Video

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is seeking to jump-start his Republican presidential campaign by proposing a new tax system: a 20 percent flat rate on individual and corporate income, down from the current 35 percent top rate, and elimination of existing taxes on estates, capital gains and dividends. He sat down with John Harwood of The Times and CNBC to discuss the plan, his challenge to a Republican rival, Mitt Romney, and other issues. What follows is a condensed, edited transcript of their conversation.

Q.

Your plan — by cutting the top rate to 20 percent, eliminating dividends and capital gains taxes, would provide a huge tax cut to wealthy people. Given what’s happened with income inequality, why is that a good idea?

A.

We’re trying to get this country working again. And that’s what I focus on. We went through what are the ways to really give incentives to those that are going to risk their capital to create the jobs. Those that want to get into the class warfare and talk about, oh my goodness, there are going to be some folks here who make more money out of this, or have access to more money, I’ll let them do that.

Q.

But for those at the top, it is hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions of dollars for them.

A.

But I don’t care about that. What I care about is them having the dollars to invest in their companies. To go out and maybe start a business because they got the confidence again because they actually get to keep more of what they work for. If that’s what comes, I’ll take that criticism. Because what I’m interested in is getting Americans working.

Q.

Do you fundamentally believe we should not have a progressive tax system in this country?

A.

I do. I think you need to have a tax system that basically is flat, fair and simple. And that you can put on a postcard. Americans, I hope, aspire to be wealthy.

Q.

In 1996, when your adviser Steve Forbes was running on a flat tax, Mitt Romney said it was a tax cut for fat cats. If he says that about your plan, what are you going to say to him?

A.

Well, I would say that he ought to go look in the mirror, I guess. I consider him to be a fat cat. I consider what Mitt’s doing kind of nibbling around the edges. I consider what we’re doing bold.

Q.

Even if your plan increases growth, that’s going to take time. Year one, year two, you’re going to blow a huge hole in the deficit, right?

A.

I don’t think it does. The budget deficit needs to be addressed through a number of ways. We think this will balance the budget by 2020. And you’ve got to have some hard cuts. You’ve got to deal with the entitlement issue. I’m looking long term. I’m looking to get this country back on track. If you’re looking for somebody that’s going to nibble around the edges, if you’re looking for somebody that’s going to say, “Hey listen we’re not going to make it hard on you, it’s all going to work it out, and it’s just, you know, kumbaya,” I’m not your guy.

Q.

You would raise the retirement age for Social Security, and also limit the benefit calculation for high earners. How much do you have to make before your benefits are reduced in that way? How high would you raise the retirement age?

A.

I’m not ready to give some hard numbers on that one. But those are the types of thoughtful debates that we need to be having with Congress.

Q.

Why did you choose to keep the birther issue alive?

A.

It’s a good issue to keep alive. You know, Donald [Trump] has got to have some fun. It’s fun to poke him a little bit and say “Hey, let’s see your grades and your birth certificate.” I don’t have a clue about where the president — and what this birth certificate says. But it’s also a great distraction. I’m not distracted by it.

Q.

In the last debate, what were you thinking when Mitt Romney put his hand on you?

A.

I wasn’t giving a thought to it.

Q.

You have this proposal to dramatically cut taxes for people at the top and you want to repeal Dodd-Frank, going back to the old system of regulation of Wall Street. How would you explain that to Occupy Wall Street? You think the previous regulation on Wall Street was adequate?

A.

Yes, absolutely, I think it was adequate. We had a bunch of regulators that weren’t doing their job. Here’s what I would tell those young people — the old Churchill saying, you’re a liberal in your heart when you’re 20, and you’re a conservative when you’re 40. I hope what they will see is that America’s a fabulous country and it gives them the opportunity to go say your piece, go protest on the street. But at the end of the day America’s about having the opportunity to take care of your family.

Q.

If a member of the Tea Party in South Carolina says, “I’m trying to take care of my family. Why are you giving millions of dollars in tax cuts for people at the top?” What do you say to them?

A.

I say to them that we want those people at the top to be investing in this country so that you have a chance to have a job. Because that’s the way this country has always worked.