Texas GOP Promotes Partisanship Over Practical Solutions
By Shawn M. Griffiths | 07/21/2012 | Featured, Issues, Taxes, Texas | 1 CommentThe state of the economy, job creation, and tax reform are important issues for independent voters. Most people in this voting demographic want practical and pragmatic solutions to some of the biggest problems facing the country, and not proposals that fall purely on partisan lines.
Within the Republican Party and among conservative voters the biggest debate on tax reform is typically whether the national tax code should be replaced entirely with a 23% federal sales tax, a plan more commonly known as the “Fair Tax,” or if the federal government should move to adopt a low, flat income tax where every American pays the same rate regardless of earnings.
During the 2012 Texas GOP Convention, the party decided that the best solution for both the state and federal tax codes is to move towards a consumption-based tax code with the implementation of a flat income tax during the transition from the current system to the new one.
Federal Tax Reform – We recommend repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, with the goal of abolishing the I.R.S and replacing it with a national sales tax collected by the States. In the interim we urge the income tax be changed to a flatter, broader, lower tax with only minimal exemptions such as home mortgage interest deductions.
Permanent Tax Cuts – We urge the income tax, capital gains tax, estate tax, and all other tax reductions be made permanent. The death tax is immoral and should be abolished forever.
Capital Gains Tax – We favor abolishing the capital gains tax.
See the full document here.
The most common argument for the “Fair Tax” is that it would allow the federal government to eliminate burdensome taxes, including the income tax, but would still generate a substantial amount of revenue. People would be taxed based on consumption, and not on income. Therefore, in theory, if consumers take home more of their income they are likely to spend more.
When certain variables are not added to the equation and key factors are not considered the “Fair Tax” lives up to the name. People would take home the full fruits of their labor and everyone, regardless of how much money they make, would pay the same tax rate.
However, not everyone spends the same amount of their income on items that would be taxable under a national sales tax. The people who end up carrying the heaviest tax burden are lower and middle income earners who spend a higher percentage of their income on consumer goods and services compared to wealthier Americans.
According to John T. Harvey, Economics professor at Texas Christian University, the top 20% of Americans spend roughly 62% of their income. Everyone else, in comparison, spends about 87% of their take home.
When you take into consideration the demand per-dollar of income lower and middle class families have, add in an exponentially higher sales tax than what Americans currently pay for state, county, and/or local sales taxes, and then eliminate the Capital Gains Tax completely the Texas GOP supports a severely regressive tax system.
According to the “Fair Tax” website, another incentive to eliminate the IRS and replace it with a national sales tax is that it would put the individual tax burden in the hands of the taxpayer. The less you spend the less you will be taxed. It encourages people to, not only live within their means, but to be thrifty.
The consumption-based tax code is supposed to provide a system that benefits consumers and businesses while strengthening the economy, helping job creation, and bringing in enough revenue for the government to deal with the national deficit and debt. However, if people are encouraged to be frugal then they aren’t spending the extra take home and it won’t help the economy or encourage businesses to hire.
American Jobs – We support a favorable business climate of low taxes and deregulation to encourage capital investment, ensuring retention and creation of American jobs.
The Texas GOP favors a tax system that is business friendly in an effort to attract entrepreneurs and encourage job creation. Would eliminating business taxes be the key solution to getting Americans back to work?
Many economists argue that it isn’t, and that the best job creators are consumers. If consumers are spending then businesses are prospering. Basic law of supply and demand dictates if demand is high then entrepreneurs need to compensate by increasing the supply. In order to increase productivity they would then hire more workers.
If demand is low there is no incentive for businesses to hire. Even if you eliminate every business tax employees are still a cost to any business. If the demand for the worker isn’t there then that is an additional cost employers can and will avoid.
The Texas GOP platform reflects the immense polarization that is keeping this country solidly divided. It proposes unrealistic and sometimes contradictory ideas for how to solve our nation’s biggest problems. We need real solutions that work in both theory and application.
Many voters would agree that we need tax reform, but the system needs to be both fair and pragmatic. We can’t rely on policies that echo partisan talking points without considering what those policies would mean if implemented. We can’t simply go with whatever looks shiny on the surface.






Leave Your Comment →
1 Comment
Eugene Patrick Devany
07.21.2012
The Texas GOP has half the tax reform solution but the other part is a 2% tax on net wealth and a 4% VAT.
Our tax code has been a great experiment in income and wealth distribution. In 1995 the top 10% of the country had 67.8% of the country’s wealth while the bottom 50% shared only 3.6%. By 2010 the bottom share was only 1.1% ($584 billion) – (a 70% loss amounting to $1,333 billion over 15 years). The loss of wealth to the bottom half the country was offset by a 6.7% gain ($3,558 billion) for the top 10%. A wealth gap of this extreme has not been seen in the U.S. since the Great Depression of 1929 (when unemployment was also as bad).
The extreme concentration of wealth is problematic due to the loss of consumer spending which drives the economy and creates jobs. Since the Great Recession of 2008 our economy has been propped up with increased government safety net spending (i.e. food stamps, unemployment, temporary payroll tax relief, etc.) and monetary policy has kept interest rates low. These measures have not revived the economy. They are also not sustainable because we have a tax code that contains $1.1 trillion in annual tax expenditures (“loopholes” that reduce government revenue). The investment class gets subsidy which exceeds the combined cost of Social Security and Medicare now paid for with payroll taxes – a 15% burden on low and middle income workers which did not exist back in 1929.
Today it is worse than 1929 because the payroll taxes add 7 ½% to the cost of each job (business share) and further reduce consumer spending power by 7 ½% (employee share). This 15% tax on jobs is the main reason why the economy is less resilient to recession. Replacing payroll taxes with a 2% net wealth tax (excluding $15,000 cash and retirement funds) would quickly create millions of jobs through increased consumption. Income tax expenditures (“loopholes”) would be unnecessary if the tax rate was lowered to 8% (and capital gains, estate and gift taxes were eliminated). These changes will encourage maximum business investment and complement the healthy negative reinforcement (“use it or lose it”) of the wealth tax.
Completing the perfect tax reform plan would be a 4% value added tax (VAT) on business and an 8% corporate income tax rate for the most competitive business rates in the world. [Foreign profits will return to the U.S. and pass-through rates would be equalized].
Let us know at http://www.TaxNetWealth.com if you can identify a logical, legal or economic reason why this 2-4-8 Tax Blend would not produce a sustainable economic recovery as promised. Otherwise let your representatives in Washington know that the right blend of taxes can create jobs without government spending.
Eugene Patrick Devany, JD, MPA