How do you determine if the Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page is right about Herman Cain's "9-9-9" plan?
A middle income household making between $64,000 and $110,000 would get hit with an average tax increase of about $4,300, the center says. That would increase its average federal tax rate (including income, payroll, estate and its share of the corporate income tax) from 18.8 percent to 23.7 percent.
That could have a particularly painful impact on women, since Cain's proposal would eliminate the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit. Both offer tax breaks to lower-income earners who tend to be female.
Read this column by the Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page and you get the impression that Herman Cain's ""9-9-9" plan is a real slam to the real middle class taxpayer.
The above figures from his column certainly says that many in the middle would end up paying $4,300 more each year in federal taxes.
His plan is deceptively simple. It rolls off the tongue nice and on some levels in makes sense.
But, it doesn't seem to add up. Does anybody have evidence to the contrary?
Even if he won, getting plan like that through the U.S. Congress would have to be categorized as an impossibility.
What am I missing with this perceived attraction to Cain? Is it just because he's a business guy?