Rating Tax Reform Proposals


Tax Reform Prospects

With tax reform interest growing we must comprehensively analyse current proposals. Following is one attempt.

We need to analyze Flat, Fair, Cain’s 9-9-9, Obama’s planned 2013 increases on high income earners, and Romney’s proposed corporate tax decrease. Below are priority criteria to rate all tax reform proposals.

1 – Progressive The current tax system is progressive and therefore tax reform must remain similarly progressive. In part due to the Great Recession, 47% of our populace pays no federal income taxes. Tax reform should at least in the short term match this so that low income earner discretionary income remains about the same. Tax reform however must stimulate economic growth so that this 47%ile drops to 40% and lower.

of Low income earners can suffer from large state and federal consumption taxes. “Prebates” or “rebates” to the low income must be a central feature and not just up to poverty level but beyond that and with flexibility given geography (ex: $40,000 in Texas buys much more than Manhattan).

2 – Entrepreneur and business friendly: Tax reform must entice domestic and foreign investors so US can increase competitiveness, keep jobs in the US.

3 – Revenue Neutral – US needs to live within its means while not exacerbating our debt. Hence, keep US Treasury revenues at post WW2 norms of 16% to 19% of GDP, currently at near 16% die to our weak economy.

4 – Level the playing field This means elimination of all special tax breaks. This is especially critical for tax breaks that are lobbied for. It is hard for anyone to prove any special interest tax break meets a return on investment (ROI) criteria. Ex: if tax break == $10 billion for one special interest, the special interest should prove the tax break increased GDP by at least $11 billion (and then project further ROI benefits before renewing any further breaks). Special interests limit available capital for entrepreneurs. They have repeatedly have had positive ROI. Proof: Over 60% of all new jobs that sustain themselves are created by private entrepreneurs and small companies (those with staff of 50 or less).

5 – Reduce or (better) eliminate complex tax code compliance. Technology is in place now to eliminate a majority of IRS functions, if not all. If we eliminate most or all deductions there will be no need for an IRS. Per Economists Art Laffer, Wayne Winegarden, and John Childs, US taxpayers will spend $431 billion for 2011 for tax compliance. This is 3% of our GDP. This is also about a shocking third of all income taxes collected! Imagine one-third of your discretionary income going to waste! This is a huge drain on GDP growth prospects. A ROI analysis for tax code compliance is clearly very, very negative )-33%).

6 – Predictable, Stable Private entrepreneurial investments are both more extensive and more successful when a tax system is predictable long term (at least 4 years) as many investment returns take time to generate a profitable return – at times a few years or more. Therefore tax reform must implemented in a way to provide stable expectations.

Can anyone challenge any of these 6 criteria? Or add additional? Please add to the debate.

Next, let’s assess tax reform alternatives against these 6 criteria.

A – Obama Tax Plan:
This is composed of raising taxes on those earning over $250,000 and increasing taxes on capital gains. This is even more progressive than current but at what cost? It is not entrepreneurial friendly. These job creators will have less capital. It is not revenue neutral and will add to our Nanny State mentality and punish success. It does not level the playing field as numerous tax breaks for special interests will remain. It may even increase tax code compliance given concurrent increasing regulations on business. It will not be predictable or stable. Rather it will increase suspicions of further increases given the socialist leaning politicians to tax and spend more. Finally it will decrease our GDP. Christina Romer, before she accepted position of Head of Council of Economic Advisors for BO (then subsequently resigned in disgrace) published an elaborate analysis of the impact of tax increases on GDP growth in the US since the end of WW2. Her conclusion was that a tax increase of 1% GDP will subtract 2% to 3% of GDP. Are the Socialist leaning unaware of this and oblivious of what a 40% to 60% tax rate did to Europe?

B – Flat Tax
There have been and are multiple variations. For the most part flat tax plans assign one and sometimes two or three rates while eliminating many or all deductions and special tax breaks. These plans address federal personal taxes only and not payroll taxes. Hence these plans will likely be less progressive than current, even some to the point of regressive. Flat tax plans, however will be more entrepreneurial friendly mainly since they will level the playing field eliminating special interest deductions and substantially decrease tax code compliance costs. Flat tax plans can be set up to be revenue neutral. Also once set, a Flat tax can be predictable and stable thereby increasing private investment. Nevertheless its propensity to significantly alter the progressive nature of our current system is a serious flaw.

C – Romney Tax Plan
Romney at present need s to be more specific on his tax reform plans. What we know so far is that he favors overall lower taxes and particularly touts lower corporate taxes to improve our global economic competitiveness. Hs also favors lowering capital gain taxes but maybe only for those earning less than $250,000. We’ll wait for more specifics. However, at present, indications are that a Romney Tax Plan will remain progressive and possibly even more progressive with his capital gains proposal. Romney’s plan will be moderately more entrepreneurial friendly given the moderate proposed decrease in corporate tax rate to 20% or 15%. His plan may become revenue neutral given the extra GDP growth of his corporate tax rate and capital gains decrease proposals. It will not or maybe slightly level the playing field as we do not have many specifics about this yet. The IRS may therefore be approximately the same and tax compliance costs likewise may be the same. Romney’s plan can likely be predictable and stable and position the US for improved GDP growth from the current Obama economic and tax plans. However, the Romney has gaps in not addressing special interests and the $430 billion cost of tax compliance. We hope Romney elaborates more about his tax plan and addresses these gaps.

D – Cain’s 9-9-9
Essentially the 9-9-9 plan creates a 9% federal consumption tax and decreases federal income and corporate income taxes to 9%. An analysis by Art Laffer quantified the 9-9-9 against our current annual rates of $9.5 trillion business revenues, $7.7 billion income, and $8.3 billion consumption . Laffer concluded that the 9-9-9 would generate revenues in the historic 16% to 19% rate of GDP. Therefore one can argue that the 9-9-9 is revenue neutral. However it will struggle greatly to prove it is progressive enough. Cain will need to be more specific about the prebates to low income. A popular think tank, Tax Policy Center predicted that 84% would pay more. Again, Cain needs to be more specific about role prebates will have for low income. 9-9-9 will be more entrepreneurial friendly with its lower corporate tax rate. Also helping this will be the leveling of the playing field by eliminating all deductions except charitable. However, although the 9-9-9 will make a significant dent to tax code compliance costs, it will not go all the way and eliminate the IRS. Finally, 9-9-9 most glaring flaw is its lack of predictability. It is judged as not stable by many entrepreneurs. Not eliminating the personal and not touching the payroll taxes means that we may be on first step of a European tax system where all three are high – personal, corporate and consumption. Has not Cain followed European economics. If he understood the consequences of European tax policy he would never propose the 9-9-9.

E – Fair Tax (in Congress as HR 25).
The Fait eliminates all federal personal and corporate income and payroll taxes and replaces that with a revenue-neutral tax of 23 percent (for now) for all “new” products. It is progressive, provides “prebates” to lower-income earners. It eliminates the IRS, which alone will boost our GDP annually by at least $430 billion (tax code compliance). That money in the private sector will further generate economic growth and jobs. Gone also are dubious (at best) tax write offs per lobbyist efforts that do little if any to generate additional income or economic growth. The 0% federal corporate tax rate will position the US overnight as an entrepreneurial friendly haven. Foreign and domestic investors and venture capitalists will take advantage of this; this will lead to much less incentive to create jobs overseas.

All of the above measures will increase real disposable income and thus jobs The Fair Tax framework is very well detailed and can be passed and benefit all immediately.

In sum the Fair Tax at its core is progressive with prebates. Consider that a framework which can be adjusted over time and with special circumstances. At first, in order to attain bipartisan approval, prebates to 47% of the populace may need to be implemented. Also consider that a family of 4 with $50,000 in New York City will have less discretionary income that same family in suburbs of Austin Texas so flexible prebate adjustments may be necessary at least in the short term.

All other criteria are succinctly met. Zero personal and corporate tax rates will increase entrepreneurial activity tremendously. Revenue neutral, eliminating all deductions and the IRS are by design and core to the Fair Tax. Once the private sector starts again generating new jobs that are self sustaining a momentum will build to keep the Fair Tax long term if not indefinitely. It has been proven by many that it is the private sector that creates new industries, products, jobs, ancillary jobs, and sub industries, Once passed the Fair Tax will be predictable and stable and increase opportunity for all.

Now is the time to eliminate a major albatross around the US Economy’s neck – our archaic tax system. By our 6 criteria, the Fair Tax is the only one that meets all. Visit http://www.fartax.org, http://www.returntoexcellence.net for more information about the Fair Tax. Contact your Senator and Congressman and advise them of your support.

Advertisements

About economics501

1 - free market Capitalist; 2 - Fitness Entrepreneur; 56 years old, VP at an Investment Bank in NYC, ex Venture Capitalist, happily married with 2 girls. Education: Rutgers and NYU. I allow Ted Hruzd, my friend to blog at will here. He has many posts here. I have known Ted since we were both students at NYU. Ted also works for an Investment Bank as a VP in Equity Global Markets. ------------------------- I was very very Socialist leaning as a 22 year old. I then strongly believed in Gov role in helping the poor. However, as a USDA Child Nutrition Programs, I personally accounted for millions of fraud, abuse, and waste of tax payer money. I came to believe that the poor would be best served with less Gov programs and more with direct aid via tax system. Then after 5 years I became a free market capitalist, was a venture capitalist in 2007 and helped start 2 high tech companies. I dedicate this site to champion free market capitalism as the best road to Prosperity. Please join in. If you disagree, fine, but please post with dignity and class and be civil. Argue with facts always.
This entry was posted in Tax Reform and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s