DOCSLIB.ORG

Special Report 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Special Report 1 SPECIAL 1 REPORT SPECIAL March 2000 No. 96 REPORT The Tax Burden of the Median American Family Two-Earner Family’s Total Tax Burden Slips Under 40 Percent by Claire M. Hintz Of the many questions surrounding tax do business with taxpayers—have to pay taxes Senior Economist policy, few can match the substantive and that end up being passed on to taxpayers in the Tax Foundation political importance of the total tax burden on form of higher prices or lower income. For the median family. Taxes are the most funda- example, employers pay half of all payroll mental means of pricing out government, and taxes, and these taxes diminish salaries. Also, yet few taxpayers have a clear notion as to the when corporations pay their own taxes, they price they pay. pass that cost on. Unfortunately, taxpayers are mostly unaware of these hidden taxes even Assessing the Total Tax Burden though they make up a significant fraction of Taxpayers pay such a wide variety of taxes the family’s real tax burden. at the federal, state, and local levels. Some This lack of transparency in the national taxes are easy to detect, like a personal income tax system is a great flaw that this study helps tax or a sales tax, but many taxes go unseen. to remedy. For historical comparison, this That happens when third parties—people who study presents a fifty-year series of the aggre- Figure 1 50 Taxes as a Percentage of Families with One Earner Families with Two Earners Median Family Income Selected Years, 1955–1998 41.50 40.90 40.90 40 38.60 39.00 37.60 .60 .60 37.00 37 37.30 37 32.20 .50 30 30 21.70 21.60 20 18.20 17.30 10 0 Source: Tax Foundation 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 1996 1997 1998 SPECIAL 2 REPORT gate tax burden on one- and two-earner Tracking the Median Family’s families. Tax Burden Over Time The Relevance of Measuring the The tax burden on the median income Median Family’s Tax Burden two-earner family is estimated to have peaked at 41.5 percent in 1996, dropped to 40.9 The family unit has grown in political percent in 1997 and dropped again to 39 stature greatly in recent years. Advocates of percent in 1998. In 1998, this family is esti- lower taxes often cite the tax pressures on the mated to have paid $26,759 in taxes on family as one motivation for a tax reduction. It $68,605 in direct and attributed income. (See is, therefore, important to have some gauge as to the magnitude of those pressures. Perhaps of even greater import, policy makers and the taxpayers themselves need some consistent Taxes are the most gauge of this tax burden over time. Focusing on the tax burden of the median fundamental means of income family is relevant because, by defini- pricing out government, tion, half of all families have incomes that exceed that of the median family and half have and yet few taxpayers incomes that are less than the median family’s. This study examines one- and two-earner have a clear notion as to families separately because their tax burdens the price they pay. are typically quite different. How the Tax Burden is Measured Figure 1 and Table 2). Much of the nearly two The tax burden is presented in dollar terms percentage point drop that occurred between and as a rate. To calculate the tax burden in 1997 and 1998 was the result of the enactment dollar terms, the study sums the families’ total of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (TRA’97). federal, state, and local tax liabilities. This The effect of TRA’97 was largest on families involves adding together such obvious taxes as with children due to the creation of new tax personal income and payroll taxes, but it also credits: the Per-Child Tax Credit and the Hope involves attributing some amount of all other and Lifetime Learning Education Credits. taxes these families ultimately pay, such as the Table 1 and Table 2 show the historical corporate income tax, sales taxes, etc. evolution of the tax burden on one- and two- The tax burden is also expressed as a rate, earner median income families. The burden is which reflects the median family’s total shown on a decade-by-decade basis from 1955 effective tax rate. This rate is the ratio of the through 1985 and on a yearly basis thereafter. total tax burden to total income. The total Between 1955 and 1998, the tax burdens on income of one- and two-income families is both categories of median families grew by calculated by summing such income as wages over 20 percentage points—more than dou- bling since 1955. Both tables also track the tax burden in dollar terms. After adjusting for inflation (to The tax burden on the median income 1998 dollars), the taxes paid by the two-earner family are 4.9 times greater in 1998 than in two-earner family is estimated to have 1955. For the one-earner family, taxes are 3.4 peaked at 41.5 percent in 1996, dropped times greater than they were in 1955. to 40.9 percent in 1997 and dropped Defining the “Typical” Family There is no single, best definition of the again to 39 percent in 1998. typical or average taxpayer. The two-earner family has the advantage of being the most common type of family. However, two- and salaries, payroll taxes paid on their behalf earner families as a group have higher by their employers, dividends, interest, and incomes than one-earner families, and thus realized capital gains. have historically higher total tax rates. For A detailed description of the methodology example, in 1996 the total tax rate of the is presented at the end of the report. one-earner family was 37.3 percent, 4.2 percentage points lower than the two-earner family. By 1998, however, the difference SPECIAL 3 REPORT Figure 2 Taxes as a Percentage of the Median Two-Earner Family’s Income by Type Selected Years, 1955–1998 16 14 12 State and Local Taxes 10 Combined Payroll Taxes Federal Income Taxes 8 Other Federal Taxes 6 4 2 0 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 1996 1997 1998 Source: Tax Foundation between the two rates had narrowed to only The median is one definition of average. 1.4 percentage points. In 1998, the one- An alternative definition is to calculate the earner family is estimated to have paid arithmetic mean income level for a family $13,746 total in taxes on $36,579 in total and use this to represent the typical family. income. The primary reason for not choosing this This study uses one- and two-earner definition is that government data are more median families as representative of a typical complete and consistent for the median family. This is consistent with the practice of family. If the arithmetic mean were chosen, the Federal Reserve Board which refers to however, one might expect the total tax rate the net worth of the “typical family” as a to be slightly higher for the two-earner mean family with the median amount of wealth. average family than for the two-earner Also, the Bureau of the Census provides a median family. The reason for this is the great deal of information based on these greater proportion of income earned by characterizations. upper-income taxpayers interacting with the The tax burdens of the one- and two- generally progressive tax structure. earner median income families over time may The Tax Foundation releases two other be considered gauges of the “typical” family statistics each year that also reflect to an as reflected by their income. Such a family is extent an average tax burden. Tax Freedom typical in the sense that half of all two-earner Day, which is released every April 15, shows families have incomes that are higher than the ratio of all taxes collected at the federal, the median two-earner family, and half have state, and local levels to national income, incomes that are lower. Similarly, half of all which is then allocated on a pro-rata basis one-earner families have incomes higher than across the calendar. Unlike the two-earner the median one-earner family, and half of all median family calculation, which shows the such families have lower incomes. average tax rate facing a specific category of SPECIAL 4 REPORT taxpayer, Tax Freedom Day illustrates the Figure 3 Representative Budget of the Median Two-Earner Family, 1958 tax burden of all Americans, on average. In 1999, for example, 35.7 percent of the nation’s income was collected in tax pay- ments. Because 131 days is 35.7 percent of the year, May 11 was Tax Freedom Day in Recreation 1999. Other Another broad measure of America’s tax 4.2% 7.0% Transportation burden published annually by the Tax 9.0% Federal Taxes Foundation is the Price of a Civilized Soci- Medical Care 14.2% ety. It shows the change over time of the per 4.8% capita, inflation-adjusted total tax burden. Whereas Tax Freedom Day is a depiction State and Local Taxes through the calendar of the average tax rate, 3.7% being the ratio of total taxes to national income, the Price of Civilized Society House and Household Savings depicts the dollar amount of tax paid per 6.5% 21.5% capita. In 1999, for example, the Price of Civilized Society was estimated to be $10,298.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Analysis of the Graded Property Tax Robert M
    TaxingTaxing Simply Simply District of Columbia Tax Revision Commission TaxingTaxing FairlyFairly Full Report District of Columbia Tax Revision Commission 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 550 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: (202) 518-7275 Fax: (202) 466-7967 www.dctrc.org The Authors Robert M. Schwab Professor, Department of Economics University of Maryland College Park, Md. Amy Rehder Harris Graduate Assistant, Department of Economics University of Maryland College Park, Md. Authors’ Acknowledgments We thank Kim Coleman for providing us with the assessment data discussed in the section “The Incidence of a Graded Property Tax in the District of Columbia.” We also thank Joan Youngman and Rick Rybeck for their help with this project. CHAPTER G An Analysis of the Graded Property Tax Robert M. Schwab and Amy Rehder Harris Introduction In most jurisdictions, land and improvements are taxed at the same rate. The District of Columbia is no exception to this general rule. Consider two homes in the District, each valued at $100,000. Home A is a modest home on a large lot; suppose the land and structures are each worth $50,000. Home B is a more sub- stantial home on a smaller lot; in this case, suppose the land is valued at $20,000 and the improvements at $80,000. Under current District law, both homes would be taxed at a rate of 0.96 percent on the total value and thus, as Figure 1 shows, the owners of both homes would face property taxes of $960.1 But property can be taxed in many ways. Under a graded, or split-rate, tax, land is taxed more heavily than structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada Taxation of Foreign Passive Income (FAPI)
    INTERNATIONAL TAX POLICY FORUM / GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER Reform of International Tax: Canada, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States January 21, 2011 Gewirz Student Center, 12th floor 120 F Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 International Tax Policy Forum International Tax Policy Forum and Georgetown University Law Center Conference on: REFORM OF INTERNATIONAL TAX: CANADA, JAPAN, UNITED KINGDOM, AND UNITED STATES Table of Contents 1) Agenda ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2) Sponsoring Organizations a) About ITPF ....................................................................................................................................... 2 b) About Georgetown University Law Center ....................................................................................... 3 3) Taxation of International Income in Canada, Japan, UK, and US a) International Tax Rules in Canada, Japan, the UK and US (J. Mintz Presentation) ....................... 4 b) Canada i) S. Richardson, Presentation on Canadian international tax reform (Jan. 2011) ....................... 9 ii) N. Pantaleo, Presentation on Canada's taxation of foreign business income (Jan. 2011) ..... 12 iii) Advisory Panel on Canada’s System of International Taxation, Enhancing Canada’s International Tax Advantage, (Dec. 2008) [Executive Summary] ........................................... 16 c) UK i) M. Williams, Presentation on UK international tax
    [Show full text]
  • Latest CBO Report on Incomes and Taxes Shows That the Federal Fiscal System Is Very Progressive
    Latest CBO Report on Incomes and Taxes Shows that the Federal Fiscal System is Very Progressive FISCAL Scott A. Hodge FACT President No. 742 Jan. 2021 Key Findings • President Joe Biden has proposed an ambitious agenda that would make the federal fiscal system more progressive, and the huge budget deficits caused by the numerous COVID-19 relief packages could heighten the call for more tax revenues. What is needed are benchmark facts to guide these debates. • A recent study by the Congressional Budget Office fills this void with data showing that the current fiscal system—both taxes and direct spending benefits—is already very progressive and redistributive. • In 2017, the federal fiscal system lifted the incomes of households in the lowest quintile by 126 percent, in the second quintile by 46 percent, and in the middle quintile by 10 percent while reducing the incomes of households in the highest quintile by 23 percent and in the top 1 percent by 31 percent. • In 2017, households in the lowest quintile received $67.67 in direct federal benefits for every $1 of taxes paid vs. $1.60 for middle-quintile households, while households in the highest quintile received $0.15, and $0.02 for the top 1 percent. • In the aggregate, fiscal policy increased the incomes of households in the bottom three quintiles by more than $1 trillion in 2017 and reduced the incomes of households in the highest quintile by more than $1.7 trillion, The Tax Foundation is the nation’s of which $728 billion came from households in the top 1 percent.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    Table of Contents Preface ..................................................................................................... ix Introductory Notes to Tables ................................................................. xi Chapter A: Selected Economic Statistics ............................................... 1 A1. Resident Population of the United States ............................................................................3 A2. Resident Population by State ..............................................................................................4 A3. Number of Households in the United States .......................................................................6 A4. Total Population by Age Group............................................................................................7 A5. Total Population by Age Group, Percentages .......................................................................8 A6. Civilian Labor Force by Employment Status .......................................................................9 A7. Gross Domestic Product, Net National Product, and National Income ...................................................................................................10 A8. Gross Domestic Product by Component ..........................................................................11 A9. State Gross Domestic Product...........................................................................................12 A10. Selected Economic Measures, Rates of Change...............................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • How Do Federal Income Tax Rates Work? XXXX
    TAX POLICY CENTER BRIEFING BOOK Key Elements of the U.S. Tax System INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX How do federal income tax rates work? XXXX Q. How do federal income tax rates work? A. The federal individual income tax has seven tax rates that rise with income. Each rate applies only to income in a specific range (tax bracket). CURRENT INCOME TAX RATES AND BRACKETS The federal individual income tax has seven tax rates ranging from 10 percent to 37 percent (table 1). The rates apply to taxable income—adjusted gross income minus either the standard deduction or allowable itemized deductions. Income up to the standard deduction (or itemized deductions) is thus taxed at a zero rate. Federal income tax rates are progressive: As taxable income increases, it is taxed at higher rates. Different tax rates are levied on income in different ranges (or brackets) depending on the taxpayer’s filing status. In TAX POLICY CENTER BRIEFING BOOK Key Elements of the U.S. Tax System INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX How do federal income tax rates work? XXXX 2020 the top tax rate (37 percent) applies to taxable income over $518,400 for single filers and over $622,050 for married couples filing jointly. Additional tax schedules and rates apply to taxpayers who file as heads of household and to married individuals filing separate returns. A separate schedule of tax rates applies to capital gains and dividends. Tax brackets are adjusted annually for inflation. BASICS OF PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAXATION Each tax rate applies only to income in a specific tax bracket. Thus, if a taxpayer earns enough to reach a new bracket with a higher tax rate, his or her total income is not taxed at that rate, just the income in that bracket.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxes and New York's Fiscal Crisis
    TAXES AND NEW YORK’S FISCAL CRISIS: EVALUATING REVENUE PROPOSALS TO CLOSE THE STATE’S BUDGET GAP By Jared Walczak PRINCIPLE D INSIGHTFU L ENGAGED TAX FOUNDATION | 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At first glance, New York faces projected budget shortfalls as arresting as the New York City skyline, and to meet the challenge, some have proposed taxes that would rival that skyline for staggering height. The challenge confronting policymakers is real, though perhaps not as dire as once feared. Its intensity depends on the pace of recovery, the availability of additional federal aid, and the policy choices state officials make in a state that has borne the brunt of the pandemic. State lawmakers will be called upon to navigate between two forbidding shoals, finding a way to meet the state’s revenue needs from a currently diminished tax base without implementing policies that make those economic losses permanent. It is no easy task, and there are no pat answers. In this publication, we examine the scope of the losses New York confronts and the prospects for—and potential extent of—federal relief in helping alleviate the state’s fiscal crisis. Then, situated in the context of New York’s past efforts to improve its tax competitiveness, and the importance of maintaining the Empire State’s attraction in an increasingly mobile economy, we review many of the proposals for raising additional revenue. Some hold promise, others present economic perils, and a few are legal quagmires. Recent data from the New York Department of Taxation and Finance suggest four-year tax revenue losses of $20.9 billion in real terms, about a 6.7 percent inflation-adjusted decline across the period, and a challenge above what the figures would indicate for a state that was struggling to balance its budgets even before the COVID-19 pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Supercharged IPO (Vanderbilt Law Review, Forthcoming, 2014)
    The Supercharged IPO (Vanderbilt Law Review, forthcoming, 2014) Victor Fleischer University of Colorado School of Law and Nancy Staudt USC Gould School of Law Center in Law, Economics and Organization Research Papers Series No. C13-6 Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 13-6 March 26, 2013 VOLUME FEBRUARY 2013 NO. THE SUPERCHARGED IPO By Victor Fleischer* Nancy Staudt** A new innovation on the IPO landscape has emerged in the last two decades, allowing owner-founders to extract billions of dollars from newly-public companies. These IPOs—labeled supercharged IPOs—have been the subject of widespread debate and controversy: lawyers, financial experts, journalists, and Members of Congress have all weighed in on the topic. Some have argued that supercharged IPOs are a “brilliant, just brilliant,” while others have argued they are “underhanded” and “bizarre.” In this article, we explore the supercharged IPO and explain how and why this new deal structure differs from the more traditional IPO. We then outline various theories of financial innovation and note that the extant literature provides useful explanations for why supercharged IPOs emerged and spread so quickly across industries and geographic areas. The literature also provides support for both legitimate and opportunistic uses of the supercharged IPO. With the help of a large-N quantitative study—the first of its kind—we investigate the adoption and diffusion of this new innovation. We find that the reason parties have begun to supercharge their IPO is not linked to a desire to steal from naïve investors, but rather for tax planning purposes. Supercharged IPOs enable both owner- founders and public investors to save substantial amounts of money in federal and state taxes.
    [Show full text]
  • The Labor Incidence of Capital Taxation: New Evidence from the Retail Sales Taxation of Manufacturing Machinery and Equipment
    National Tax Journal, June 2017, 70 (2), 257–294 https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2017.2.02 THE LABOR INCIDENCE OF CAPITAL TAXATION: NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE RETAIL SALES TAXATION OF MANUFACTURING MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT John L. Mikesell and Justin M. Ross This paper seeks to produce evidence on the labor incidence of the taxation of ma- chinery and equipment purchases by manufacturers under the state general sales tax. For the identification strategy, we exploit tax policy discontinuities among adjacent counties along state borders. The main results demonstrate that, on aver- age, there are no significant losses or gains to manufacturing labor from adjusting this tax. The main results are robust to specifications of controls and state specific time trends. The identification strategy also passes a falsification test where counties are differenced from a randomly selected county. Keywords: sales tax, capital income tax, tax incidence JEL Codes: H25, H71 1. INTRODUCTION here has long been substantial interest in the labor incidence of business tax instru- Tments, both from economists in the study of economic incidence of partial factor taxes and from policy makers who worry these taxes are “job killers.” In the case of taxes on the formation of capital inputs, previous literature has mostly been limited to the study of corporate income taxes (Gravelle, 2013).1 This literature follows in the tradition of Harberger (1962) heavily cited general equilibrium model, “The Incidence 1 See a recent symposium review of the incidence of CIT in the March 2013 issue of the National Tax Journal. For distributional analyses of proposed tax reforms, both the Joint Committee on Taxation (2013) and the Congressional Budget Office assume that 25 percent of the CIT burden will fall upon labor, whereas the Department of Treasury on average allocates about 18 percent of the burden to labor.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Freedom Day 2018 Is April 19Th
    Tax Freedom Day 2018 Apr. 2018 is April 19th Erica York Analyst Key Findings • Tax Freedom Day is a significant date for taxpayers and lawmakers because it represents how long Americans as a whole have to work in order to pay the nation’s tax burden. • This year, Tax Freedom Day falls on April 19, 109 days into 2018. • Tax Freedom Day will be three days earlier than it was in 2017, in large part due to the recent federal tax law, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which significantly lowered federal individual and corporate income taxes. • In 2018, Americans will pay $3.4 trillion in federal taxes and $1.8 trillion in state and local taxes, for a total bill of $5.2 trillion, or 30 percent of the nation’s income. • Americans will collectively spend more on taxes in 2018 than they will on food, clothing, and housing combined. • If you include annual federal borrowing, which represents future taxes owed, Tax Freedom Day would occur 17 days later, on May 6th. The Tax Foundation is the nation’s leading independent tax policy research organization. Since 1937, • Tax Freedom Day is a significant date for taxpayers and lawmakers because it our research, analysis, and experts have informed smarter tax policy represents how long Americans as a whole have to work in order to pay the at the federal, state, and local levels. We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit nation’s tax burden. organization. ©2018 Tax Foundation Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 Editor, Rachel Shuster Designer, Dan Carvajal Tax Foundation 1325 G Street, NW, Suite 950 Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Trade and Tariffs on the United States FISCAL FACT Erica York No
    The Impact of Trade and Tariffs on the United States FISCAL FACT Erica York No. 595 Analyst June 2018 Key Findings • Trade barriers such as tariffs raise prices and reduce available quantities of goods and services for U.S. businesses and consumers, which results in lower income, reduced employment, and lower economic output. • Measures of trade flows, such as the trade balance, are accounting identities and should not be misunderstood to be indicators of economic health. Production and exchange – regardless of the balance on the current account – generate wealth. • Since the end of World War II, the world has largely moved away from protectionist trade policies toward a rules-based, open trading system. Post-war trade liberalization has led to widespread benefits, including higher income levels, lower prices, and greater consumer choice. • Openness to trade and investment has substantially contributed to U.S. growth, but the U.S. still maintains duties against several categories of goods. The highest tariffs are concentrated on agriculture, textiles, and footwear. • The Trump administration has enacted tariffs on imported solar panels, washing machines, steel, and aluminum, plans to impose tariffs on Chinese imports, and is investigating further tariffs on Chinese imports and The Tax Foundation is the nation’s automobile imports. leading independent tax policy research organization. Since 1937, our research, analysis, and experts have informed smarter tax policy • The effects of each tariff will be lower GDP, wages, and employment in the at the federal, state, and local levels. We are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit long run. The tariffs will also make the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Gov't Finance Briefs GFB-13-NS
    OVERNMENT FINANCE BRIEF NO . 13 Property Taxation: Economic Aspects TAX F O U N D A T I O N, I N C . This pamphlet is 2dapted hors a paper by C. Lowell Harries on Economic Evaluation of Real Property Taxation : Municipal Income Tares, Pro- credin s. the Academy of Political Science, Colum- bia University. Ed. by Robert H_ Connect. Vol. XXVIII. No. 4. January 1965 7r. Harries is the Tax Foutsdationis Economic Consultant and Professo r of Economics at Columbia L-nh-ersit -The views ex - pressed are Dr. Harris ow t- . Tax Foundation is a private, non-profit organiza- tion founded in 19-7 to engage hi nonpartisan re - f search and public education on focal and manage- ment aspects of government. It serves as a national information agency for individuals and organiza- tions concerned with government fiscal problems. Covvnunmt Finance Brief No. 1.3 + August 1988 _ i Copyright Im - I TAx For%vAm.N, 1%-c- 50 RMWeller Pbra - hew Yak, . Y. 10030 - I' Property Taxation: Economic Aspects By C- Lowell ;4acriss TIu property tax pL-trs :t role in tool.cs of takiiiz d+-)ILtr. €iam the t-; xpay r and '. o etuntent finance Lame eitmigh to aur- aiug tliltii to :i ~government trcaiurv- prise Iiialli- tihsrrvers. The tax takes 1he- julrerse. rituircre nue• ctFeru "in be snore• trip.-i taxl;ta c ps ,!rill eves Ixfere ul In+ire than wimr significance- Iitost Ik r •'diili'CF, iI- CiC~fl:t'i eii CtttLYfeiitf flltt;tii. vvrnffila- when the t. x rites :ire at the ?N!Irert — sand hringis niorr Into localtzov- hitz-h levels found in numerous coiiununi- erntnetit treamirico .
    [Show full text]
  • GREEN PASSPORT Innovative Financing Solutions for Conservation in Hawai‘I
    GREEN PASSPORT Innovative Financing Solutions for Conservation in Hawai‘i Improving the visitor experience and protecting Hawai‘i’s natural heritage © Pascal Debrunner Purpose: The purpose of this report is to identify and explore innovative conservation finance solutions that bring additional revenue to support conservation in Hawai‘i and effectively manage cultural and natural resources that are critical to our communities’ wellbeing and the visitor experience. Scope of Work: (1) This report reviews existing visitor green fee programs that support conservation in jurisdictions around the world. (2) Based on this information, the report then explores legal, economic, and political considerations in Hawai‘i that shape the implementation of a potential visitor green fee program for the State of Hawai‘i. (3) Lastly, the report presents potential pathways for a visitor green fee in Hawai‘i, noting that each of these options require further legal and policy research. How to cite: von Saltza, E. 2019. Green Passport: Innovative Financing Solutions for Conservation in Hawai‘i. A report prepared for Conservation International. Acknowledgements: The report was developed with the support of The Harold K.L. Castle Foundation, Hawai‘i Leadership Forum, and The Nature Conservancy. We are thankful for insights and perspectives from a wide range of thought leaders across the visitor and conservation sectors. October 2019 © Photo Rodolphe Holler TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................
    [Show full text]