On Monday, the Tax Policy Center published an analysis of Newt Gingrich’s plan to overhaul the tax code — the latest in a series of of analyses of GOP presidential candidate tax proposals. And like all the plans that came before it, Gingrich’s constitutes a massive tax cut for the rich. Indeed, no matter how you stack the numbers, Gingrich wants a tax system that permanently holds tax rates on the highest earners lower than tax rates on the middle class.
There are a lot of ways to parse the data. Gingrich proposes creating an alternative tax system that would significantly flatten the code, while keeping the current one in place as an option. So you can run the numbers assuming everybody jumps into the new system, or you can run them assuming that the only people who hop into the new system are people who would benefit financially as a result. And you can compare Gingrich’s plan to current tax policy — including the Bush tax cuts and other temporary tax policy — or you can compare it to current law, which assumes all of these policies will expire in the next year, and go up on just about everyone.
To be as fair as possible, let’s take Gingrich at his word that he would extend the Bush tax cuts for those staying in the current system, and that the only people who would opt into the new system are those who would pay lower taxes as a result.
Here’s what happens to people’s average federal tax burden as a result.
Aside from a quirk that would result in the super poor paying a slightly higher average tax rate than the merely impoverished, Gingrich’s plan takes a broadly progressive approach for most taxpayers. But look what happens just past middle-class territory. Somewhere above $200,000 annual income, the average rates max out, and taxpayers begin paying a smaller percentage of their income than those less fortunate. It’s like codifying the problem President Obama’s “Buffett Rule” was meant to solve.
This is true regardless of your assumptions about the Bush tax cuts and the likelihood that lower and middle-income people would transfer into the new program. Unlike Herman Cain, whose 9-9-9 plan was nearly popular enough among GOP base voters for him to withstand a number of allegations of sexual misconduct, Gingrich is not proposing to raise taxes on middle income. His plan is broadly comparable to Rick Perry’s. Both are designed in essence to create a separate tax code for “the one percent,” under which they’ll get huge tax cuts (for a funny illustration of this, see here). It’s no surprise then that the Gingrich plan, like Perry’s, would starve the federal government of revenues and require either massive, unspecified cuts to essential federal support programs, or else hasten a fiscal crisis.
Per the Tax Policy Center, “The Gingrich plan would reduce federal tax revenues dramatically. TPC estimates that on a static basis, the Gingrich plan would lower federal tax liability by $1.28 trillion in calendar year 2015 compared with current law, roughly a 35 percent cut in total projected revenue. Relative to a current policy baseline, the reduction in liability would be roughly $850 billion in calendar year 2015. If taxpayers were required to file under the flat tax option (that is, they could not opt to remain under current tax law), revenues in 2015 would fall by about $1.25 trillion relative to a current law baseline and by about $830 billion relative to a current policy baseline.”
Brian Beutler
Brian Beutler is TPM's senior congressional reporter. Since 2009, he's led coverage of health care reform, Wall Street reform, taxes, the GOP budget, the government shutdown fight, and the debt limit fight. He can be reached at brian@talkingpointsmemo.com.
Newt
Gingrich and his fourth vow of no infidelity sounds about as truthful as Jerry Sandusky’s claims of being innocent of shower misbehavior, Larry Craig’s toe tapping incident or Ted Haggard’s missteps……….in all of these men, there is strong evidence their dicks have no conscience and if an opportunity arose, they would put employ their turgid pudenda for self gratification.
He was guilty of 80 or 90 ethics violations while speaker and was only fined for one offense and resigned in disgrace………why give this lying loser another chance to prove he is unfit?..........He’ll burn out on Calista in three or four months or less and go getting blow jobs in car seats and be horizontally refreshed on his desk top.
Hey you gave the lying whoreing Billy Clinton a second term. I thought you libs were all about forgiveness, redemption and giving everyone a chance to rehab and improve their act. Doesnt matter what is said here, Mr. Newt will win the nomination and whip the child man in the general anyway. The more we hear the left wail about Newt's sins and the Old boy right cry he's too erratic the more we know HE"S OUR MAN!!
We have the greatest inequality between rich and poor since the Glided Age. It led to speculation and a Depression. Republicans would make the balance between the have and have nots worse. What Planet are they on?
So the Dems would just redistribute wealth and make every thing rosey huh? Like the food stamp, its a recession, depression I didnt know how bad it was President is doing??
Flat tax plan from the flat earth society.
Since when have Republicans been concerned about deficits?
JohnPidaras When a Democrat is in the White House.
Not since the threw Newt out
We need a new tax structure. 0-10K pays 5%, 10K-30K pays 10%, 30K-50K pays 15%, 50K-100K pays 20%, 100k-500K pays 25%, 500K and up pays 30%. Flat tax absolutely no deductions, all based on income.corp profits.
Don Carrigan That's not a flat tax.
Don Carrigan Okay, and then what would happen is that the corporate officers would receive more salary resulting in lower, or no, profits for the corporation. Else, how can anyone expect less than 10k for corporate income?
HiJack Dude, for one thing, you do know that taxes are paid out of the compensation paid to the worker, and whether the Income tax rises or falls it represents no additional cost to the company, right?
Second, American "corporate Officers" as you put it already recieve far higher income relative to the ground floor worker compared with everywhere else on the planet outside of the third world, and that's what sucks corporate profits out of the company.
Really, you must be addicted to the feel of your teeth on your toes.
With inequality in income and political power now a central political issue because of us in the 99% movement, this tax plan to help the 1% is a perfect issue with which Democrats can nail Gingrich to the wall.
We need a tax code that is based not just on income levels, but takes into account the fact that the Average American also pays taxes other than federal income tax. I would like to offer an alternative to anything currently proposed by any party.
First, Taxes on the wealthy with personal incomes over $250K per year and corporations would be progressive, starting at 40% and going up to 50% depending on level of income. They would be given only 5 deductions which would max out at 10% of their tax liability, and would force them to invest in this country if they wanted the lower tax rates which would then be reduced to the 30% to 40% range. Taxes on corporations which have net revenues under $5 million, would be treated like private citizens in how the tax code would be applied.
Second, while SS, Medicare, and a new Children's Security Fund deductions (which would total no more than 8% combined) would remain for the rest of us, our federal income tax would be set at a flat 15% and phased out over a period of 5 years until we no longer paid federal INCOME taxes.
Third, as the personal income taxes phased out, a state union fee equal to each state's GROSS revenues from all sources times the percentage of the US population in each state would phase in. This means that all the other taxes you pay, such as property taxes, state income taxes, sales taxes, business taxes, etc. would not be double taxes, only one time taxes to you. Since these are tax rates and issues that can either remain the same or be adjusted by the states where citizen input is greatest, as citizens you would have greater say in how you are taxed.
Running the numbers (and I must admit that I do not have numbers more current than 2009) shows that in the next few years as the transition would take place in the phase out/in of different taxes, we would generate the most income, and after that there would be a reduction, but this would allow the government to restructure, return many current operations to state levels where they are more effective and efficiently handled or are state specific, and therefore, we would need less money at the federal level and those who profit from investing or doing business across state lines or international borders and who would individually benefit most from federal services and laws are carrying a fairer share of the financial burden. Of course, such a policy is sane and simple common sense and math, but it will never see the light of day unless someone who will fight for it gets into Congress and the White House.
VOTE FOR AMERICA IN 2012!
http://www.weeeevoteamerica2012.org
http://www.devonnollforpresident2012.org
Follow my videos on YouTube or get updates through Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Thanks.
devon.noll Just some thoughts on your plan there and I will say right off that I'm not interested in protracted discussion on this issue, but: for one the wealthiest will not tolerate being a tax structure that makes them pay more than anyone else, they will have to be forced to do it and as long as they control and are the political class, forget it.
Secondly, I don't see the "state union fee" as being a progressive tax and also see that as an in-run to state corruption. Also, I don't know how that would pull us through in the long haul absent a broad progressive tax.
Gee, what a surprise.
Why is this news? Are we supposed to be suprised?...I know, you miss Herman Cain...You just want to fill up your web site to cover the grief...Go ahead...Let it all out...Heres a tissue...Dont worry though, I'm sure Newton Leroy is a bigger nazi than Cain, which will thrill the base of his party, But is he self centered enough?...Wow, thats a tough one...Perry is dumb enough for the base, but he might have a problem washing himself with the blood of poor children...Oh, the base will never except that.... But really though, I thought repubs wanted someone with at least a snowballs chance to beat Barack in a general election. Oh well, you cant believe a word they say anyway.
jcal44 As I've said before, ANYBODY can beat Obama. The guy is a total failure a la Carter. God help us if he gets re-elected, which would only happen if those 57 states are allowed to vote for his worthless ass. I wonder, how does anybody stand in the middle of Kansas and refer to the locals as Texans? Time, after time, after time this guy doesn't know what he's talking about. And don't get me started on Biden who's been safely tucked away and protected by his gaffe-infected brain.
HiJackjcal44 Lay off the stimulants man and take a breath, look at yourself in the mirror and then meditate.
Yeah Hijack is way out there huh? Not like the lib who posted before him calling Cain a Nazi, the Rep base dumb and spoke about candidates washing themselves in the bolld of children. Yeah we better watch out for Hijack who id only citing what the pols say about Carter and Obama. Keep drinking the Koolaide. Obama is done!
HiJackjcal44 Haha, good one Jack. So what's gonna happen to you and your kind when, despite your best attempts at fudging everything and flinging as much sh#t as you can muster, you still can't beat him? What's gonna happen when Obama is reelected - are you all going to finally lose it? 'Cause you're all teetering over the edge already, and the suspense is killing me.
kunda311HiJackjcal44 The only way Obama get reelected is through voter fraud, like the first time /However ACORN may not be as active as before and many of the people who were duped by him are awake now. Nope its one and done!
HiJack See, I can't tell if these people actually believe this tripe or whether they just just compulsively toe the party line. He is very convincing. The depth of the disillusionment is stunning, I mean really stunning. I am always waiting for the right wing pols and pundits to say the next most unbelievable thing and that maybe it will snap these people out of their suspended reality, but when the next ludicrous statement is made, they just osmote it and make it part of their vocabulary.
Stunning, just stunning.
ItsallaboutthemoneyHiJack Everyone knows that 2 + 2 = 5 and that we've always been at war with Eurasia.
Didnt yu hear the announcement "we are not at war with Eurasia" What is wrong with you!
HiJack If ANYBODY can beat Obama, then why do the polls in red states like South Carolina and Florida show Obama beating both "Multi-choice" Mitt and the Newtster?
Surely a well-informed "deep thinker" such as yourself can help us sort out this anomaly. Or not.
Joe WilkinsHiJack Please don't burst Jack's bubble, especially when's in the bath.
Joe Wilkins Let's wait until next fall to see what the polls say. By then, the economy will be so bad that even Hillary might think about running as a write-in.
HiJackJoe Wilkins Except that the reports that I heard on the news today sounded like things were going well with Christmas season sales -- up considerably over last year. Too bad for all of you hoping for economic failure.
HiJackJoe Wilkins I would vote for Hillary over Obama. at least she has shown she can be trusted (more than her husband and Obama).
She has a backbone and will stand up to the Tea party and the Repugs.
HiJackJoe Wilkins More like you desperately hope that Hillary, or any other Democrat, does that to draw votes away from Obama. Because you know that's the only way a Republican is going to win.
The GOP's master plan was to wreck the economy and blame it on Obama. The problem is, the American people noticed. They know your party is actually to blame.
Yep I never thought that I'd think Hilla the hun would look like a good thing. I bet theres a fix in anyway to get her in there somehow. Did you see Obama taking credit for the Iraq war today? The war he called stupid, didnt vote for, claimed was lost and voted against the surge on! What audacity!
OOh wait.....that was his book, Audacity of hope, No hope here just the old bait and switch!! What a hypocrite!!
What she has shown is that after over 30 infidelities she would stay with a scoundrel just to get a chance to run for the Presidency herself. If not for the afirmative action President she would have succeeded. Just in....... Obama's rating among Americans is down 31% Newt is at 40% Gee thats so stange, cause everyone says Newt will lose
jcal44 Yep, not a single refutation. Just drivel. Par.
HiJackjcal44 I saw that speech in Kansas, and he made it clear he was ribbing another speaker who had made that mistake of calling it Texas (which in itself is a perfectly understandable flub).
I really wish the 57 state meme would die too. I saw that one as well, and it was clear from context that he was referring to the 57 contests in the democratic primary (there are more contests than states).
I know you're just trolling and I'm wasting my time. Oh well.
wickning1jcal44 That's right, but the fact is that he can't say it correctly without a friggin' teleprompter. The guy is lost without it as if he can't think for himself and others have to do the thinking, and the writing, for him. He's great at delivering a speech when he's reading it, but take away his teleprompter and he's a driveling idiot. Unless he's angry. Then we get to see the real Barry.
wickning1jcal44 By the way, it would be easier and more honest to simply admit that he meant to say 47 states according to the context. He was tired, certainly, but there are tons of gaffes that he has committed and hardly anyone notices. But have W or Palin screw up and it's major headlines.
HiJackwickning1jcal44 I would like you to get up in front of the nation and all those nasty journalist (on both sides) and not make a small mistake. I was young and got up in front of 30 parents and had to adlib because another student forget his lines. It wasn't earth shaking or important but I was able to somehow carry it off. I have also addressed 40-50 people in a classroom situation and didn't flub anything (I knew what I was talking about) however I was successful as the students learned from what I was teaching. I would be in shock addressing the nation and I would flub things no matter how well I knew it. Can you say the same?
HiJackwickning1jcal44 Funny how there's allegedly a ton of gaffes, but you can never come up with them.
<span id="user_2" class="namespace reply lf" uid="e2206b9053d899b9@talkingpointsmemo.fyre.co" user_name="HiJack" screen_name="undefined" provider="lf" jid="e2206b9053d899b9@talkingpointsmemo.fyre.co" ns="true"><span class="namespace-reply" ns="true">HiJack<label ns="true">.</label></span></span> That's right, but the fact is that he can't say it correctly without a friggin' teleprompter. The guy is lost without it as if he can't think for himself and others have to do the thinking, and the writing, for him.
<p> </p>
<p>Sure, that's why he was able to stand up before the entire GOP caucus without notes or a teleprompter on live TV in January 2009. And the entire GOP caucus could not out debate the guy. It was so humiliating for the GOP that FOX NEWS had to cut the feed 2/3 of the way through. And I didn't notice the teleprompters when he was debating John McCain either.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Seriously, all you have to justify your hatred is IMAGENING the guy is an idiot against all avalible evidence to the contrary. Now make Sarah Palin wear gloves, that's when you see a real idiot...</p>
Sorry about the above everyone. I have no idea how all that HTML stuff got into the message.
Hijack , dont tell them but the press is dead in America. Its just a propaganda arm for the Dems or anyone else that hates the US. The way they (CNN Commie News Network, MSNBS, Mostly slanted news by communists and NBC nothing but crap) operate is disgraceful.
HiJackjcal44 Tell your story to Osama Bin Laden. AKA Fish Food. He might enjoy it.
turnaroundjcal44 Yep, that's right. Stopped-clock Barry. The only time he's right is by default.
HiJack "As I've said before, ANYBODY can beat Obama."
Well its a pity that ANYBODY isn't running then, isn't it? Instead all you've got is EVERYBODY, SOMEBODY, NOBODY, WHATABODY and WHEREISEVERYBODY.
I'm shocked!
Mr. Koch, would you PLEASE PLEASE buy me the White House? PLEASE....
Hey you just reminded me Ed Koch just endorsed Newt!! Buy the WH , dont you mean Mr. SOROS??
If his name didn't sound so much like the Grinch, I'd swear he would be called Newt Scrooge. True enough, Scrooge was too miserly for wife-cheating and Tiffany's credit. But he'd love Newt's tax policy, and his other schemes. Work for school kids. Ghettos without adequate food for people who didn't grow up rich. I'm waiting for Scrooge to appear at the next Republican debate -- and maybe become the new front runner, for he'd be no more delusional than the other GOP crew that's running.

Newt would slash taxes for the rich? Wow. In related news, rain is wet.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like