Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
JEC Macroeconomic Conference RETURN TO PROSPERITY: CREATING THE STRONGEST ECONOMY OF THE 21ST CENTURY Presentation of Stephen J. Entin Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation February 23, 2010 IRET • 1710 Rhode Island Ave., NW, 11th floor, Washington, DC 20036 (202) 463-1400 • www.iret.org Policy Targets And Policy Tools Two Policy Targets: Stable Prices And A Sound Dollar Vibrant Economy -- High Real Output, Income, Employment Two Policy Weapons: Monetary Policy (Federal Reserve) – Best Used To Keep Prices Stable Fiscal Policy -- Taxes & Govt. Spending (Congress, Mainly) – Can Facilitate Growth If Used Properly Reversing The Roles Leads To Trouble Two Strategies: Shoot The Right Weapon At The Right Target And You Might Hit Both. Shoot The Shotgun At The Elephant And The Elephant Gun At The Quail And You Will Get Gored And Go Hungry. Policy Assignments: Nixon/Ford/Carter Years: Set Monetary Policy To Promote Real Growth And Reduce Unemployment With Easy Money While ... Congress Spent Like Crazy And Let Inflation Raise Taxes, Growing The Public Sector And Restricting The Private Sector. Result: Stagflation. Kennedy/Reagan/Clinton(Gingrich) Years: Set Monetary Policy To Promote Stable Prices While ... Congress Restrained Spending To Shrink The Public Sector And Cut Taxes In A Pro-Growth Manner. Result: Strong Private Sector Growth Without Inflation. Inflation, Unemployment, And Interest Rates, 1965 - 1988 12 P e r c e n t GNP Price Deflator * 10 10.8 10.0 (Percent Change from Year Earlier) 8 5.7 6 5.7 4 3.7 4.1 2 3.6 3.0 0 1965 2.1 1970 1975 1980 1985 1988 P e r c e n t 12 10.8 Civilian Unemployment Rate ** 10 9.0 8 5.7 6 4.6 4 5.3 3.4 2 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 18 P e r c e n t 16 3-Month Treasury Bill Rate ** 15.5 1985 1988 16.3 14 12 10.5 10 8.8 7.9 8 8.1 6 7.0 4 2 0 1965 7.1 5.2 4.4 3.5 3.2 1970 1975 1980 1985 1988 Does Fiscal Policy Have Demand Effects? The Keynesian Focus On Managing Demand Is Misguided According To Friedman. Tax Cuts And Govt Spending Do Not Stimulate Demand, Because The Govt Must Fund Them Through Borrowing OrOffsetting Taxes/Spending Cuts. With Rare Exceptions, Govt Spending Takes Resources From The Private Sector And Shrinks Real Output By Putting Them To Inferior Uses. Tax Cuts Don't Work By Giving People Money To Spend (Raising "Disposable Income" Or "Aggregate Demand"). Unless Matched By Spending Cuts, The Tax Cuts Are Borrowed Back By The Treasury. If The Federal Reserve Buys The Added Debt With New Money, Demand Will Rise, But The Likely Effect Is Higher Prices, Not Higher Output. Or Must We Rely On Incentives To Supply? Tax Cuts Can Boost Output By Creating Incentives To Produce; Only Those Tax Cuts That Affect These Incentives Have A Pro-Growth Effect. Tax Cuts That Simply Redistribute Income Do Not Increase Work, Saving, Or Investment; They Do Not Increase Employment, Productivity, Output, Or Income. They Probably Reduce Them By Rewarding Non-Work. Tax Cuts That Improve After-Tax Rewards At The Margin For Additional Work, Saving, Investment, Production, Raise Output, Employment, Income. There Are No "First Order Income Effects" From A Tax Cut. A Tax Cut Raises Income Only As It Encourages Supply. As Supply Increases, People Get Paid For Their Productive Services, And Only Then Does Demand Rise. (Says' Law, Not Keynes' Claptrap). Price Imposition Of A Tax Supply (With Tax) Supply (No Tax) Reduction in Value of Economic Output = E1 Pc Loss to Consumer Tax E0 + P0 Loss to Producer Pp Resources Redirected to other Activities Q1 Q0 Demand Quantity Laffer Curve Government revenue maximized, but tax rate too high because it's hurting growth. Tax Revenue B Optimum tax rate: value of government services equals revenue and growth costs that taxes impose on society. 0% A Normal Range C Prohibitive Range Tax Rate Tax rate much too high. It's hurting growth and lowering government revenue. 100% Tax Increases Reduce Economic Activity Long Before They Reduce Tax Revenues A Dollars Economic Output B Optimal Tax Rate 0% Revenue Maximizing Tax Rate Govt Revenues Tax Rate 100% Effect of Tax On Labor Wage Labor Supply Gross Wage Marginal Product of Labor (Demand) Tax Net Wage Drop in Labor L1 MPL would rise if labor had more capital to work with, and fall if capital formation lagged. L0 Hours Worked Effect of Tax On Desired Capital Stock Return to Capital Gross Return Tax Required Return to Capital (Supply) Net Return Drop in Capital Marginal Product of Capital (Demand) K1 K0 Desired Amount of Capital Wage A Smaller Stock Of Capital Reduces Wages Labor Supply W0 MPL (K0) W1 MPL (K1) N1 N0 Employment Taxing Capital Hurts Labor Labor Bears The Economic Burden When Taxes Drive Capital Offshore Or Discourage It From Existing At All. Taxing Income Used For Consumption Instead Of “Haig-Simons Income” Would Raise After-Tax Wages And GDP. A 10% Rise In GDP And Wages Would Benefit Workers And Families More Than Misc. Tax Credits And Govt Jobs. Marginal Vs. Average Tax Rates Income = $50 K. Desired Tax Take = $10 K. System 1: Tax All $50 K @ 20%. Tax = $10 K. Average Tax Rate = 20%. Marginal Tax Rate = 20%. Earn $100 More, Keep $80. System 2: Exempt $25 K. Tax $25 K @ 40%. Tax = $10 K; Average Rate 20% Marginal Rate 40%. Earn $100 More, Keep $60 Under Which System Will People Be More Eager To Earn Additional Income? Weighted Marginal Individual Income Tax Rate 34% 33.2% 32.0% 32% 30.5% 30.1% 30% 29.5% 28.5% 28.5% Percent 28.1% 28% 27.6% 27.7%27.8% 26.8% 26.5% 26.1% 26.1% 26% 25.3% 25.6% 25.4% 25.1% 25.2% 24.7% 24.2%24.3% 24% 23.3%23.4%23.3% 23.2%23.2% 25.6% 24.7% 23.2% 22.9% 22.3% 22% 20% 72 73 74 75 76 77 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 Year Data Source: Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income, Individual Income Tax Returns, various issues; Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income Bulletin, various issues. (Data not published for 1978) Cumulative Marginal Tax Rate For A Single Taxpayer Earning $12,000 to $40,000 With 2 Children 50% 46.71% Marginal Tax Rate 40% 30% 41.71% Cumulative Marginal Tax Rate 16.71% EITC Phase-Out (21.06%) 26.71% 20% 25.65% Federal Income Tax (10%, 15%) 10% 0% Child Tax Credit (-15%) -4.35% -10% Payroll Tax (7.65%) State Income Tax (3%) -20% 12,000 16,000 20,000 24,000 28,000 Earned Income 32,000 36,000 40,000 The Phase-Out Of The Health Exchange Subsidy Would Create A Huge Marginal Tax Rate Spike Single Individual Effective Marginal Tax Rate 70% With Subsidy Phase-Out 60% 50% 40% 30% Current Law (2009) 20% 10% 0% 13,000 23,000 33,000 43,000 Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) Sources: CBO for estimates of Health Exchange Subsidy; and calculations by author, based on Federal Income Tax, State Income Tax, Federal Payroll Tax, and Phase-Out of Health Exchange Subsidy. See text for more details. Tax Base Vs. Tax Rates The Tax Base -- What We Tax -Is At Least As Important As The Tax Rates We Impose. The Income Tax Is Seriously Biased Against Saving And Investment. All Tax Reforms Worthy Of The Name Reduce Or Eliminate These Tax Biases. A Good Tax System Is Saving/Consumption Neutral. Multiple Taxation of Saving One Tax on Consumption, Four Taxes on Saving Layer 1– Tax on Earnings Income is taxed when earned. If it is used for consumption, there is usually no further federal tax. Layer 2 – Personal Income Tax on Returns If the income is saved, the returns are taxed as interest, dividends, capital gains, or non-corporate business profits. Layer 3 – Corporate Income Tax If the saving is in corporate stock, the corporate tax hits the income before it is either paid out to shareholders or reinvested to boost future earnings. Layer 4 – Transfer (Estate and Gift) Tax Another tax on already taxed assets. (Similar taxes at the state and local levels increase the multiple taxation.) Advantage Of Tax Deferred Saving Over Ordinary (Biased) Tax Treatment: Build-up Of $1,000 Saved per Year $450 $400 Tax Deferred Assets (thousands of $) $350 $300 $250 $200 $150 $100 Ordinary (Biased) Tax Treatment $50 $0 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Age 55 60 65 70 Saving from age 20 onward, under tax-deferred system and ordinary "double taxation" (7.2% interest rate, 20% tax rate). Multiple Taxation of Corporate Income (a) Retained Earnings, Pre-2003 Act (b) Dividend Payout, Pre-2001 Act (c) Retained Earnings and Dividends, 2003 Act 1) Corporate Income $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 2) Corporate tax at top rate $0.35 $0.35 $0.35 3) After-tax corporate income: Either retained, raising stock price (columns (a), (c)), or paid as dividend (col. (b), (c)) $0.65 $0.65 $0.65 $0.13 (tax rate 20%) $0.2574 (tax rate 39.6%) $0.0975 (tax rate 15%) 5) Total tax $0.48 $0.6074 $0.4475 6) Total tax rate 48% 60.74% 44.75% 7) Income left to shareholder $0.52 $0.3926 $0.5525 4) Individual income tax at top rate (dividends as ordinary income, retained earnings as capital gain)* * Top corporate rate excludes corporate surtaxes, and top individual rate ignores phase-outs of exemptions and deductions and taxation of Social Security, which may push effective top tax rates higher than statutory rates. Retained earnings are assumed to trigger a long-term capital gain with a maximum rate of 20% or 15%. Short-term gains are taxed at ordinary tax rates. Changes In GDP, Wages, and Capital If Capital Gains and Dividends Tax Rates Increase Changes in Billions of Dollars Tax Rates Rise to 20% GDP Capital Stock Private Sector Wages Tax Rates Rise to 28% GDP Capital Stock Private Sector Wages 0 -500 -94 -194 -237 -489 -1,000 -1,029 -1,500 -2,000 -2,500 -2,549 -3,000 Changes In GDP, Wages, and Capital If Capital Gains and Dividends Tax Rates Increase Changes in Percent Tax Rates Rise to 20% GDP Capital Stock Private Sector Wages Tax Rates Rise to 28% GDP Capital Stock Private Sector Wages 0% -2% -4% -1.4% -1.4% -3.8% -3.4% -3.5% -6% -8% -10% -9.5% Static Versus Dynamic Federal Budget Effects Of Capital Gains And Dividend Tax Changes In Billions 100 Tax Rates Rise to 20% Tax Rates Rise to 28% 77.5 80 60 40 30.7 20 0 -20 -28.3 -40 -19.9 -17.4 -60 -50.0 -80 -46.0 -73.5 -100 Static Gain Income Tax Loss Other Net Budget Federal Effects Budget Impact Static Gain Income Tax Loss Other Net Budget Federal Effects Budget Impact Present Value of Current Law Capital Consumption Allowances per Dollar of Investment Compared to Expensing (First-Year Write-Off) 3 Yrs Asset lives: 5 yrs 7 yrs 10 yrs 15 yrs 20 yrs 27.5 yrs 39 yrs Present value of firstyear write-off of $1 of $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 $1.00 investment: Present value of current law write-off of $1 if inflation rate is: 0% $0.96 $0.94 $0.91 $0.88 $0.80 $0.74 $0.65 $0.55 3% $0.94 $0.89 $0.85 $0.79 $0.67 $0.59 $0.47 $0.37 5% $0.92 $0.86 $0.81 $0.74 $0.60 $0.52 $0.39 $0.30 Assumes a 3.5 percent real discount rate, 3-20 year assets placed in service in first quarter of the year, 27.5 - 39 year assets placed in service in January. Expensing Versus Depreciation: Depreciation Overstates Taxable Income and Depresses Return on Capital Expensing (Full Cost Recovery) Depreciation Revenues from machine, present value $115 Revenues from machine, present value $115 Full cost of machine $100 Full cost of machine $100 Actual profit $15 Actual profit $15 Full cost write-off for tax purposes (expensing) $100 Allowable depreciation write-off, present value $85 Taxable profit = Actual profit $15 Taxable profit exceeds actual profit $30 Tax $5 Tax $10 Actual after-tax income $10 Actual after-tax income $5 Rate of return 10% Rate of return 5% Marginal Tax Rates On Estates And Income Contributed To Estates, 2009 90% 81% 80% GST 70% Marginal Tax Rate 70% 60% 50% 85% GST GST Estate Tax Estate Tax 45%* Payroll Tax 40% State Income Tax State Income Tax Federal Income Tax 30% 20% Estate Tax Estate Tax Federal Income Tax Estate Tax Estate Tax and Generation Skipping Trust Tax on a Dollar of Interest Left in an Estate 10% 0% * 45% Estate Tax Rate became effective in 2007. Assumes married couple in 33% tax bracket, who are self-employed, with a 6% state income tax. Computed prior to Estate Tax Repeal, which is now scheduled for 2010. Tax on a Dollar of Wages (self-employed) Left in an Estate Effect Of Estate Tax Alternatives On Gross Domestic Product And Labor income 150 100 Billions of $ 50 0 -50 GDP Labor Income -100 -150 -200 Pre-2001 Law 35% Top Rate; 15% Top Rate; Repeal Estate $5 Million $5 Million Tax Exemption Exemption Calculations by Author Revenue Effects Of Estate Tax Reform: Static Versus Dynamic Revenue Estimates 30 25 Revenue Effect: Static Analysis 20 Revenue Effect: Dynamic Analysis Billions of $ 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 35% Top Rate; $5 Million Exemption Calculations by Author 15% Top Rate; $5 Million Exemption Repeal Estate Tax STEPS TOWARD NEUTRALITY: ALL SAVING GETS DEFERRAL OR RETURNS EXEMPT EQUIVALENT; EXPENSING OF INVESTMENT; NO DOUBLE TAX OF CORPORATE INCOME; NO ESTATE AND GIFT TAX. TAX BASES OF FOUR NEUTRAL TAXES & POINTS OF COLLECTION NRST -- INCOME LESS SAVING = CONSUMPTION (NOT IMPOSED ON INVESTMENT GOODS). TAXED AT POINT OF SALE. VAT -- INCOME LESS SAVING = CONSUMPTION (INVESTMENT EXPENSED). CAPITAL AND LABOR INCOME TAXED AT BUSINESSES, IN STAGES. CASH FLOW TAX -- INCOME LESS SAVING = CONSUMPTION. TAXED ON INDIVIDUAL TAX FORM. FLAT TAX -- INCOME LESS INVESTMENT = CONSUMPTION. CAPITAL INCOME ON BUSINESS OR PROPRIETOR TAX FORM (INVESTMENT EXPENSED); WAGES ON INDIVIDUAL TAX FORM. The Kennedy and Reagan Tax Cuts The Kennedy rate cuts were roughly the same percentage rate reductions across the board, but rewards rose most where rates were highest: Top tax rate cut from 91% to 70%. After-tax reward rose from 9% to 30%, up 230%. Bottom tax rate cut from 20% to 14%. After-tax reward rose from 80% to 86%, up 7.5%. Similarly for the Reagan Tax cuts: Top tax rate cut from 70% to 50%. After-tax reward rose from 30% to 50%, up 67%. Bottom tax rate cut from 14% to 11%. After-tax reward rose from 86% to 89%, up 3.5%. In both cases, a greater response by upper-income taxpayers raised the total share of taxes they paid. The Kennedy and Reagan Tax Cuts, cont. Kennedy also cut the corporate tax rate, introduced the ITC, and accelerated depreciation. Reagan (1981) also accelerated depreciation, increased the ITC, and enhanced saving incentives. Both altered business taxes as well as individual tax rates. While Marginal Tax Rates Have Fallen, High Earners' Income Tax Shares Have Risen 50% 1981 2006 39.9% Income Tax Share (%) 40% 30% 24.2% 20.3% 20.2% 20% 17.5% 17.9% 15.5% 12.9% 10.7% 10% 10.7% 7.4% 3.0% 0% Bottom 50% 50% - 75% 75% - 90% 90% - 95% 95% - 99% Taxpayers in AGI Range Top 1% Marginal Individual Income Tax Rates Under Old Law And 2001 / 2003 Tax Acts If Congress 1986 Tax 1990 Tax 1993 Tax Reform Act* Act Act 1988 - 1990 1991 - 1992 1993 - 2000 2001 2002 2003 - 2010‡ 2011 - --- --- --- 10%† 10% 10% --- 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 28% 28% 28% 27.5% 27% 25% 28% 33%** 31% 31% 30.5% 30% 28% 31% 28% --- 36% 35.5% 35% 33% 36% --- --- 39.6% 39.1% 38.6% 35% 39.6% 2001 / 2003 Tax Act s Lets Tax Cuts Sunset * 1986 Tax Reform Act had transition rate for 1987, fully effective in 1988. ** The 5% surtax recaptured the "benefit" of the initial 15% rate, creating the 33% "bubble"; marginal rate returned to 28% after taxpayer had lost all "benefit" from the 15% rate. † Rebate in 2001 equivalent to 10% rate. ‡ 2001 / 2003 Tax Acts sunset at end of 2010. Old rates return in 2011 in the absence of further legislation. Other 2001-2003 Tax Changes That Affect Growth Enhanced Saving Incentives (2001) Phase-Out Of Estate Tax (2001-2010) Reduction Of Tax Rates On Dividends And Capital Gains (2003) 1,100 340 1,050 320 1,000 950 2002 Tax Cut 2003 Tax Cut 2001 Tax Cut 300 Equipment and Software <-- Left Axis 280 260 900 240 Nonresdidential Structures Right Axis --> 850 800 2000 220 200 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Quarter Data Source: BEA, National Income and Product Accounts, Table 5.3.6, accessed via www.bea.gov. Billions of Dollars (2000 $) Billions of Dollars (2000 $) Real Private Investment And 2001, 2002, and 2003 Tax Cuts Rebates Did Not Boost Consumption Billions of Dollars 11,000 10,500 Disposable Personal Income 10,000 9,500 Personal Consumption Expenditures 9,000 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O 2007 2008 Data Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis <http://www.bea.gov>. Based on John B. Taylor, "Why Permanent Tax Cuts Are the Best Stimulus,' Wall Street Journal, Nov. 25, 2008. Interim Steps -What Works And What Doesn't Pro-Growth Tax Provisions: End/Reduce Death Tax Augment Expensing (At The Margin) Lower Cap Gains, Dividend Tax Rates Lower Corporate Tax Rate Expand IRAs, Pensions (At The Margin) Lower Marginal Personal Tax Rates (Especially In Top Brackets) Social Tax Cuts: They Have Their Role, But Do Not Create Jobs Or Boost Investment, Wages, Or Output. E.g. Child Credits, Personal Exemptions, Standard Deductions. Don't Meddle, Don't Distort Distorting Provisions Hurt: Targeted Credits/Taxes That Favor Or Penalize One Activity Over Another Grow One Area But Shrink Another, And Reduce Total Output And Welfare. e.g., Green Credits, Excises, Housing Breaks. You Can't Raise GDP, Income, And The National Welfare By Making People Do Things The Hard Way. e.g., Locking Up Cheap Energy And Favoring Sources That Cost More And Deliver Less. Recovery Assignments: Who Does What? Never Rely On The Federal Reserve To Create Real Growth With Easy Money. The Best The Fed Can Do For Growth Is Focus On Price Stability, Because Inflation Raises Taxes On Investment And Kills Growth Of Jobs And Output. It Is The Job Of Congress To Aid The Growth Of The Real Economy. That Is Best Done By Curbing Government, Leaving Productive Resources For Private Sector Uses. Tax Rates And Regulations That Drive Up Costs Are Barriers To Production And Hiring That Must Be Kept Under Control. Final Thoughts People who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it. When governments do not learn from history, the people are condemned to repeat it. Economics is not the dismal science, if you have a morbid sense of humor. Final Thoughts, cont. There is hope: we have in the past, and we can again, adopt policies that set the people free to flourish and prosper. We even know what those policies are. They do not require sacrifice by the people. They require sacrifice by Washington.