You choose, we deliver
If you are interested in this story, you might be interested in others from The Journal Gazette. Go to www.journalgazette.net/newsletter and pick the subjects you care most about. We'll deliver your customized daily news report at 3 a.m. Fort Wayne time, right to your email.

Editorial columns

  • Cyberspace demands one-world vision
    At some point in the not-too-distant future, for the first time in the history of the world, almost everyone on the planet will become part of a single, man-made system.
  • A rotten first bite of Apple
    Apple is best known for the brilliance of its technological wizardry. But when Senate investigators finish examining its financial practices, the electronics giant may be best known for its brilliance in legal tax avoidance.
  • Import of holiday brightly illuminated
    It was dark as I left the house before dawn to head across town to exercise at a local high school.
Advertisement

Romney’s tax plan just isn’t adding up

For several weeks, we’ve been asking Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to explain how he can cut taxes, as promised, without adding to the nation’s debt, as also promised. Now he’s effectively let the cat out of the bag: He can’t.

Romney’s tax plan calls for reducing income tax rates by 20 percent. The top bracket would go from 35 percent to 28 percent. He has said that he can do this in a revenue-neutral way by eliminating loopholes.

There are a couple of pitfalls here. The first is that while closing loopholes sounds good, the costliest ones are cherished by most Americans. These are tax provisions that promote home ownership, charitable giving, and employer-provided health care and that allow taxpayers to deduct their state and local income taxes. Limiting or eliminating these would be extremely difficult.

The second obstacle, as shown by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, is that Romney’s plan is mathematically impossible. Take away every deduction from every wealthy household, and you still couldn’t make up the revenue the government would lose by reducing rates without raising taxes on middle-class households.

Not so, Romney protested recently, and cited an analysis by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein. Feldstein said the math could work – if you took away every deduction from every household earning $100,000 or more. (Even then, he couldn’t pay for the estate tax abolition Romney also favors, but never mind.) Is that what Romney has in mind? If not, what is his plan?

On Friday, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos put the question to the candidate. “No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less,” Romney replied.

But then, the Harvard study shows, the math can’t work. His answer? “The biggest source of getting the country to a balanced budget is not by raising taxes or by cutting spending,” he said. “It’s by encouraging the growth of the economy.”

In other words, we are back to counting on magic – the voodoo economics of the Reagan era, the wishful thinking of George W. Bush’s tax cuts that helped turn a surplus into the deficit now weighing the nation’s economy. Cut taxes and hope the economy grows faster than predicted.

When the nation is already on course to build up a debt so large that interest payments alone will begin to drown us, Romney wants to reduce taxes further, with – it now appears – no plan to make up the difference. It almost takes your breath away.

Advertisement