Archive for Main Page
Tax Reform Won’t Happen in 2011 (or 2012)
Posted by: | CommentsMuch as I hate to write these words, tax reform isn’t going to happen in the coming year, or even in the year after that.
The bipartisan tax deal reached by President Obama and Congress earlier this month, along with a few kind words about closing tax loopholes from a handful of GOP lawmakers, has some reformers uncharacteristically optimistic about a quick agreement to revise the revenue code. But, sadly, they are wrong. Here’s why there won’t be a serious effort to rewrite the tax code until after the next elections.
Obama isn’t on board. The President could have used the tax reform plans offered by his own fiscal commission or the Bipartisan Policy Center as an opportunity to jumpstart the debate. But he was decidedly cool, calling only for a national conversation on taxes. As Ronald Reagan showed with the 1986 Tax Reform Act, a major rewrite of the revenue code requires a full-court press by the White House. To get a bill moving, Obama would have to send a complete reform plan to Congress and keep up the pressure for passage. There is no sign he’s ready to do that.
Hill Republicans are not on board. Incoming Ways & Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) says tax reform will be one of his priorities, and that’s a good thing. But speaker-to-be John Boehner (R-OH) has little interest in supporting real reform. In the Senate, Democrat Ron Wyden (D-OR) still has his rewrite, but his GOP cosponsor, Judd Gregg, has retired and Republicans are not exactly lining up to take his place. Republicans would surely back further rate reductions, but they have no interest in cutting tax subsidies—the hard part of reform. It is easy enough for a pol to embrace the concept of repealing loopholes. It isn’t so easy to actually cut the mortgage interest deduction. And does anyone seriously think the GOP would give Obama an historic victory on tax reform on the eve of a presidential election campaign?
Hill Democrats are not on board either. After their battering in this year’s elections, Democrats want only one thing between now and November, 2012—a plummeting unemployment rate. And they don’t see how a nasty protracted debate over tax reform will create many jobs. Besides, these days Dems are just as enamored of targeted tax subsidies as Republicans.
There is no agreement on how much money the new tax code should raise. The ’86 Act passed, in part, because it produced the same amount of money as the tax code it replaced. But in the face of a $1 trillion-plus deficit and growing fiscal pressures down the road, the next reform would have to raise more revenues. Democrats, of course, will be fine with that. But the idea was red meat for Republicans even before the 2010 elections. The growing clout of the anti-tax activists who make up much of the tea party movement will make it even tougher for GOP lawmakers to budge on new revenues.
This year’s deal was tax deform, not reform. The compromise cut by Obama and Hill Republicans produced mostly winners (the only losers were workers making less than $20,000—and they rarely vote). It extended dozens of targeted tax subsidies and kept rates relatively low. By contrast, cutting rates while eliminating deductions and credits, and raising overall taxes would create boatloads of losers. This year, Congress nearly ran out the clock arguing over how to give away $850 billion. To be sure, they agreed in the end. But that’s no clue about how they’d react to a broad rewrite of the code.
Follow the money. We have learned a lot in recent weeks about who funded those non-profit outfits that plowed tens of millions of anonymous money into this year’s congressional campaigns. And much of the cash that found its way into the coffers of successful GOP candidates came from two sources: Wall Street and energy producers—among the biggest beneficiaries of special interest tax breaks. These folks paid good money to protect their subsidies. And I suspect they’ll get what they paid for.
Make no mistake, tax reform is going to happen, and relatively soon. But not in Obama’s first term. I dearly hope I’m wrong, but I just don’t see it.
Tax Reform Won’t Happen in 2011 (or 2012)
Posted by: | CommentsMuch as I hate to write these words, tax reform isn’t going to happen in the coming year, or even in the year after that.
The bipartisan tax deal reached by President Obama and Congress earlier this month, along with a few kind words about closing tax loopholes from a handful of GOP lawmakers, has some reformers uncharacteristically optimistic about a quick agreement to revise the revenue code. But, sadly, they are wrong. Here’s why there won’t be a serious effort to rewrite the tax code until after the next elections.
Obama isn’t on board. The President could have used the tax reform plans offered by his own fiscal commission or the Bipartisan Policy Center as an opportunity to jumpstart the debate. But he was decidedly cool, calling only for a national conversation on taxes. As Ronald Reagan showed with the 1986 Tax Reform Act, a major rewrite of the revenue code requires a full-court press by the White House. To get a bill moving, Obama would have to send a complete reform plan to Congress and keep up the pressure for passage. There is no sign he’s ready to do that.
Hill Republicans are not on board. Incoming Ways & Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) says tax reform will be one of his priorities, and that’s a good thing. But speaker-to-be John Boehner (R-OH) has little interest in supporting real reform. In the Senate, Democrat Ron Wyden (D-OR) still has his rewrite, but his GOP cosponsor, Judd Gregg, has retired and Republicans are not exactly lining up to take his place. Republicans would surely back further rate reductions, but they have no interest in cutting tax subsidies—the hard part of reform. It is easy enough for a pol to embrace the concept of repealing loopholes. It isn’t so easy to actually cut the mortgage interest deduction. And does anyone seriously think the GOP would give Obama an historic victory on tax reform on the eve of a presidential election campaign?
Hill Democrats are not on board either. After their battering in this year’s elections, Democrats want only one thing between now and November, 2012—a plummeting unemployment rate. And they don’t see how a nasty protracted debate over tax reform will create many jobs. Besides, these days Dems are just as enamored of targeted tax subsidies as Republicans.
There is no agreement on how much money the new tax code should raise. The ’86 Act passed, in part, because it produced the same amount of money as the tax code it replaced. But in the face of a $1 trillion-plus deficit and growing fiscal pressures down the road, the next reform would have to raise more revenues. Democrats, of course, will be fine with that. But the idea was red meat for Republicans even before the 2010 elections. The growing clout of the anti-tax activists who make up much of the tea party movement will make it even tougher for GOP lawmakers to budge on new revenues.
This year’s deal was tax deform, not reform. The compromise cut by Obama and Hill Republicans produced mostly winners (the only losers were workers making less than $20,000—and they rarely vote). It extended dozens of targeted tax subsidies and kept rates relatively low. By contrast, cutting rates while eliminating deductions and credits, and raising overall taxes would create boatloads of losers. This year, Congress nearly ran out the clock arguing over how to give away $850 billion. To be sure, they agreed in the end. But that’s no clue about how they’d react to a broad rewrite of the code.
Follow the money. We have learned a lot in recent weeks about who funded those non-profit outfits that plowed tens of millions of anonymous money into this year’s congressional campaigns. And much of the cash that found its way into the coffers of successful GOP candidates came from two sources: Wall Street and energy producers—among the biggest beneficiaries of special interest tax breaks. These folks paid good money to protect their subsidies. And I suspect they’ll get what they paid for.
Make no mistake, tax reform is going to happen, and relatively soon. But not in Obama’s first term. I dearly hope I’m wrong, but I just don’t see it.
The Tax Vox 2010 Lump of Coal Award, Job-Killing Edition
Posted by: | CommentsIt’s time for Tax Vox’s fourth annual Lump of Coal Award, given to 2010′s worst moments in fiscal policy. Bad law, outrageous rhetoric, and months of inaction made it tough to choose, but here are our Top 10 nominees:
10. A GOP leadership that sees “job-killers’ everywhere. The health bill was a job killer. The financial regulatory bill was a job killer. Even various Democratic efforts to extend provisions of the 2009 stimulus were job killers. This would make them job-killing jobs bills, I suppose. Even after brokering a bipartisan tax deal last week, incoming House speaker John Boehner (R-OH) couldn’t help himself. “It’s a good first step,” he said happily, “but…if we actually want to help our economy get back on track and to begin creating jobs, we need to end the job-killing spending binge.” The message discipline is impressive, but enough already.
9. Obama’s tax reform chatter. At least the wonks are talking about it. And we now have a fistful of commissions and studies that could serve as blueprints for reform. President Obama, however, says only that he’d like to have a “conversation” on the subject next year. Note to president: You are running a government, not a salon.
8. Extending the Homebuyer Tax Credit. The first version of the credit expired in late 2009. Instead of giving it the quiet burial it deserved, lawmakers extended and expanded it, then gave buyers more time to claim it. The credit added to the deficit, subsidized high-earners buying bigger houses, and did little more than accelerate purchases that would have happened anyway. The homebuyer credit is a poster child for all that is wrong with the tax code.
7. The baseline battle. Budget baselines make policy wonks salivate but serve only to confuse real people. Did we just get a tax cut or a tax increase? It all depends, it seems, on your baseline. As the well-known budget analyst Johnny Depp says, attempted murder is not so serious when you compare it to murder, but it is quite serious when you compare it to room service.
6. Replacing the Making Work Pay Tax Credit with a payroll tax cut. The new tax law is a windfall for nearly everyone—but not those making less than $20,000. For nearly 50 million low-income working Americans, the new tax break is less generous than the expiring credit. I understand Obama felt the need to recast Making Work Pay, but there must have been a better way.
5. Extending the tax extenders. Want to make $55 billion disappear? Mindlessly continue four dozen special interest tax subsides. I know America’s economic future depends on the NASCAR racetrack owners, ethanol producers, Manhattan real estate developers, and Puerto Rican rum manufacturers who benefit from these give-aways.
4. Obama and his deficit commission. The President created it, but gave it a tiny budget and staff and no access to Treasury or OMB resources. After its chairs made their far-reaching but controversial recommendations to reduce the deficit, Obama said almost nothing. He was, apparently, busy mixing eggnog. I haven’t seen such enthusiasm from the White House since a commission handpicked by President George W. Bush made its own far-reaching tax reform proposals. Bush, I believe, was bike-riding that day.
3. The estate tax. First Congress allowed the tax to expire, granting a windfall to the heirs of billionaires who happened to die this year. Then, by failing to act until a week ago, it created massive uncertainty over what would happen to the levy in 2011 and beyond. Had Congress done nothing, the estate tax would have reverted to relatively tough 2001 rules. Instead, Congress restored the tax in a more generous form than ever before. The heirs of a handful of super-rich estates benefit, and the national debt rises by another $70 billion. Heckuva job all around.
2. Addressing all the expiring Bush-era tax cuts. Well, Congress did it, though it waited ’til the clock nearly ran out. But who could blame the pols: They’ve only known for a decade that the 2001 tax cuts would expire this year. The issue became a grotesque political football and, in the end, Congress and President Obama agreed to an extension of the law that combined the worst of the Democratic and Republican agendas. And because the deal is again temporary, we get to have the same argument again in two years.
1. The winner is: Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who called the $858 billion tax cut and spending bill he helped engineer a “step in the right direction” toward deficit reduction. Only in Washington can you spin an $858 billion increase in the debt as a step in the direction of deficit reduction. For that bit of high rhetorical legerdemain, Mitch McConnell wins our 2010 Lump of Coal Award with George Orwell Newspeak ribbon.