Is it that he's just sure that, on principle, he can net-net cut taxes for everyone, or that he just doesn't know what sort of cuts and deduction changes he will propose, or that he's afraid if he gets specific then people will get angry with him?
'Mr. Romney’s tax proposal is built on three central pillars. He has pledged that he will cut all of the marginal tax rates by 20 percent — so the top tax rate would fall to 28 percent from 35 percent, and the bottom tax rate would fall to 8 percent from 10 percent. That by itself would reduce the government’s revenue by hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
Second, Mr. Romney has promised that his plan will be “revenue neutral,” meaning it would pay for those rate reductions by clearing out the underbrush of loopholes and credits in the tax code.'
Romney's tax plan is a lot like his tax returns — to be taken on faith.
Embedded Link
Romney’s Tax Plan Leaves Key Variables Blank – Washington Memo
Mitt Romney has pledged to cut individual income tax rates for everyone, but he has provided few specifics, confounding analysts and leaving himself open to attack from Democrats.
Google+: View post on Google+
He probably doesn't want to reveal the loopholes he is going after because it would piss folks off… I'm guessing that Mortgage interest is probably a big one.
Well, it seems that's one place where he's said (maybe kinda) he won't touch things. But, then, I trust sort of vague handwaving for this sort of thing to continue into solid policy proposals down the line.
The big three are mortgage interest, education interest, and children, which would hit the most people.
Follow that up with capital loses, depreciation, and tax-deferred savings as probably the next biggest personal loopholes.
Things will get interesting fast if they start messing with those.
Charitable deductions are another biggy.
And that's the problem — these widely used "loopholes" / deductions are very popular (duh) and often serve useful purposes (which is why they were put in). Screwing around with them is going to be unpopular … which gets back to not wanting to tick off the electorate. As long as Mitt focuses on evil and wasteful loopholes without being specific, he thinks he can be the good cop, not the bad cop.
If he’s so desperate to cut the deficit, why not close the loopholes THEN see if you can afford to cut taxes?
@LH – Because the GOP is not out to cut the deficit as much as it is out to cut taxes. The deficit provides cover.
I did the math on the mortgage interest credit, if they eliminate it entirely, then lower my tax rate to 25%, I almost break even with what I pay now with the deduction, but only because I hit some caps in the current system.
where the 10%/25% lines are drawn will make a huge difference in effective tax rates in the plan. Honestly, I'm intrigued, but would really like more information about the details.
The other question is what happens to leftover, unallowed losses? I've got a lot (more than I'd like to publicly admit) of built up unallowed losses that I'd be kind of annoyed if they were wiped out by a new plan.
I know! Its like when a business says ‘Efficiency’ – they always mean less people, not more done.
Mortgage Interest Relief was abolished here over a decade ago. Not sure why I should get the government giving me tax back at the expense of my stepson and daughter in law, who rent.