Warren Buffett isn't a fan of Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan, but
according to William McBride of the Tax Policy Foundation, it would cut Buffett's taxes by at least 38 percent and as much as 51 percent, saving him up to $3.5 million annually.
That's only an estimate, but keep in mind it's not one coming from the political left. Recent directors of the Tax Policy Foundation include the top lobbyist for Koch Industries, George W. Bush's top economic adviser, and John McCain's top economic adviser. And while most people might see these numbers as a disqualifying feature of Cain's plan, McBride defends it:
Cain's plan is about reducing taxes on saving and investment, so it is inevitable that a famously tight-fisted saver and investor like Warren Buffett would receive a big tax cut. I'm pretty sure Cain is not doing this because he likes Buffett in particular or millionaires in general. Rather, Cain is pursuing straight forward economic logic that says low taxes on saving and investing are particularly conducive for long term growth. Essentially, it is the same reason that personal investment advisors recommend saving and investing, rather than blowing one's income on SUVs and fancy clothes. So, a sound tax code would not penalize the savers of the world nearly as much as ours currently does. These savers likely include Warren Buffett.
Of course the problem is that if you cut Warren Buffett's taxes, you're going to have to raise somebody else's in order to raise the same amount of revenue. That's something Cain himself acknowledged over the weekend when he said his plan would raise taxes on some middle-class and poor people.
Indeed, to pay for Buffett's $3.5 million tax cut, you'd need to find 3,500 families to pay $1,000 more each year. That's such an absurd proposition, it makes 99:1 look like communism by comparison. But based on the polls, you have to assume that Republicans think it's a fair deal. Either that or they don't have a clue about what Herman Cain's plan would really do.