Tag Archives: tax reform

A Lull in the Storm

Posted on by
Reply

 

The Congressional Budget Office has a sterling reputation for collecting accurate data and making credible predictions about basic economic and fiscal trends.  CBO analyses, which are based on current law, are generally accepted as valid by both liberals and conservatives.  Considering the degree of hyper-partisanship in most discussions of fundamental policy, it is reassuring to at least have an unimpeachable source of basic information.
CaptureCBO has just released its regular annual report, ”The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2015-2025.” There is good news for the near term.  As shown above, GDP is projected to grow by 2.9% in the (budget) years 2015 and 2016, and dropping to 2.5% growth in 2017, which is still better than 2014. This means that our national debt will not grow from its current level of 74% of GDP for the next few years and might even decrease slightly.
Capture1Growth will then hover around 2.2% for the remainder of the 2015 – 2025 decade, which is the average GDP since the end of the Great Recession in June 2009.  Likewise, unemployment will likely not fall much below its current value of 5.6% for the next ten years.  In short, under current policy, except for the next couple of years, we are stuck in the same slow-growth rut where we have been for the past five and one-half years.
It should be obvious that we need new policies to speed up growth, put more people back to work, and raise the stagnant wages endured by many middle- and lower-income workers.  How can this be accomplished?

  • Tax reform, both individual and corporate, is the primary route to faster growth. Lower tax rates across the board, paid for by closing loopholes and shrinking deductions. This will put extra income in the pockets of the 64% of taxpayers who do not itemize deductions, which they will likely spend. It will also make it easier for potential entrepreneurs to successfully launch a new business.
  • Immigration reform, expanded foreign trade and deregulation will also create more business opportunities which will in turn grow the economy and create more jobs.

Hopefully the new Congress will be able to move forward in this direction.  A better future depends on it!

 

What Will It Take to ‘Fix the Debt’?

Posted on by
4

 

I have recently become a volunteer for the national bipartisan organization, Fix the Debt. It is the outreach arm for the Washington think tank, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, which is an offshoot of the Simpson-Bowles Commission from several years ago.
As such, I give presentations to local civic organizations about our national debt and what needs to be done to get it under control. Typically the audience will readily appreciate the seriousness of our debt problem.  What they want to talk about are practical ways to address it.  They have their own ideas and want to know what I think as well.  My first message is that we don’t have to pay off the debt or even balance the budget going forward.  Realistically we need to shrink our annual deficits in order to put the debt on a downward course as a percent of our growing economy,  as shown in the chart just below.

Capture It will be a huge challenge to accomplish even this!  Here are my ideas, in very general outline, on how to get this done:

  • Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) are the biggest single problem because our population is aging so fast. Furthermore, in order to control the growth of Medicare and Medicaid, we have to do a much better job of controlling the overall cost of healthcare in the U.S. For example, even though healthcare costs slowed down to an increase of only 4.1% in 2014, this is still more than twice the rate of inflation!
  • The second thing we need to do is to make our economy grow faster than the roughly 2.3% growth we have achieved since the end of the Great Recession. The main way to get this done is through broad-based (and revenue neutral) tax reform at both the individual and corporate levels, by reducing tax rates, paid for by closing loopholes and limiting deductions.
  • Finally, there is enormous waste and inefficiency in the federal budget, with huge redundancy and overlap of programs between different federal departments. Responsibility for such programs as education, community development, transportation and social welfare, for example, should be returned to the states with block-grant funding to replace rigid federal control.

I have discussed each of these major reform ideas in much detail in previous blog posts and will continue to do so.  As large as our fiscal problems are, I remain optimistic that they can and will be successfully addressed.

The Legacy of Senator Tom Coburn

Posted on by
Reply

 

Oklahoma’s Senator Tom Coburn has just retired from Congress after serving six years in the House of Representatives and ten years in the Senate.  He will be sorely missed because his achievements were legion.
By ridiculing the “Bridge to Nowhere” in Alaska in 2006, he eventually prevailed upon Congress to totally eliminate earmark spending by 2011.
Beginning in 2010 his staff compiled an annual “Wastebook” each year listing numerous examples of wasteful spending by the federal government.  The “2014 Wastebook” gives 100 such examples totally $25 billion ranging from laughing classes for college students to a State Department program to dispel the perception abroad that Americans are fat and rude!
CaptureBeginning in 2011, Senator Coburn has prevailed upon the Government Accounting Office to issue annual reports entitled “Actions Needed to Reduce Fragmentation, Overlap and Duplication and Achieve Other Financial Benefits.”  Now, after four years, a total of 226 specific actions have been recommended by the GAO.  GAO’s Action Tracker shows that the government has addressed about 19% of the efficiency recommendations made by the GAO.  Be thankful for small progress!
His latest, finest and presumably last major effort along these lines is a 320 page report, the “Tax Decoder” which is intended to “decode the tax code for every taxpayer.  It reveals more than 165 tax expenditures costing over $900 billion this year.”  Although more than $1.7 trillion in tax revenue was collected by the government in 2014, the IRS will be unable to collect an additional $500 billion that is owed.  This would have been enough to cover the $483 billion deficit for fiscal year 2014!
As Senator Coburn points out in the introduction to this document, “ideally Congress would throw out the entire tax code and start over.  But at the very least, Congress should make the tax code simpler, fairer and flatter.”
It is rare that a single member of Congress makes such an extraordinary contribution to our country’s welfare!

Status Quo on the Budget Is Not Good Enough II. Look at the Big Picture!

Posted on by
Reply

 

In my last post, “Status Quo on the Budget Is Not Good Enough,” I discussed a report from the outgoing chair of the Senate Budget Committee, Patty Murray (D-WA), and explained how it epitomizes the lack of progress made on the massive debt problem which has developed since the Great Recession of 2008 -2009.
CaptureThe basic problem is that Senator Murray’s analysis simply does not recognize the seriousness of our debt problem as shown in the above chart.  Right now our public debt (on which we pay interest) is “sitting” at 74% of GDP for a year or two, before it continues its rapid increase.  This projection assumes an historically “normal” growth rate of 3% and no new recessions, neither of which assumption is assured.  It also assumes that the sequester budget cuts and new top tax rate of 39.6% stay in effect.  In other words it is a best case scenario based on current policy.
Breaking it down, the debt will continue to increase because annual deficits will continue to exceed the rate of growth of the economy.  The main driver of these increasing deficits is the cost of the health care entitlements of Medicare and Medicaid.  Medicare costs will increase rapidly because of the aging of the American people.  Medicaid costs will increase rapidly because: 1) more low-income people are being covered by the ACA and 2) since the recession there are more low-income people to be covered.  I certainly support expanded healthcare coverage but we have to figure out how to pay for it!
How do we contain the increasing costs of Medicare and Medicaid?  We do it by controlling the overall rapid growth (at twice the rate of inflation) of healthcare costs in general, i.e. for private healthcare. How do we do this?  See a couple of my recent posts either here or here.
Senator Murray, along with many other progressives, argues that we need more deficit spending in order to stimulate the economy and create new jobs.  More jobs are badly needed but more deficit spending is the wrong way to get them.  Then how?  With tax reform among other things.
Based on the outcome of the 2014 elections, I am optimistic that something along the lines of what I have just described will be tried by the next Congress.  We’ll soon find out!

Fix the Debt II. The National Debt and You

Posted on by
Reply

 

As I reported earlier, I am a volunteer for Fix the Debt, the outreach arm for the Washington DC think tank, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. I recently attended a workshop in D.C. put on by Fix the Debt and, in return, I have agreed to make presentations about our debt problem to local organizations during the coming year.  Today I gave my first such talk to a local Kiwanis Club.
CaptureThe message is that a large debt means:

  • Lower Wages and Fewer Job Opportunities. The growing debt “crowds out” productive investments in people, machinery, technology and new ventures. For example, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the average wage in 25 years will be $7000 lower if debt is on an upward path compared to a downward path (see above chart).
  • Increased Costs of Home, Auto, Student and Credit Card Loans. Although interest rates are currently low, they will almost certainly rise as the economy recovers, and they will rise much higher if debt continues to grow.
  • Less Room for Investment in Infrastructure, Research, and the Next Generation. The CBO projects that interest costs will nearly quadruple from $220 billion in 2013 to $800 billion in 2025. By 2030, 100% of all revenue will go towards interest payments and mandatory spending.
  • A Threatened Social Security Net. Both Social Security and Medicare are on a road to insolvency. By 2033 both Medicare’s hospital insurance trust fund and the Social Security trust fund will run out of money.
  • An Increased Likelihood of a New Fiscal Crisis. If investors lose confidence in our ability to service debt, there will be tanking markets, sharply rising interest rates, mass unemployment and rapid inflation.
  • A Missed Opportunity to Grow the Economy. Debt reduction, tax reform and modest entitlement reforms have the potential to increase economic growth by 9.5% by 2035. Think of all the new jobs this would create!

Do you belong to a club or other civic organization in metro Omaha which brings in outside speakers?  If so I’d be happy to bring Fix the Debt’s message to your group.  Shoot me an email at jackheidel@yahoo.com!

“Manana Is Not a Credible Fiscal Plan”

Posted on by
Reply

 

Thus spoke George Osborne, Great Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a recent speech to the Economic Club of New York.  “By applying a consistent and long-term economic plan, we can ensure that our best days lie ahead.  If we reduce our high debt so we can weather new shocks, and take the difficult decisions to make our economies more productive, we can provide rising living standards for our citizens.”
CaptureAccording to Mr. Osborne, any long term economic plan needs to include three elements:

  • An activist monetary policy to do whatever it takes to sustain sufficient demand in the economy.
  • A credible commitment to sustainable fiscal policy. Some have argued that fiscal consolidation is incompatible with economic recovery. But recent experience, e.g. sequestration in the U.S. and a balanced budget in the U.K., has shown the reverse.
  • An ambitious program of supply-side reform. The U.S. has a booming technology sector and the fracking revolution. The U.K. has cut its corporate tax rate to 20%, welcomes disruptive innovation and is pushing ahead on shale gas.

In the U.S. things are moving in the right direction and so the focus needs to be on keeping the momentum going.  Monetary stimulus has accomplished much but now a sound exit policy is needed.  Sequestration has slowed down the growth of government debt but has not ended it.  Further progress will require entitlement reform, especially for Medicare and Medicaid.  But first, the Affordable Care Act needs to be improved to do a better job of controlling the overall cost of healthcare.  Infrastructure improvement, tax reform and expanding trade are the supply side keys to increasing productivity and shared prosperity.
Activist monetary policy, credible fiscal policy, and ambitious supply side reform: these are the policies which will lead to future progress!

Let’s Keep the Economic Momentum Going

Posted on by
Reply

 

There has been lots of good economic news lately:

  • The economy added 321,000 jobs in November, the most in one month since January 2012.
  • The unemployment rate of 5.8% remains steady and is down from 7% in November 2013.
  • The average hourly earnings for workers is up by 2.1% from a year earlier.
  • Economic growth for the third quarter is up 3.9% from the previous quarter.
  • The deficit for the 2014-2015 fiscal year was “only” 2.8% of GDP and is predicted by the Congressional Budget Office to drop to 2.6% for the current year.
  • The price of a gallon of gasoline has dropped to $2.71 on average, its lowest level since 2010 and is still dropping.

CaptureThe New York Times predicts that the “Brighter Economy Raises Odds of Action in Congress.”  Jason Furman, Chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, is quoted as saying that “At least there will be less of a philosophical debate on infrastructure, tax reforms and expanding exports.  You can have that agenda because the economy is not in free fall.” These three items would make a great agenda for the 114th Congress in the following way:

  • Infrastructure. The continuing drop in the price of gasoline offers the opportunity to replenish the inadequately funded Highway Trust Fund in a fiscally responsible manner. Congress should raise the federal gasoline tax above its current 18 cents per gallon to a level which is sufficient to fund the entire federal share of highway construction and repair.
  • Tax reform. Individual and corporate tax reform will give the economy a huge boost. The idea here is to lower tax rates in a revenue neutral way by closing loopholes and deductions.
  • Expanding Exports. What’s needed here is to give the President fast track negotiating authority so that Congress has to vote any trade agreement up or down without modification. This is the only way to get other countries to make concessions.

 

Of course there are many other issues which need to be seriously addressed by the new Congress.  But relatively quick action on just these three less controversial items would be a great start!

Fix the Debt

Posted on by
Reply

 

Recently I have had several posts about our national debt, for example, “Why the National Debt Is Such a Threat to the U.S.,” showing graphically that our current public debt at 74% of GDP is very high by historical standards and rising rapidly under current fiscal policies.
CaptureYesterday I attended a workshop in Washington D.C. put on by Fix the Debt.  All expenses were paid and, in return, the attendees agree to make at least three presentations to local community groups during the following year.  This means that I will soon be sending out a letter to such groups as Kiwanis and Rotary Clubs around the Omaha area where I live, offering my services as a speaker at one of their meetings.  The purpose is to build more public awareness of the threat of a huge and growing national debt to the long-term welfare of our country. Here is a summary of talking points from the workshop:

  • The deficit for the 2013-2014 fiscal year is almost $500 billion.
  • Under current fiscal policies the debt will increase to 270% of GDP by 2080.
  • Reasons for our debt problem:
  1. An aging population which means expanded Social Security spending
  2. Healthcare costs are growing for both Medicare and Medicaid
  3. Interest costs will grow rapidly as the economy recovers and interest rates rise
  • All bipartisan reform plans call for both spending cuts and revenue increases.
  • The benefits of taking action are:
  1. Increased budget flexibility
  2. Lower exposure to changes in interest rates
  3. Reduced risk of another financial crisis
  • The longer we wait:
  1. The older our population gets
  2. The higher the debt will rise
  3. The less time we have to phase in changes
  4. The slower our economy will grow
  5. The fewer tools we will have to fix it
  • How do we bring debt under control?
  1. Enact policies that grow the economy
  2. Health care cost containment
  3. Spending cuts
  4. Tax reform and tax expenditure cuts

Let me know if you’d like a speaker on this topic at your club!

Is It Feasible to Cut Tax Preferences to Pay for Lower Tax Rates?

Posted on by
Reply

 

I have been focusing lately on America’s two biggest fiscal and economic problems:

  • How to boost the economy in order to put more people back to work
  • How to either cut spending or raise revenue in order to shrink the deficit.

A few days ago in “The Great Wage Slowdown and How to Fix It,” I laid out a fairly specific proposal to make a substantial reduction in tax preferences in order to cut tax rates across the board and especially for the 64% of taxpayers who do not itemize deductions.  These are the middle- and lower-income workers with stagnant incomes who would likely spend any tax savings they received thereby giving the economy a big boost. Let’s examine whether or not this is a realistic course of action.
CaptureThe above chart from the Congressional Budget Office document, “The Distribution of Major Tax Expenditures in the Individual Income Tax System,” shows that, for example, the upper 10% of households by income receive about 40% of the total $1 trillion in individual tax expenditures per year.  Furthermore, this same top 10% of tax payers have an income of about $140,000 or more (Congressional Research Service). My basic idea is to shrink tax preferences by $250 billion per year and to lower tax rates for middle- and lower-income non-itemizers by this same amount.  If we assume that they would spend 2/3 of this new income, it would boost the economy by $170 billion per year which is 1% of GDP.
A reasonable way to achieve this savings is to expect higher income earners to contribute a greater percentage of their tax preference savings.  For example:

  • top 1% contribute $110 billion (2/3 of their total deductions).
  • top 96th % to 99th % contribute $50 billion (1/2 of their total deductions).
  • top 91st % to 95th % contribute $30 billion (1/3 of their total deductions).
  • top 81st % to 90th % contribute $30 billion (1/4 of their total deductions).
  • top 61st % to 80th % contribute $30 billion (1/5 of their total deductions).
  • this gives a total of $250 billion in tax preference savings.

This back-of-the-envelope calculation is not intended to be definitive but rather to suggest what can be done along these lines.  Those who are more well-off need to make bigger sacrifices in getting our economy back on track.

The Great Wage Slowdown and How to Fix It

Posted on by
2

With a new Congress just elected, this is a good time to reflect about what changes should be made in public policy. Our biggest economic problem is to speed up growth in order to provide more and better paying jobs.  In addition, a faster growing economy would bring in more tax revenue which would help pay our bills and reduce the deficit.
CaptureA column in today’s New York Times, “The Great Wage Slowdown, Looming over Politics,” by David Leonhardt, proposes a cut in the marginal tax rate for the middle class as a way of boosting their incomes.  As can be seen in the above chart, median household income has been flat since the year 2000, and even lower since the 2008 recession.  Mr. Leonhardt goes on to say that any tax cut for the middle class should be balanced by a tax increase for the wealthy.
It so happens that I proposed such a plan several months ago as a way of boosting the economy and reducing inequality at the same time. The idea is to enact broad-based tax reform whereby tax rates are lowered for all, offset by shrinking tax deductions.  The 64% of taxpayers who do not itemize deductions will receive a big tax cut.  But these are the very middle-class wage earners with stagnant incomes.  So they will likely spend their tax savings, thereby giving the economy a big boost.
More specifically:

  • Individual tax deductions total about $1 trillion per year.
  • Let’s suppose that these deductions are cut in half to $500 billion per year.
  • Let’s further suppose that half of this amount, or $250 billion per year, is cut from the taxes of the 64% who do not itemize deductions.
  • If these 64% spend just 2/3 of their new income (instead of saving it or paying off debt), this will total $170 billion which is 1% of GDP.
  • This would increase the rate of growth of GDP from the 2.2% average, since the end of the Great Recession, to 3.2%. This represents an enormous boost to the economy and would return average GDP growth to about its 3.3% average since 1947.

    Mr. Leonhardt suggests that presidential contenders in 2016 would greatly benefit from proposing a tax rate cut for the middle class. Here’s a specific plan they can use!