Monday, February 18, 2008

McCain Pledges “No New Taxes”

This is good to see.

Republican John McCain says there will be no new taxes during his administration if he is elected president.

McCain told ABC’s “This Week” that under no circumstances would he increase taxes and added that he could “see an argument, if our economy continues to deteriorate, for lower interest rates, lower tax rates, and certainly decreasing corporate tax rates,” as well as eliminating the alternative minimum tax and giving people the ability to write off depreciation.

[...]

The leading contender for his party’s presidential nomination, McCain blamed out-of-control federal spending for a lack of enthusiasm among Republican voters.

“Spending restraint is why our base is not energized,” he said. “I think it’s very important that we send a signal to the American people we’re going to stop the earmark pork-barrel spending.”

The problem is that he’s a bit too equivocal.  He can’t guarantee “no new taxes.”  He can promise to veto any tax increases, but he could always be overridden.  But hey… it’s a step in the right direction.  He’s right that the GOP’s failure to restrain spending is a big reason why Republicans are not energized.

(5) Comments
Posted by Owen at 2027 hrs
Politics + Politics - General

  1. Read. My. Lips…. blah rhetoric blah.

    Posted by Fuzz on February 18, 2008 at 2105 hrs


  2. Too bad it’s highly unlikely he can put that pledge to the test.

    Question for the hacks. Say someone got elected by pledging to not riase taxes. Along comes a bill that simplifies our tax code by eliminating all those lobbyist-approved breaks for certain favored industries, and lowered the rate and made it uniform.

    For those industries/special interests that had a break, their taxes would rise.

    Would that be a “Tax increase” in your eyes?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 18, 2008 at 2123 hrs


  3. ATV, your proposal is too vague.  If you are saying to change the Income Tax code to a Flat Tax Income levy, then I’d consider that a Tax increase.
    If, on the other hand, you mean changing the Income Tax Revenue system to a National Sales Tax or “Consuption Tax” then i would not consider it a Tax increase, even if the Tax paid was larger.
    Are you talking about Income Tax, Real, Business, Sales, what?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 19, 2008 at 0119 hrs


  4. It is a simplistic question, though I’m not sure why you answer as you do on the income tax.

    Say it is a corporate tax. Simplistically, say the state has a base tax rate of 10%. But there are lots of subsidies and penalties and all kinds of things that make the tax code the monster it is, so the actual rate ranges anywhere from -5% to 12%.

    Say the state said, all the exemptions and loopholes and everything else goes away. Now, every business pays 5%. or 7%. Something lower than the base rate.

    Would you oppose that as a tax increase because a few industries or companies who curried special favor are losing their exemptions?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 19, 2008 at 2141 hrs


  5. So you seem to have clarified that you are comparing an Income Tax, or Corporate Income Tax, with loopholes to a Flat Tax rate without loopholes, where the taxed entity pays more than before.  Yes, this is a tax increase.
    If you had said swapping the Income Taxation (including Corporate Income Taxation) for Consumption Tax (Sales Tax), then No, I would not consider it a tax increase.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on February 20, 2008 at 0157 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.