Forget the Bush Tax Cuts; Reform The Tax Code

December 3, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (13)

The old saying goes, “You can tell a lot about a man by looking at his shoes.” Well, I can tell a lot about our government by looking at our tax code. It’s inefficient, bloated, and wasteful. More than that, judging by the innumerable exclusions, exemptions, deductions, and credits that reward certain behaviors, I’d say they want us to own houses, go to college, buy green products, and have life insurance.

These, and countless other tax code complications, are costing the federal government more than $1 trillion in revenue, and the average tax filer 26 hours in lost time. As the debate over whether or not to extend the Bush tax cuts rages on, I argue that a much more important task lies ahead--fundamental reform of our tax code.

The tax code is a growing mess. Since 2001, the code has averaged more than one change a day. It has grown so long that nobody is exactly certain of its length. As of 2009, it was approximately 67,204 pages, about twenty times the size of the entire Harry Potter book series, and eminently less readable.

Cleaning up the tax code clutter is an issue that could garner bipartisan support. Democrats should jump at the idea of reducing the deficit without making significant cuts to any programs (though that must certainly be part of any long-term solution to our deficit problem). Republicans should cheer the idea of spending cuts

No, that wasn’t a typo. Eliminating tax deductions is really a form of lowering spending—the primary component of any conservative deficit reduction plan. Even the tax code identifies them as such, calling them “tax expenditures” because they are, quite simply, spending programs implemented through tax policy. As Nicole Gelinas recently wrote for City Journal:

Tax breaks, after all, are simply a pernicious way for the government to spend other people’s money. Washington doesn’t get the money to bestow mortgage-interest deductions out of thin air. It gets that cash from renters and other taxpayers who don’t take this deduction, or who have saved more and borrowed less to buy smaller homes. Similarly, a wealthy Texas taxpayer must pay more so that a wealthy New York taxpayer can deduct the cost of his much higher state and local taxes from his federal return.

[Read more about the deficit and national debt.]

When it comes to wealth redistribution, Congress is a wily bunch. In an age when new government spending is akin to career suicide, politicians had to come up with under-the-radar ways to achieve the same social engineering goals. Rather than create a program out of tax revenue, which would likely cause a tremendous uproar, they simply dressed up a tax cut to encourage the same outcome, but instead they are cheered for it. As C. Eugene Steurle of the Urban Institute said, “One looks like smaller government. One looks like bigger government. In fact, they both do exactly the same thing.”

Congress now has the opportunity, the incentive, and the motivation to change this backward system. The debate over the Bush-era tax cuts are dominating the headlines. Republicans, and a smattering of conservative Democrats, argue that it’s foolish to raise taxes on anyone given the sluggish economy. Democrats counter that for a government in dire need of revenue, raising taxes on the nation’s top earners is a no-brainer. But scrubbing the tax code and replacing it with reforms similar to the Wyden-Gregg bill or Paul Ryan’s tax plan could short circuit the largely political debate over whether we should increase taxes on the rich. [Check out a roundup of political cartoons on the economy.]

Each of these plans accomplishes something that merely extending the Bush-era tax cuts does not. They simplify the code, create a lasting framework that doesn’t need to be revisited in two years, reduce government meddling in the economy, and most importantly for the average citizen, they accomplish it all and still lower tax rates!

You can tell a lot about our government by looking at our tax code. Perhaps you can tell more by looking at their seeming unwillingness to change it.

Tags:
Democratic Party,
income tax,
economy,
Congress,
taxes,
Republican Party,
unemployment,
federal taxes

Reader Comments Read all comments (13)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I don'y get it? everyone knows the current taxe code is a disaster, since republicans and democrats both agree on the clear as day need to change it, what is the hold up? There are only a few options, what so hard about it? There is fair tax, flat tax, the current payroll tax or a combination of of them no secrets, why can't they vote on a few proposals? I like the fair tax, it's makes the most sense for being fair to all, and with out a doubt spur the economy, but if not something. If our government won't act on the most obvious bipartisian issue, man they need to be fired! I just don't get what the hold up is?

Mitch of IN 11:50PM December 09, 2011

I have posted the link where CBO said Bush tax cuts to rich increased their tax burden, increasing revenue by 4.06 %. Have done same thing for John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan tax cuts.

States have tried to soak the rich with BAD RESULTS.

Why doesn’t anybody show where raising taxes on rich increase revenue for government ??? There are many JFK quotes affirming this. Why Democrats don’t quote J. Kennedy economics.

“Millionaires Go Missing”

“Maryland's fleeced taxpayers fight back”

“Maryland couldn't balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O'Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were "willing and able to pay their fair share." The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it."

“One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.

No doubt”

http://www.taxcutsincreaserevenue.com/Go-To-9823-0314-8302/Tax%20Increases%20Cut%20Revenue.htm

“The Soak-the-Rich Catch-22”

“Since 1978, the U.S. has cut the highest marginal earned-income tax rate to 35% from 50%, the highest capital gains tax rate to 15% from about 50%, and the highest dividend tax rate to 15% from 70%. President Clinton cut the highest marginal tax rate on long-term capital gains from the sale of owner-occupied homes to 0% for almost all home owners. We’ve also cut just about every other income tax rate as well.”

“During this era of ubiquitous tax cuts, income tax receipts from the top 1% of income earners rose to 3.3% of GDP in 2007 (the latest year for which we have data) from 1.5% of GDP in 1978. Income tax receipts from the bottom 95% of income earners fell to 3.2% of GDP from 5.4% of GDP over the same time period. (See the nearby chart)”.

Was Newt not Clinton. Contract with America...

http://cliftonchadwick.wordpress.com/2010/08/03/the-soak-the-rich-catch-22/

Bill Hedges of MO 11:31AM December 06, 2010

A large portion of our population argues and votes against both their own principles of fair and equal treatment and their personal self-interest because our leadership has obscured the nature of our existing policies. Reform of the code is indeed critical. But the current crop of insiders guiding the debate appear committed to perpetuating the structural preferences provided to the investment class.

If the rich paid taxes at the same rate the middle class now does, we would have a balanced budget today. The challenge is, how to normalize rates between investment income and labor without stifling growth. That will requires us to re-think our structural tax policies toward wealth and investment income. Until and unless we acknowledge and confront that challenge we will not achieve meaningsul and equitable change, but instead will continue to have a government that steals from Peter to give to Paul. For further see Myth of Progressive Tax Rates at http://www.2pctsolution.com/?p=467

The Bush Tax Cuts are indeed just a sideshow which obscurs the bigger problem.

Douglas Hopkins of NJ 9:11AM December 06, 2010

Brandon Greife

Brandon Greife

Brandon Greife is the political director for the College Republican National Committee.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

An End to the NRA’s Angry Swagger

Polls show that overwhelming majorities of Americans, and even of NRA members, favor universal background checks.

Mary Kate Cary

Washington’s Toxic Stew

President Obama's burgeoning problems affect more than this week’s three scandals.

advertisement