Will Tax Issue Mortally wound Romeny?

[Torie]

I'm going to have to echo True Federalist, the real liability for Romney is his tax plan. The media will go after him on it once the public starts paying attention and he'll be hammered for responding to them with non-specific platitudes while Obama's is very concrete.

Yes I agree Mittens needs to get more specific on his tax plan. Just saying the revenue lost from cutting rates will be replaced by reduced deductions, is too vague. The "problem" of course is that the big ticket deduction items are just too popular, such as the home mortgage and charitable deduction. Obama of course is vague about a host of stuff too, or just makes ludicrous promises/predictions, or ignores the elephant in the room. That's politics baby.  

As an aside, the first deduction that I would consign to the ash heap of history is the one for state and local taxes. Just why should the Feds subsidize the high taxing states?  It is just bad public policy. An added bonus of exorcising that deduction, is that it would drive Chuck Schumer nuts. What could be better than that?  

[Torie]

I'm going to have to echo True Federalist, the real liability for Romney is his tax plan. The media will go after him on it once the public starts paying attention and he'll be hammered for responding to them with non-specific platitudes while Obama's is very concrete.

Yes I agree Mittens needs to get more specific on his tax plan. Just saying the revenue lost from cutting rates will be replaced by reduced deductions, is too vague. The "problem" of course is that the big ticket deduction items are just too popular, such as the home mortgage and charitable deduction. Obama of course is vague about a host of stuff too, or just makes ludicrous promises/predictions, or ignores the elephant in the room. That's politics baby.  

As an aside, the first deduction that I would consign to the ash heap of history is the one for state and local taxes. Just why should the Feds subsidize the high taxing states?  It is just bad public policy. An added bonus of exorcising that deduction, is that it would drive Chuck Schumer nuts. What could be better than that?  

Cutting any rates on corporations, capital gains or the top tax brackets is the liability, it doesn't really matter which deductions he plans to eliminates. It will look incredibly irresponsible. There is no getting around this for Romney.

Most support cutting rates on C corps, including Dems, and it is not clear if that tax is even progressive (much of it is passed on in the form of higher prices, akin to a regressive sales tax). Whether it is progressive or not, the US has the highest rate in the world, hurting competitiveness. Mittens does not support cutting the already low capital gains rate. So no, it does not look "incredibly irresponsible" to me.

[Torie]

I'm going to have to echo True Federalist, the real liability for Romney is his tax plan. The media will go after him on it once the public starts paying attention and he'll be hammered for responding to them with non-specific platitudes while Obama's is very concrete.

Yes I agree Mittens needs to get more specific on his tax plan. Just saying the revenue lost from cutting rates will be replaced by reduced deductions, is too vague. The "problem" of course is that the big ticket deduction items are just too popular, such as the home mortgage and charitable deduction. Obama of course is vague about a host of stuff too, or just makes ludicrous promises/predictions, or ignores the elephant in the room. That's politics baby.  

As an aside, the first deduction that I would consign to the ash heap of history is the one for state and local taxes. Just why should the Feds subsidize the high taxing states?  It is just bad public policy. An added bonus of exorcising that deduction, is that it would drive Chuck Schumer nuts. What could be better than that?  

Cutting any rates on corporations, capital gains or the top tax brackets is the liability, it doesn't really matter which deductions he plans to eliminates. It will look incredibly irresponsible. There is no getting around this for Romney.

Most support cutting rates on C corps, including Dems, and it is not clear if that tax is even progressive (much of it is passed on in the form of higher prices, akin to a regressive sales tax). Whether it is progressive or not, the US has the highest rate in the world, hurting competitiveness. Mittens does not support cutting the already low capital gains rate. So no, it does not look "incredibly irresponsible" to me.

You're evading the topic at hand: how this will effect Romney's electability.

Torie, why are you ignoring the major public policy institutes on this one? I don't understand how anyone could believe that this plan is feasible, especially if they believe that America is in the middle of a fiscal crisis (I don't).

Why don't you give me a link to one of the public policy institutes to which you refer, and I will read it, and comment?  Fair enough?

As to the electability matter on the lucunae of tax policy, as opposed to the public policy merits, that just bores me, and I find it ludicrously speculative, so no, I don't wish to comment on that. Thanks.

[Torie]

Here you go: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1001628

I find this analysis to be the most credible and least biased. Have at it.

Thanks for taking the effort to link it. I shall.