, "the tax code now requires $140 billion of American families' income to prepare their tax returns." Unfortunately, he greatly overestimated this number. The exact cost attributed to individual taxpayers was only $65 billion, and some estimate the total at a much lower $20 billion. Although McCain's camp said he was drawing his figures from a 2005 report by the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, the study was not just on families, it included both individual and business taxes

Gas Tax Holiday
The Gas Tax Holiday is one of the few tax proposals that are supported by both McCain and Clinton. As I have mentioned before, this plan is to stop the collection of federal taxes on gasoline and diesel from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Currently the federal government collects an excise tax in the amount of 18.4 cents for gasoline and a 24.4 cents for diesel. Some estimates have cited average savings of $70 per person, but the exact numbers are widely disputed.

Although the phrase “gas tax holiday” sounds good, this holiday is getting a lot of criticism for being nothing more then a campaign gimmick. Within a few days of the announcement 200 of the top economists came forward saying the plan was worthless. Many claim that lower prices would lead to more demand, and only the big oil companies would get anything out of the holiday.

Repeal Alternative Minimum Tax
In addition to lowering taxes on middle income families, McCain also wants to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which would basically be a tax cut for the upper middle income taxpayers.

“I believe that we've got to simplify the tax code,” claims McCain. “But one of the first areas we've got to go after is the alternate minimum tax, which is going to eat in to 20 million American families if we don't eliminate it, and very quickly.”

Although the AMT is very unpopular it generates billions of dollars in federal revenue. In addition, remember that the president does not have the power to just remove a tax – only congress does. If McCain wants this tax fully repealed, then he is going to have to strike a deal with congress, and it seems highly unlikely that he would get enough support to make this drastic change.

Extend President Bush Tax Cuts
Although McCain had originally voted against the Bush tax cuts, he now claims to support an extension of the plan. “I voted to extend them because it would have the effect of having a tax increase,” claimed McCain when asked about his flip-flop. “The tax cuts have increased revenues enormously. They've been very beneficial. The problem is that spending has lurched completely out of control. My proposal was to restrain spending. I do not support tax increases. And the effect of not making them permanent would have the effect of a tax increase.”

Unfortunately, changing your view on important issues is suicide for a presidential hopeful. Think back to the 2004 election, and how strongly the Bush campaign pushed the flip-flop label on John Kerry. Voters do not tend to vote for someone they feel will flip on an issue, yet if McCain wants to win the election he is going to need to.

Cut Corporate Tax Rates
Another tax cut McCain supports is cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. The United States has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. If we want businesses to stay in this country then we need to keep our tax rates competitive. McCain’s plan does just that.

Revisions to Charitable Contributions
Another controversial component of McCain’s tax plan is his hope to revise the current laws on charitable contributions. Under his plan, taxpayers that give charitable contributions in the form of stock, real estate, bonds, or artwork would not be able to take a tax deduction for the current, inflated value of the gift. Instead, they would only be allowed to take a deduction for the original cost of the asset.

McCain claims this would only affect the richest Americans who take advantage of this loophole to reduce their tax liabilities. However, the plan has been met with loud criticism. The current administration has publicly stated “anything that would take money away from a charity is a step in the wrong direction.”

“Wealthy Americans shouldn’t get a tax write-off for contributing a fancy painting or an overvalued stock,” responded a spokesperson for McCain. “Bush is protecting his wealthy donor base at the expense of the middle class.”

Health Insurance Tax Credit
When it comes to health care, McCain wants to give more responsibility and control to individual patients. His plan would remove current tax breaks given to employers to provide health insurance, and replace it with a $5,000 credit to families who purchase their own health care. He suggests that it would encourage choice and competition in the market, thus lowering current prices. “I’ll work tirelessly to address the problem,” Mr. McCain claimed in a speech at the University of South Florida. “But I won’t create another entitlement program that Washington will let get out of control. I won’t do it. Nor will I saddle states with another unfunded mandate.”

McCain Tax Cuts Would Bloat Deficit Or Take Huge Spending Curbs

The Wall Street Journal had added this interesting article on the disadvantages of McCain’s tax plan. Below is picture that summarizes his plan, but you can check out the full article by clicking here.

Clinton, Obama, & McCain: The Good, Bad, & Ugly Candidate Tax Views

As the primary elections continue across the United States, I am keeping to my commitment to getting the candidate’s tax views more attention. So much attention is being placed on superficial topics that taxes are taking a back seat. Taxes and the economy will probably become a popular topic in the general election, but I strongly encourage every one to think taxes now! Read up on the candidate’s respective websites, and check out neutral information sources like SmartVoter.org.

At this point in the game there are only three major candidates left in the race. Each have quite different tax views. Below are the good, bad, and ugly tax views of each major remaining candidate.

Hilary Clinton

The Good

Let Bush’s Tax Cuts Expire

Ms. Clinton adamantly claims that the middle class has been ignored by the current administration and seeks to strengthen and grow the middle class and restore the basic bargain: "if you work hard and do your part, you can build a better life for yourself and your family." One method of doing so would be to let the Bush tax cuts expire. This may be a controversial view, but most liberals will agree that it’s essential for the improvement of the American economy. These tax cuts only go to the extremely wealthy individuals in the country and do nothing for the hard working American class. Although some argue that cutting taxes for the rich stimulates the economy, since these tax cuts were enacted the national debt has only increased. Most Americans are quick to judge any tax increase because no one likes paying more in taxes. However, I doubt any one reading this blog would be affected, as letting Bush’s tax cuts expire would only raise taxes on the super rich.

The Bad

Maintain Current Social Security Cap

Clinton supports retaining the current income cap on the Social Security tax, which is a good idea. Currently income over $102,000 is not subject to taxation from the social security tax. Therefore the top income earners do not pay the social security tax on their full income. Increasing the limit on the social security cap, or removing it all together, would create millions of dollars in additional federal revenue.

The Ugly

Mandatory Health Insurance

With heath care issues on the top of every one’s mind Clinton recently proposed the "American Health Choice Plan" which revolves around an individual mandate requiring everyone to have health insurance. Her plan would give more choices to taxpayers seeking health insurance without quite making it universally available through he federal government. Clinton claims her program would cost about $110 billion per year, but has not yet given any specific information on how the plan would be funded. The concept is not so bad on it’s own, but the lack of funding information makes this an ugly tax view.

Barack Obama

The Good

Tax Wealth More Than Regular Wages

One of the tax cuts enacted by President Bush was to drop the tax rate on capital gains from 20% to 15%. This was another tax break that specifically targets the wealthiest in this country who do not earn wages, but rather live off of investments and accumulated wealth. There’s no reason that capital gains should be taxed so much less then regular wages, and Obama agrees. By raising the tax back to 20% some studies estimate that an additional $100 billion in revenue could be generated for the federal government.

The Bad

New Tax Credits

Obama's tax plan features a prominent "Making Work Pay" credit that would offset federal taxes on the first $8,100 of a taxpayers earnings. It would essentially generate a credit of up to $500 for single persons or $1,000 per family. According to Obama this credit would eliminate income taxes for at least 10 million low-income Americans. The idea of lowering taxes for low paid working Americans is considered great by many liberals, but there isn’t really a need for a new credit to accomplish this. Instead, why not expand the Earned Income Tax Credit or the standard deduction amount rather than trying to get a new credit passed by codgers.

The Ugly

No Taxes For Senior Citizens

One of Obama’s tax proposals is to eliminate all federal taxes imposed on senior citizens making under $50,000 per years and not requiring them to file tax returns. This may be a good way to get the senior vote, but it’s much more complicated than it seems. First of all, senior citizens often have income from multiple sources including capital gains, dividends, Social Security, retirement plans, etc. Determining their exact income would still require the same effort as filing a tax return. Additionally, this plan gives special tax treatment to a group if individuals based solely on their age, which seems like borderline age discrimination. Why should a struggling single mother have to pay taxes on her $49,999.00 income when a retired grandmother would pay noting on the same income amount?

John McCain

The Good

Investment Tax Cuts

McCain is a strong supporter of lowering taxes to encourage economic growth, which is the dominant economic stance of the Republican party. Not only does he support renewing the Bush tax cuts, but he also favors numerous tax cuts. McCain hopes to reduce taxes on Capital Gains, Interest, Dividend, Investment income, and even corporate tax rates. And as if his tax cuts weren’t enough, McCain also supports a new rule that would require a 3/5-majority vote to raise taxes. In summary, McCain is a strong supporter of permanent tax cuts, and the Republicans love him for it.

The Bad

Continued War Funding

McCain is a strong supporter of the American military and the "War on Terror," with promises of a continued military presence in Iraq. According to his website, he believes that the answer to our current national security problems is to not "roll back our overseas commitments," but to increase the size of our Army and Marine Corps and continue the current War on Terror. McCain has recognize there is a problem with current military spending but has not provided any information on how to continue the military efforts while lowering the current $12 billion-per-month budget.

The Ugly

No Pledge Against Taxes

Although liberals typically support raising taxes to stimulate the economy, this view is very unpopular among republicans. McCain is one of the only republicans who ran for president this year who declined to sign the pledge put forth by Americans for Tax Freedom not to impose any new taxes or increase existing taxes. The conservative wing of the Republican Party are almost always against increasing taxes and this lack of a commitment could hurt his chances of winning the presidency.

Open Request to Presidential Candidates

The upcoming presidential election is one of the most talked about in recent history. However, tax and economic views are a major topic that nearly none of the candidates seem to be addressing. As we move into the general election, the economy will likely get more attention. However, I think it is important to talk taxes now!

As such, I have posted numerous blog entries on the candidate’s tax views on both my personal blog, and the RDTC Tax Help blog. Some of the entries include: Tax Views of Top 10 Presidential Candidates, Where the Candidates Stand On the Issues, and Huckabee’s Tax Plan: The Achilles Heel of his Campaign.

In continuing with my effort to bring attention to the candidate’s tax views, I am putting out an open request to all the presidential hopefuls to talk more about taxes. Additionally, I would love the opportunity to speak with any of the candidates about their views. Either through e-mail, telephone, or even in person. I encourage any of the candidates to contact me as soon as possible to give more detailed information to the readers of my blog.

Huckabee’s Tax Plan: The Achilles Heel of his Campaign

On January 3, Iowa voters spoke out and voted for Mike Huckabee, the former Republican Governor from Arkansas. Over the past few week’s Huckabee has garnered a lot of media attention due to his far right religious views and his support for a national sales tax. These views appealed to the people in Iowa as 35% of Republican voters selected him to represent their party in the general elections. Although the Iowa voters supported Huckabee, his “fair tax” views are likely to become the Achilles heel of his campaign, and could cost him the election.

The fair tax policy is an idea that was actually thought-up in the mid-1990s by the Texas based Americans for Fair Taxation. The basic premise is simple. Instead of charging a federal income tax all of the federal revenue would be generated from a 23% flat tax on purchases. According to the plan, states would collect the funds and forward them to the federal government. Huckabee claims this system ensures a fair, progressive, sustainable tax system that encourages economic growth. He claims it allows working individuals to take home 100% of their paychecks and it would encourage saving and responsible spending.

This plan may look good at a glance, but upon further inspection it’s full of holes. Tax experts across the country, both Republican and Democratic, agree this plan will not work. Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist and former official from the Department of Treasury even goes as far as saying, “anyone who supports it {the fair tax} should not be taken seriously.”

Supporters of the fair tax claim a 23% sales tax would need to be levied on all purchases Americans make. But how they came up with this number is a mystery. Independent research continues to show that the tax would need to be far higher to support the government at current levels. One bipartisan group, the Advisory Panel on Tax Reform, conducted a study that showed the tax rate would need to be at least 34%. Additional studies put the tax rate as high as 50%.

Huckabee’s plan also predicts that American spending habits will stay the same as they are now. However, with a massively higher sales tax many predict a strong black market would surge, thus providing a way for many to avoid the tax on larger purchases. Not paying the sales tax would be as easy as driving across the border to make a purchase in Canada or Mexico.

One major selling point of the fair tax is that people can keep 100% of their wages. People seem to respond well to this idea of not having to hand over a portion of their wages. This logic has problems. What about retirees who have paid an income tax their entire lives? Would they not be – in effect – taxed twice? So far, Huckabee’s plan fails to account for these individuals.

Huckabee also claim’s his fair tax is progressive. “All of us will get a monthly rebate that will reimburse us for taxes on purchases up to the poverty line, so that we're not taxed on necessities,” Huckabee explains. “This means people below the poverty line will not be taxed at all. We will be taxed on what we decide to buy, not what we happen to earn.” However, these rebates would cost the federal government an estimated $600 billion per year.

Consider this: a 2006 Department of Labor study shows that households at every income level spend more than the poverty line. The average family making under $70,000 per year spends more then it earns. While the average family making more then $150,000 per year spends less then half of what it makes. Therefore middle-class families would get hit the hardest from a national sales tax. This plan is not progressive whatsoever it’s regressive.

Huckabee’s plan also calls for the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Services (IRS). This has many people wondering - if there is no IRS, then who will collect and monitor the new sales tax? Additionally, who is to monitor the distribution of the tax rebates? The government certainly cannot rely on the “honor system.” The American public disdains the IRS and any plan to get rid of it sounds good to most Americans. However, in order for the government to function and collect the sales tax a new institution with many of the same responsibilities as the IRS would need to be setup. It would just have a different name.

Granted, the fair tax plan is not completely bad. Economists do generally agree that a fair tax has the potential to cause economic growth. Without income taxes there will be no need for corporate tax shelters. With no corporate taxes, corporations would be more likely to do business in the country. However, it is unlikely these small benefits will outweigh all the other holes and discrepancies in the fair tax plan.

It is also interesting to note that Huckabee is the strongest supporter of the fair tax plan, when his history as Governor of Arkansas gives a drastically different impression of his tax views. While he was in office, he cut taxes 90 times but more than made up the difference with 21 tax increases. Between 1998 and 2006 Arkansas’s state budget increase by over $5.2 billion.

Huckabee may have won over Iowans with his empty promises of a fair tax, but he will have a much harder time as this election year continues. So much attention has been placed on his moral and religious beliefs that voters probably have not given any real though to his radical tax plans. If Huckabee wants to stand a chance in the general election, then he will slowly begin to distance himself from the fair tax plan. However, he may have dug himself into a hole as going back on his fair tax plays would get him labeled as a flip-flopper.

Where the Candidates Stand On the Issues

Primary elections are just a few weeks away in some states, but the candidates’ views on tax issues are not really getting decent media coverage. To help voters make informed choices I constructed the following chart detailing where the top 10 presidential candidates stand on 20 important tax issues. Click the thumbnail below to view the full image.

Republican Debate Comments From Tax Foundation

The other night was a Republican primary debate with the topic on taxes and the economy. Tax Foundation.org has put together a good review of the debate with their comments and observations on various things candidates said in the debate. Topics include revising the current tax code, government subsidies, the federal budget, corporate taxes, and others. Check out the full review at Tax Foundation.org: Observations from the Republican Debate.

Health Care Changes Could Raise Taxes

The White House recently announced their plan for improving the country’s health insurance coverage which included a proposal to make health insurance costs tax deductible. The plan will allow a $15,000.00 tax deduction for families, and $7,500.00 tax deduction for individuals. However, for those individuals who receive employer provided health insurance that costs more than $15,000.00 would face a tax hike, as their health insurance premiums would be counted as taxable income. Early estimates suggest that the plan will increase taxes for as many as 30 million taxpayers. For more information check out Reuters.com.

Tax Relief for Phantom Gains

"US President George W. Bush is expected to sign into law by next week a bill that will give relief to employees who were taxed on 'phantom' share options gains they never received." Fore more information click here.