DOCSLIB.ORG

A Defense for Tax Shelters? KPMG Is Being Investigated by the U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Defense for Tax Shelters? KPMG Is Being Investigated by the U.S (C) Tax Analysts 2004. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. edited by Robert J. Wells and Jon Almeras The Element of Willfulness: Criminal Investigation of KPMG’s Tax Shelter Operations A Defense for Tax Shelters? KPMG is being investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York for some of its By David B. Porter tax strategies. The investigation focuses on specific tax strategies (the IRS calls them shelters; KPMG calls them David B. Porter is an attorney with Robert W. ‘‘solutions’’ or ‘‘tax products’’) known as the bond linked Wood, PC (http://www.rwwpc.com) in San Fran- issue premium structure (BLIPS) strategy, the foreign cisco. His practice focuses on civil and criminal tax leveraged investment program (FLIP), the offshore port- controversies and litigation. He can be reached at folio investment strategy (OPIS), and possibly the S [email protected]. The views expressed herein are corporation charitable contribution strategy (SC2). solely those of the author and should not be attributed BLIPS to any other source. KPMG pitched BLIPS as a tax-advantaged investment that would generate a large tax loss. The investor was People are always asking me for free legal advice after told that in exchange for payments to KPMG, which were finding out that I defend people in civil and criminal tax frequently in the millions, he would generate a tax loss of controversies. One of my most recent interrogations was as much as 10 to 20 times the investment. conducted by an accountant at a highbrow cocktail party. Now I don’t mind having a casual conversation about Three tax shelters — FLIP, OPIS, and BLIPS — are tax, but I try and steer clear of doling out legal advice to similar and function as ‘‘loss generators,’’ meaning they people who are already half in the bag and who are only generate large paper losses that the purchaser of the going to remember half of what I tell them anyway. (By product then uses to offset other income, thereby shelter- the way, I hear that a lawyer can be sued for giving out ing it from taxation. All three products have generated bad legal advice even when it’s at a cocktail party. hundreds of millions of dollars in paper losses for Therefore, when a prospective client is smashed, doesn’t taxpayers by using a series of complex orchestrated remember to provide all of the facts, and may only hear transactions involving shell corporations, structured fi- half of the answer, there is a greatly enhanced risk of a nance, purported multimillion dollar loans, and deliber- malpractice action.) ately obscure investments. The BLIPS transactions required a bank to lend, on a One of the topics of our conversation involved tax nonrecourse basis, money to a shell corporation with few shelters. In the process, I remarked, ‘‘You know, igno- assets and no ongoing business. The so-called loan pro- rance is a good excuse for the law.’’ To which the ceeds were instead deemed ‘‘collateral’’ for the ‘‘loan’’ accountant responded, ‘‘I thought ignorance is no excuse itself under an ‘‘overcollateralization’’ provision that for the law.’’ We proceeded to discuss the interesting required the ‘‘borrower’’ to place 101 percent of the loan concept of how the government is trying to attack proceeds on deposit with the bank. The loan proceeds, established tax shelter designers despite the fact that serving as cash collateral, were then subject to severe ignorance and complexity are both legally acceptable investment restrictions and were closely monitored by excuses for tax crimes. In doing so, we concluded that the the bank. government will have a heavy burden in attempting to prove the element of willfulness, which is one of the The end result was that only a small portion of the elements of a tax crime. funds in each BLIPS transaction was ever placed at risk in legitimate investments. Also, the banks were empowered The IRS believes that some individuals and businesses to unilaterally terminate a BLIPS loan under a variety of have promoted certain tax shelters and encouraged indi- circumstances, including, for example, if the cash collat- viduals to participate in them as a way to avoid reporting eral fell below 101 percent. The banks and investment large capital gains from unrelated transactions (talk advisory firms knew that the BLIPS loan structure and about a party gone out of control). Any person, warns the investment restrictions made little economic sense apart IRS, who willfully conceals the amount of capital gains from the client’s tax objectives, which consisted primarily and losses in that way, or who willfully advises others of generating huge paper losses for KPMG’s clients who regarding that type of concealment, may be guilty of then used those losses to offset other income and shelter criminal offenses. it from taxation. However, if the government is going to have a fighting chance at landing any indictments involving criminal BOSS offenses by a promoter, it’s going to have to figure out Another tax shelter that was widely marketed was how to circumvent the case law that developed the called the bond and option sales strategy (BOSS). The IRS definition of willfulness. shut it down with Notice 99-59, 1999-52 IRB 761, Doc TAX NOTES, September 13, 2004 1225 TAX PRACTICE AND ACCOUNTING NEWS 1999-38713, 1999 TNT 237-1. The BOSS shelter involved Willfulness: The Case Law an arrangement that applied the rules for corporate The general rule that ignorance of the law or a mistake (C) Tax Analysts 2004. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. distributions of encumbered property to create artificially of law is no defense to criminal prosecution is deeply high basis in the corporate stock that would produce rooted in the American legal system. See, for example, deductible losses on the later disposition of the stock by United States v. Smith, 18 U.S. 153 (1820); Reynolds v. shareholders. There are now civil cases docketed in Tax United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879). Based on the notion that Court involving the next evolution of that strategy, the the law is definite and knowable, under common law it son-of-BOSS shelters. was presumed that every person knew the law. In Notice 2000-44, 2000-36 IRB 255, Doc 2000-21236, However, the proliferation of statutes and regulations 2000 TNT 157-7, the IRS identified arrangements involv- has sometimes made it difficult for the average citizen to ing partnership interests that created artificially high know and comprehend the extent of the duties and basis in partnership interests, resulting in deductible obligations imposed by the law, especially the tax law. losses on the later disposition of the partnership interests Therefore, Congress has softened the effect of the by the partners. In one version of the partnership varia- common-law presumption by making specific intent to tion of the shelter, a taxpayer borrowed at a premium and violate the law an element of some federal criminal tax contributed the cash to a partnership, and the partner- offenses. As a result, more than half a century ago the ship assumed liability for the debt. For example, the Supreme Court interpreted the term ‘‘willfully’’ as used taxpayer received $3,000 in cash under a loan agreement in federal criminal tax statutes as carving out an excep- that provided an inflated stated rate of interest and a tion to the traditional rule. stated principal of only $2,000. The taxpayer contributed The special treatment of criminal tax offenses is largely the $3,000 to a partnership and the partnership assumed due to the complexity of the tax laws. In United States v. the debt. The taxpayer then sold the partnership interest. Murdock, 290 U.S. 389 (1933), the Court stated, ‘‘Congress The partner took the position under sections 705(a)(2), did not intend that a person, by reason of a bona fide 722, and 752(b) that its basis in its partnership interest misunderstanding as to his liability for the tax, as to his was $1,000. The partner argued that the amount of the duty to make a return, or as to the adequacy of the liability that the partnership had assumed under section records he maintained, should become a criminal by his 752(b) was $2,000, so that under section 705(a)(2), its basis mere failure to measure up to the prescribed standard of in the partnership interest should be reduced to $1,000. conduct.’’ Id. at 396. The partner then sold the partnership interest for a The Court held in Murdock that the defendant was nominal amount and claimed a $1,000 capital loss. entitled to a jury instruction as to whether he acted in In another version, offsetting assets and liabilities good faith based on his actual knowledge. The Court were present but the taxpayer took the position that the further interpreted the term ‘‘willfully’’ generally to partnership had not assumed any liability. The taxpayer mean ‘‘an act done with a bad purpose’’ or with ‘‘an evil purchased a call option and simultaneously wrote an motive.’’ Id. at 394-95. offsetting call option. The taxpayer then contributed both Subsequent decisions have refined that proposition. In options to a partnership. The partner took the position United States v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973), the Court that its basis in the partnership interest was the same as described the term ‘‘willfully’’ as connoting ‘‘a voluntary, its positive basis in the purchased call option, unreduced intentional violation of a known legal duty.’’ Id.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TALES from the KPMG SKUNK WORKS: the BASIS-SHIFT OR DEFECTIVE-REDEMPTION SHELTER by Calvin H
    (C) Tax Analysts 2005. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. TALES FROM THE KPMG SKUNK WORKS: THE BASIS-SHIFT OR DEFECTIVE-REDEMPTION SHELTER By Calvin H. Johnson Table of Contents Calvin H. Johnson is professor of law at the Uni- versity of Texas at Austin. This report arises out of his I. Was FLIP/OPIS Fair Game? ............433 testimony before the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcom- A. Description of the FLIP/OPIS Basis-Shift mittee on Investigation hearings on the role of profes- Shelter ........................ 433 sionals in the U.S. tax shelter industry. Prof. Johnson has agreed to serve as an expert for plaintiffs who B. The Heart of the Shelter ............ 435 bought KPMG shelters and seek recovery of costs. He C. The Paramount Substance-Over-Form thanks James Martens and Samuel Buell for comments Doctrines ....................... 438 on an earlier draft, but acknowledges responsibility II. FLIP/OPIS and Professional Standards ... 440 for errors. A. The One-in-Three Chance Test ........ 440 In this report, Johnson argues that the basis-shift or B. One-in-Three Applied to Outcomes .... 441 defective-redemption shelter, called FLIP or OPIS by III. Concluding Remarks ................ 442 KPMG, was an early product of KPMG’s endeavor to develop complete tax packages that could be sold for KPMG, the fourth largest accounting firm, is negoti- multimillion-dollar fees to many customers. The ating with the Justice Department over the terms by which it might avoid criminal indictment for its conduct FLIP/OPIS shelter gives a rare opportunity, he says, to 1 see both KPMG internal deliberations and also the arising out of its tax shelters.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Acquainted with VAT (C) Tax Analysts 2011
    Introduction: Getting Acquainted With VAT (C) Tax Analysts 2011. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. By Martin A. Sullivan Martin A. Sullivan is a contributing editor to Tax Analysts. Until recently, most talk about a value added tax in the United States was an academic exercise. Policy experts kept telling anyone who would listen that we could boost our competitive- ness if some form of a VAT was used to replace all, or at least the worst parts, of our clunky income tax. But there was no pressing need for a VAT and no political incentive to undertake the arduous task of orchestrating a major tax reform. But times are changing. Between the 2007 and 2010 fiscal years, the national debt increased from 36 percent to 62 percent of gross national product. And matters are only getting worse. America is relentlessly moving toward the edge of a fiscal abyss. In Wash- ington, while our leaders may talk tough, they are not taking action. To avoid upsetting voters, they are careful not to even hint at spending cuts or tax increases of the size needed to make a real dent in the problem. With no limit on the national credit card, the daily push and pull of politics continues unhindered by the impending crisis. Our system of checks and balances and the usual political gridlock are partly to blame. Also part of the mix is our national mental block about the federal debt. The tough choices that must be made are outside the scope of current political discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Scholars Criticize International Tax
    CURRENT AND QUOTABLE (C) Tax Analysts 2015. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. tax notes™ Scholars Criticize International profits as a share of GDP — at 9.8% — are nearly at all-time highs.2 Their U.S. taxes as a share of GDP Tax Reform Proposals are just 1.9%, which are near all-time lows.3 [See Figure below] And U.S. corporate taxes as a share of federal revenue have plummeted from 32.1% in This letter to Congress from 24 international tax 4 experts expresses opposition to international tax 1952 to 10.6% last year. Finally, the number of reform proposals under consideration that would cross-border acquisitions involving U.S. and other establish a territorial tax system and a low deemed OECD countries has remained relatively constant repatriation tax rate of 14 percent on $2.1 trillion in over the last decade — U.S. firms acquired 324 existing offshore profits. The letter also summarizes OECD firms in 2006 and 238 in 2014 and OECD research showing that there is no factual basis for firms acquired 311 U.S. firms in 2006 and 226 in the assertion that U.S. multinationals cannot com- 2014.5 pete globally because of the U.S. tax system and U.S. tax rates. There is no factual basis for the assertion that U.S. multinationals cannot compete globally because of the U.S. tax system. The effective tax rates on their Dear Member of Congress: worldwide income, including U.S. taxes, are typi- As legal scholars, economists and practitioners cally far below the 35% statutory rate — at one-half who are experts on international tax issues, we are the 35% rate or even less, according to some esti- writing to express our opposition to current propos- mates.
    [Show full text]
  • The Viability of the Fair Tax
    The Fair Tax 1 Running head: THE FAIR TAX The Viability of The Fair Tax Jonathan Clark A Senior Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in the Honors Program Liberty University Fall 2008 The Fair Tax 2 Acceptance of Senior Honors Thesis This Senior Honors Thesis is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation from the Honors Program of Liberty University. ______________________________ Gene Sullivan, Ph.D. Thesis Chair ______________________________ Donald Fowler, Th.D. Committee Member ______________________________ JoAnn Gilmore, M.B.A. Committee Member ______________________________ James Nutter, D.A. Honors Director ______________________________ Date The Fair Tax 3 Abstract This thesis begins by investigating the current system of federal taxation in the United States and examining the flaws within the system. It will then deal with a proposal put forth to reform the current tax system, namely the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax will be examined in great depth and all aspects of it will be explained. The objective of this paper is to determine if the Fair Tax is a viable solution for fundamental tax reform in America. Both advantages and disadvantages of the Fair Tax will objectively be pointed out and an educated opinion will be given regarding its feasibility. The Fair Tax 4 The Viability of the Fair Tax In 1986 the United States federal tax code was changed dramatically in hopes of simplifying the previous tax code. Since that time the code has undergone various changes that now leave Americans with over 60,000 pages of tax code, rules, and rulings that even the most adept tax professionals do not understand.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Margin
    © 2020 Tax Analysts. All rights reserved. Analysts does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. ON THE MARGIN tax notes federal High Tax, Low Tax? Comparing Income Tax and Wealth Tax Rates by Erin Melly and Alan D. Viard Without taking a position on the merits of wealth taxation,1 we provide a framework for properly interpreting wealth tax rates and their relationship to income tax rates. Because wealth taxes impose a flow of taxes on a stock of wealth, they cannot be properly stated without specifying a time unit. For example, the top tax rate in the wealth tax proposal by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., is not 6 percent but is instead 6 percent per year. No time units are required for income tax rates, for which a flow of taxes is imposed on a flow of income. We discuss how to translate wealth tax rates into equivalent income tax rates for both safe and Erin Melly is a research associate and Alan D. risky assets. We show that apparently low wealth Viard is a resident scholar at the American tax rates are equivalent to apparently high income Enterprise Institute. They thank Karlyn tax rates and vice versa. Bowman, Alex Brill, Jason Saving, and Michael We critically assess the public and political Strain for helpful comments. discussion of wealth tax rates. We find that the In this article, Melly and Viard clarify the media and the candidates have a mixed record fundamental differences between wealth tax regarding the clarity and accuracy of their rates and income tax rates, and they critique the public discussion of wealth tax rates.
    [Show full text]
  • Total State and Local Business Taxes
    Total state and local business taxes State-by-state estimates for fiscal year 2012 The authors Andrew Phillips is a principal in the Quantitative Economics and Statistics group of Ernst & Young LLP and directs EY’s Regional Economics practice. He has an MA in Economics from Johns Hopkins University and a BA in Economics from Emory University. Robert Cline is the National Director of State and Local Tax Policy Economics of Ernst & Young LLP. Robert is the former director of tax research for the States of Michigan and Minnesota. He has a PhD in Economics from the University of Michigan. Caroline Sallee is a manager in the Quantitative Economics and Statistics group. She has a Master’s degree in Public Policy from the University of Michigan. Michelle Klassen is an analyst in the Quantitative Economics and Statistics group. She has a BS in Economics from Virginia Tech. Daniel Sufranski is an analyst in the Quantitative Economics and Statistics group. He has a BA in Economics and Political Science from Washington University. This study was prepared by the Quantitative Economics and Statistics (QUEST) practice of Ernst & Young LLP in conjunction with the Council On State Taxation (COST). QUEST is a group of economists, statisticians, survey professionals and tax policy researchers within EY’s National Tax Practice, located in Washington, DC. QUEST provides quantitative advisory services and products to private and public sector clients that enhance business processes, support regulatory compliance, analyze proposed policy issues and provide litigation support. COST is a nonprofit trade association based in Washington, DC. COST was formed in 1969 as an advisory committee to the Council of State Chambers of Commerce and today has an independent membership of nearly 600 major corporations engaged in interstate and international business.
    [Show full text]
  • EFFECTS of the TAX CUTS and JOBS ACT: a PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS William G
    EFFECTS OF THE TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT: A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS William G. Gale, Hilary Gelfond, Aaron Krupkin, Mark J. Mazur, and Eric Toder June 13, 2018 ABSTRACT This paper examines the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017, the largest tax overhaul since 1986. The new tax law makes substantial changes to the rates and bases of both the individual and corporate income taxes, cutting the corporate income tax rate to 21 percent, redesigning international tax rules, and providing a deduction for pass-through income. TCJA will stimulate the economy in the near term. Most models indicate that the long-term impact on GDP will be small. The impact will be smaller on GNP than on GDP because the law will generate net capital inflows from abroad that have to be repaid in the future. The new law will reduce federal revenues by significant amounts, even after allowing for the modest impact on economic growth. It will make the distribution of after-tax income more unequal, raise federal debt, and impose burdens on future generations. When it is ultimately financed with spending cuts or other tax increases, as it must be in the long run, TCJA will, under the most plausible scenarios, end up making most households worse off than if TCJA had not been enacted. The new law simplifies taxes in some ways but creates new complexity and compliance issues in others. It will raise health care premiums and reduce health insurance coverage and will have adverse effects on charitable contributions and some state and local governments.
    [Show full text]
  • Total State and Local Business Taxes State-By-State Estimates for Fiscal Year 2015
    Total state and local business taxes State-by-state estimates for fiscal year 2015 December 2016 Executive summary This study presents detailed state-by-state estimates of The state and local business tax estimates presented the state and local taxes paid by businesses for FY15. in this study reflect tax collections from July 2014 It is the 14th annual report prepared by Ernst & Young through June 2015 in most states.1 These include LLP in conjunction with the Council On State Taxation business property taxes; sales and excise taxes paid (COST) and the State Tax Research Institute (STRI). by businesses on their input purchases and capital expenditures; gross receipts taxes; corporate income Businesses paid more than $707.5 billion in state and and franchise taxes; business and corporate license local taxes in FY15, an increase of 1.9% from FY14. taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; individual State business taxes grew less quickly than local taxes, income taxes paid by owners of noncorporate (pass- with state taxes growing 1.0% compared with local through) businesses; and other state and local taxes tax growth of 2.9%. In FY15, business tax revenue that are the statutory liability of business taxpayers. accounted for 44.1% of all state and local tax revenue. The business share has been within one percentage point of 45% since FY03. Total state and local business taxes | 1 Key findings of the study include: • Individual income taxes on pass-through business income accounted for 5.5% of total state and local • Revenue from state and local business taxes business tax revenue.
    [Show full text]
  • A VAT for the United States: (C) Tax Analysts 2011
    A VAT for the United States: (C) Tax Analysts 2011. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. Part of the Solution By William G. Gale and Benjamin H. Harris William G. Gale is the Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Chair in Federal Economic Policy at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Benjamin H. Harris is a senior research associate with the Economics Studies Program at the Brookings Institution. For helpful comments on an earlier draft, the authors thank Henry Aaron, Alan Auerbach, Martin Baily, Tracy Gordon, Jane Gravelle, Donald Marron, Diane Lim Rogers, Isabel Sawhill, and Roberton Williams. The authors thank Ilana Fischer and David Logan for research assistance. The United States faces a large medium-term federal budget deficit and an unsustainable long-term fiscal gap. Left unat- tended, these shortfalls will hobble and eventually cripple the economy. The only plausible way to close the gap is through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. This paper discusses why a federal VAT should be part of a constructive solution to the fiscal problem. Under a VAT, businesses pay taxes on the difference between their total sales to other businesses and households and their purchases of inputs from other businesses. That difference rep- resents the value added by the firm to the product or service in question.1 The sum of value added at each stage of production is the retail sales price, so in theory the VAT simply replicates the tax patterns created by a retail sales tax and is therefore a tax on aggregate consumption.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin R. Press
    Martin R. Press Shareholder Fort Lauderdale [email protected] (954) 468-1314 Practice & Industry Education Bar & Court Admissions Areas University of Miami School Florida Bar, 1973 Tax Law of Law, LL.M., Taxation, Board certified, taxation 1976 law Brooklyn Law School, J.D., New York Bar, 1973 1973 United States Supreme Hofstra University, B.B.A., Court 1969 United States Tax Court United States Court of Federal Claims United States Court of Appeals Fifth and Eleventh Circuits United States District Courts Southern District of Florida Southern District of New York Eastern District of New York Overview Martin Press was the first board certified tax attorney in the state of Florida. 1 of 6 He has served tax clients in planning, international issues and tax controversies. Prior to becoming a tax lawyer, he was employed by three of the national CPA firms. In 2014 and 2018, Martin had three highly noted tax cases, including U.S. v. Clarke, U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. v. Zwerner, a highly publicized international tax related case, and Dynamo Holdings in the U.S. Tax Court. Martin is a frequent speaker on tax matters at the ABA Section on Taxation, the Annual National Institute on Criminal Tax Fraud and the National Institute on Tax Controversy. He has been quoted in Time Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today and the Los Angeles Times, and has appeared on ABC News, Fox Business News and Swiss National Television. He is frequently quoted on matters involving voluntary disclosure of offshore accounts, identity theft and fraud. Martin serves as a trustee of Nova Southeastern University, and is chairman emeritus of the board of Nova Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Fairtax Won't Work
    (C) Tax Analysts 2007. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. Why the FairTax Won’t Work an aging society could be borne with relative ease.1 Unfortunately, the administrative problems inherent in By Bruce Bartlett this proposal make it impossible to take seriously. People know how the current tax system operates. They receive gross wages from their employers and automatically have income and payroll taxes withheld Bruce Bartlett was formerly Treasury deputy assis- from their paychecks. A worker may see that his em- tant secretary for economic policy and executive di- ployer pays him $1,000 per week, but he has only $800 to rector of the congressional Joint Economic Committee. spend because of all the taxes. In this article, he criticizes the FairTax, a tax reform FairTax advocates repeatedly claim that their proposal proposal supported by former Arkansas Gov. Mike would allow all workers to keep 100 percent of their Huckabee, a candidate for the Republican presidential paychecks. The clear implication is that withholding nomination. The proposal alleges that a 23 percent would simply disappear. The worker now netting $800 national retail sales tax collected by the states would per week would immediately get a $200 raise and start be sufficient to replace all federal taxes. That would taking home the full $1,000 gross wage that he is paid. allow for abolition of the IRS and other benefits, Instead of paying income and payroll taxes, workers supporters claim. would pay their taxes when they buy things. The FairTax would impose a 23 percent tax on all goods and services.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxing Sales Under the Fairtax: What Rate Works? by Paul Bachman, Jonathan Haughton, Laurence J
    (C) Tax Analysts 2006. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. Taxing Sales Under the FairTax: What Rate Works? By Paul Bachman, Jonathan Haughton, Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Alfonso Sanchez-Penalver, and David G. Tuerck Paul Bachman is the director of research at the gains, alternative minimum, self-employment, and Beacon Hill Institute, Suffolk University, Boston. transfer taxes with a single-rate federal retail sales Jonathan Haughton is an associate professor of eco- tax known as the FairTax. The FairTax also would nomics at Suffolk and a senior economist at the provide a ‘‘prebate’’ to each household based on its Beacon Hill Institute. Laurence J. Kotlikoff is a pro- demographic composition. The prebate is set to fessor of economics at Boston University and a ensure that households pay no net taxes on spending research associate at the National Bureau of Eco- up to the poverty level. nomic Research, Cambridge, Mass. Alfonso Sanchez- Penalver is an economist at the Beacon Hill Institute. William G. Gale (2005) and the President’s Advi- David G. Tuerck is a professor of economics and sory Panel on Federal Tax Reform (2005) have sug- chair of the economics department at Suffolk and gested that the effective (tax-inclusive) tax rate executive director of the Beacon Hill Institute. They needed to implement the FairTax is far higher than are indebted to David Burton and Karen Walby for the proposed 23 percent rate. This study, which very valuable comments and to Douglas Giuffre for builds on Gale’s analysis, shows that a 23 percent his excellent research assistance.
    [Show full text]