A Reflection on the 2016 Presidential Candidates I Know About, And What Their Tax Plans Would’ve Done To Me


No worries these two are not the only parties I will be comparing. I will look into the top two LP candidates Austin Petersen and Gary Johnson as well.

Suppose one of the other Republican or Democrat or Libertarian Party Candidates were 45th president…?

Comparing the 2016 Presidential Tax Reform Ideas, I would have to say that most of the GOP options and either of the LP options would have been a better 45th than Trump.

And I can say that as someone who makes roughly $12k per year, the very first thing I notice between the two major parties is a majority of the GOP hopefuls would have been a better 45th than Trump for GOP nominee.

But before this let’s look at what I am predicting will be how Trump changes my tax burden. I am predicting Trump’s tax plan will reduce my federal income tax burden from $2k per year down to $1.5k per year, meaning I will save about $500 annually. Now let’s move on to what the alternatives would have been all like… singling out ordinary individual income, the only income I currently make off my activity in the economy TBH. However I am going to single out the three candidates I have supported, two of which I have to pull from their official sites; Marco Rubio, Austin Petersen and Evan McMullin.

Under Marco’s Tax Plan

Marco Rubio would have reduced income brackets to there only being three of them; 15% and 25% and 35%, meaning I would be in the category wherein my tax burden remained unchanged. This is why I do not agree with Marco on taxes, because what I think we need is a flat tax model in place of current wildly complex tax code.

Under Austin’s Tax Plan

Austin Petersen seemed to be willing to carry on the Rand Paul tax plan of taxing all American incomes 15% equally and raising standard deduction to $15,000 meaning a difference of $9000 for standard deduction, subtracting my current 15% tax burden I would be saving $7.2k every year whether it was Austin Petersen propping this up or Rand Paul. I know both of these were bent on demolishing current tax code and starting over again and I am totally with both there!

Under Evan’s Tax Plan

Evan McMullin had a somewhat better tax plan than Rubio but not nearly as good as Petersen, I believe. He wanted to impose a new tax plan that would only differ from Trump’s by making 33% the highest of three rates rather than 28%.

Who Had the Best?

Assuming that he wanted to import the Rand Paul tax plan into his LP nomination run, Austin gets my nod for best plan of these three (or these four if you factor in the Donald), entirely because whichever of the two got up to implementing it, either way the fiscal benefits would be spectacular.

The 15% flat tax with $15k/yr standard deduction hybrid reform would have been poised to grow the $18 trillion size of America’s economy by 13%, meaning grow it to $20 trillion by creating 4,300,000 new jobs. The downside of the ‘Rand or Austin’ tax plan as I call it is it would add $1 trillion to the national debt, but $750 billion of debt would be avoided by the job creating. But compared to what other adds are going to be, or would have been, made to the national debt by others’ tax plans; the Rand or Austin plan is the least harmful.

As closing, thanks for reading this reflective article and please buy a subscription which is only $1.75/month every month.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s