Paul Ryan’s tax plan would reduce Mitt Romney’s effective tax rate to something under 1%, saving Romney several million dollars a year.
Author: Mark Kleiman
Professor of Public Policy at the NYU Marron Institute for Urban Management and editor of the Journal of Drug Policy Analysis. Teaches about the methods of policy analysis about drug abuse control and crime control policy, working out the implications of two principles: that swift and certain sanctions don't have to be severe to be effective, and that well-designed threats usually don't have to be carried out. Books: Drugs and Drug Policy: What Everyone Needs to Know (with Jonathan Caulkins and Angela Hawken) When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment (Princeton, 2009; named one of the "books of the year" by The Economist Against Excess: Drug Policy for Results (Basic, 1993) Marijuana: Costs of Abuse, Costs of Control (Greenwood, 1989) UCLA Homepage Curriculum Vitae Contact: Markarkleiman-at-gmail.com View all posts by Mark Kleiman
2 thoughts on “The payoff”
I wouldn’t be so sure about that. I’ve been following the published analysis of Mitt’s taxes pretty closely and I’m not sure that a 1% effective Federal tax rate would actually be a meaningful improvement. I think it’s possible that he doesn’t pay any state or federal income tax and may actually be looking to claim a refund for 2010 and 2011. Not snark, using what we know about the Marriott and IRA deals, I think it’s a distinct possibility.
As I noted on the Saletan thread, it’s quite possible Romney’s taxes would have been not 1% but zero under Ryan’s tax plan.
Comments are closed.