Businessman Herman Cain was on Fox News Sunday this weekend with Chris Wallace discussing his “999” tax plan aimed at creating jobs and growing the economy. Wallace strongly questioned Cain on the specifics of his plan and whether the numbers match economic reality. Here is Cain’s entire interview:

Report from MEDIAITE:

Presidential candidate Herman Cain defended his “999? economic proposal on Fox News Sunday today to Chris Wallace, who asked the candidate to name which economists supported his plan and who he wants the tax burden to be placed on in his plan.

Cain argued that the plan was, truly, not just his, pointing out “I had some of the best economists in the country help me develop this plan.” He explained that they analyzed government revenues collected from income taxes, corporate taxes, capital gains taxes, etc., and asked how much we would need to reduce in order to balance the budget. Yet despite Cain’s claim that he had noted economists working on the plan with him, Wallace pointed out no one is specifically mentioned on Cain’s website.

After some prodding by Wallace, Cain explained, “I’m not at liberty to mention their names,” adding that he doesn’t want “to compromise their confidentiality.” Wallace wondered if it was such a great plan, why would none of these economists be willing to let Cain mention their names publicly?


  1. Chris Wallace doesn’t seem to understand that everybody that has earned income pays a payroll tax of 15.30% (7.65 by payroll deductions and a 7.65% hidden tax paid by the employer which is essentially paid by the employee also.) So 9% income tax is less than 15.30%. Now if they spend every dime and save nothing, then it could be argued it would be higher.

  2. Generally I like Mr Cain’s plan as far as I’ve thought it through. However, there are some exceptional circumstances that need to be addressed. Does it really work for those? Even a 3% increase in taxes can be too much. Let me give you my example: (Short version) Single Mom with severely mentally and physically handicapped adult son is forced to quit her full time job and care for son full time due to increasing medical complications. Son’s disability payments are at the low end because he is home with a relative (Federal and State rules – apparently the government and state would rather have taxpayers spending high 6 digit dollars by forcing people like him into group homes with 24 hour nurses and/or into institutions with huge full time medical staffing). Mom is forced into a State run in home care program at a very low wage because she has no help from family or friends. This is a fixed income. Every penny is spent on essentials including many items for medical purposes that aren’t covered by insurance. She barely drives anywhere except to go grocery shopping and take son to numerous doctor appointments and a few of her own. At 9 and 9, and spending every penny on essentials she would be paying 3% more in taxes unless there are some kind of deductions for such exceptional circumstances such as medical & dental expenses and the like. With rising cost of water, property tax, property insurance, auto insurance, gas and this person is headed for trouble on a fixed income that keeps getting cut by the state.

    Where does this person stand?

  3. I am 45 years old. I’ve worked a full time job since I was 15. I am Unmarried with one grown son, out on his own. Frankly, I for one am tired of never hearing about any kind of tax cuts for the Unmarried mid 25 to late 45 age group. We pay exhorbant taxes with no deductions unless you own a home and not all of us want a house and may have to live in a apartment for various reasons. Why are we not able to deduct our rents or at least half of it. Why can’t we diduct more of our expenses like married people. What do each of you plan to do for the unmentiond millions of singles in America who work hard and pay more than their fair share of taxes?

Comments are closed.