DOCSLIB.ORG

Summary of HR 13270, the Tax Reform Act of 1969

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Summary of HR 13270, the Tax Reform Act of 1969 COMMITTEE PRINT ^Ist SeTsfoT } SUMMARY OF H.R. 13270, THE TAX REFORM ACT OF 1969 (AS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) PREPARED BY THE STAFFS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL REVENUE TAXATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (Note.—This document has not been reviewed by the committee.) AUGUST 18, 1969 Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance COMMITTEE PBINT 'iM SeTsfoT } SUMMARY OF H.R. 13270, THE TAX REFORM ACT OF 1969 (AS PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) PREPARED BY THE STAFFS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL REVENUE TAXATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE (Note.—This document has not been reviewed by the committee.) AUGUST 18, 1969 Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE ^-^58 WASHINGTON : 1969 JCS-61-69 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, B.C. 20402 - Price 55 cents COMMITTEE ON FINANCE KUSSELL B. LONG, Louisiana, Chairman CLINTON P. ANDERSON, New Mexico JOHN J. WILLIAMS, Delaware ALBERT GORE, Tennessee WALLACE F. BENNETT, Utali HERMAN E. TALMADGE, Georgia CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska EUGENE J. MCCARTHY, Minnesota EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois VANCE HARTKE, Indiana JACK MILLER, Iowa J. W. FULBRIGHT, Arljansas LEN B. JORDAN, Idaho ABRAHAM RIBICOFP, Connecticut PAUL J. FANNIN, Arizona FRED R. HARRIS, Olslalioma HARRY F. BYRD, Jr., Virginia Tom Vail, Chief Counsel Evelyn R. Thompson, Assistant Chief Clerk (II) — CONTENTS PART I Outline Summary of Provisions Page I. Tax reform provisions 3 II. Extension of surcharge and excises, termination of investment credit, and certain amortization provisions (contained in H.R. 12290 but which have not yet passed the Senate, and which are in H.R. 13270) 7 III. Adjustments of tax burden for individuals 7 PART 2 Analysis of Provisions and Arguments For and Against A. Private foundations 11 1. Tax on investment income 11 2. Prohibitions on self-dealing 12 3. Distributions of income 13 4. Stock ownership limitation 15 5. Limitations on use of assets 16 6. Other limitations 17 7. Disclosure and publicity requirements 18 8. Change of status 19 9. Changes in definitions 21 10. Private operating foundation definition 22 11. Hospitals 23 12. Effective dates 24 B. Other tax-exempt organizations 25 1. The "Clay-Brown" provision or debt-financed property 25 2. Extension of unrelated business income tax to all exempt or- ^^ ganizations .--T-- 3. Taxation of investment income of social, fraternal, and similar organizations 28 4. Interest, rent, and royalties from controlled corporations. _ 29 5. Limitation on deductions of nonexempt membership organiza- tions 29 6. Income from advertising 30 C. Charitable organizations 31 1. 50-percent charitable limitation deduction 31 2. Repeal of the unlimited deduction 32 3. Charitable contributions of appreciated property 33 4. Two-year charitable trust 35 5. Charitable contributions by estates and trusts 36 6. Gifts of the use of property 37 7. Charitable remainder trusts 37 8. Charitable income trust with noncharitable remainders 38 D. Farm losses 39 1. Gains from disposition of property used in farming where farm losses offset nonfarm income 39 2. Depreciation recapture 41 3. Holding period for livestock 42 4. Hobby losses 42 (in) . IV Page E. Limitation on deduction of interest 43 F. Moving expenses 45 G. Limit on tax preferences 47 H. Allocation of deductions. 48 I. Income averaging 50 J. Restricted stock plans 51 K. Other deferred compensation 52 L. Accumulation trusts, multiple trusts, etc 54 M. Multiple corporations 55 N. Corporate mergers 57 1. Disallowance of interest deduction in certain cases 57 2. Limitation on installment sales provision 59 3. Original issue discount 60 4. Convertible indebtedness repurchase premiums 61 O. Stock dividends 62 P. Foreign tax credit 64 Q. Financial institutions 66 1 Commercial banks—Reserves for losses on loans 66 2. Mutual savings banks, savings and loan associations, etc 67 3. Treatment of bonds held by financial institutions 70 4. Foreign deposits in U.S. banks 71 R. Depreciation allowed regulated industries 72 1. Accelerated depreciation 72 2. Earnings and profits 73 S. Alternative capital gain rate for corporations 75 T. Natural resources 75 1. Percentage depletion 75 2. Mineral production payments 78 3. Mining exploration expenditures 80 4. Treatment processes in the case of oil shale 81 U. Capital gains and losses 81 1. Alternative tax 81 2. Capital losses of individuals 82 3. Collections of letters, memorandums, etc 83 4. Holding period of capital assets 8^ 5. Total distributions from qualified pension, etc., plans 85 6. Sales of life estates, etc 87 7. Certain casualty losses under section 1231 88 8. Transfers of franchises 89 V. Real estate depreciation 90 W. Cooperatives 92 X. Subchapter S corporations 94 Y. Tax treatment of State and municipal bonds _ 95 Z. Extension of tax surcharge and excise taxes; termination of investment credit 96 1. Extension of tax surcharge at 5-percent annual rate for first half of 1970 96 2. Continuation of excise taxes on communication services and automobiles 96 3. Repeal of the investment credit -_ 97 4 Amortization of pollution control facilities 98 5. Amortization of certain railroad rolling stock 99 A A. Adjustment of tax burden for individuals 100 1. Increase in standard deduction 100 2. Low income allowance 101 3. Maximum tax on earned income 102 4. Intermediate tax rates; surviving spouse treatment 103 5. Individual income tax rates 104 6. Collection of income tax at source on wages 105 . " 4o PART 3 Statistical Material—Tables ^' °^ :tax reform with tax relief under H.R. '^^^.^'^Jf'i^'"!modified 13270 with Page rate reduction-Calendar year tax liability " " inq 2. Balancing of tax reform and tax relief-Calendar year ta"x liabifity 1 OQ 3. Individual income tax liability-Tax under present law and arnount'and ^"^' ''"''"' ''^°'°' ^"^ ''^''^ provisions S?ve5! ^ when fuUy ^^ 4. Tax relief provisions affectYng [ndiViduals and total" foV alf reYorm an"d ^ individuals, when fully wL^'^'^'''-^^' ^^^"i^^^S effective bj^y ad--^^ _ justed gross income class, 1969 levels > o. rax reform provisions aflfecting individuals, full year'effect—Bv'ad-j'«'^ justed gross income class ----___ 6. Revenue estimates, tax reform, calendar yVaVfiabUity jl T^'L^^blo r^^^^^V'^d^': P'-'^sent law, number made nontaVabYe'byVeii'ef provisions and number benefiting from rate reduction 113 «. lax burdens under present law, under H.R. 13270, and change-Married ' YercenYtax^ ^ couple with 2 dependents. 1 1 -^ J. lax burdens under present law, under H.R. 13270, ' 'and YerYenYpercent tax change—Single person under 35... 10. la.x burdens under present law, under H.R. Y327b, ' YndYercenYtax change-Single ^ ^'''' person, 35 and over. 1 11. Effect of H.R. 13270 on 1 fiscal year receipts, igYo'and ignYYYYYY::: 114 PART 1 OUTLINE SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS (1) PART 1 OUTLINE SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS The provisions included in H.E. 13270 can be briefly summarized as follows: I. Tax Reform Provisions 1. Private Foundations.—The permissible activities of private foun- dations desiring to preserve the benefits of tax exemption, as well as the tax benefits to their contributors, are substantially tightened to prevent self-dealing between the foundations and their substantial contributors, to require the distribution of income for charitable purposes, to limit their holdings of private businesses, to give assur- ance that their activities are restricted as provided by the exemption provisions of the tax laws, and to be sure that investments of these organizations are not jeopardized by financial speculation. In addition, these private foundations are called upon to make a small contribu- tion, 7% percent of their investment income, toward the cost of government. 2. Tax Exempt Organizations^ Generally.—The activities of exempt organizations generally are limited so that they cannot participate in debt-financed leaseback operations, wherein they, in effect, share their exemption with private businesses. Second, the unrelated business income tax is extended to virtually all tax-exempt organizations not previously covered by this tax, including churches. Third, the bill extends the regular corporate tax to the investment income of tax- exempt organizations set up primarily for the benefit of their members, such as social clubs, fraternal beneficiary societies, etc. 3. Charitable Contributions.—Charitable contribution deductions are substantially restructured. The general charitable deduction limi- tation is increased to 50 percent but the so-called unlimited charitable deduction is phased out over a 5-year period. The extra tax benefits derived from charitable contributions of appreciated property, are restricted in the case of gifts to private foundations, gifts of ordinary income property, gifts of tangible personal property, gifts of future interests, and in the case of so-called bargain sales. Also, the 2-year charitable trust rule is repealed and a number of changes are made limiting charitable contribution deductions where there are gifts of the use of property and in the case of charitable remainder and charitable income trusts. 4. Farm Losses.—The deduction of farm losses is restricted in the case of those with farm losses of $25,000 or more and with incomes of over $50,000 from nonfarm sources. Other provisions of the bill, primarily relating to farm operations, provide for the recapture of depreciation upon the sale of livestock, the extension of the holding period for livestock, and a revision of the treatment in the case of hobby losses. (3) 5. Interefit Deductions.—The deduction of interest on funds bor- rowed to carry investments is generally limited to investment income plus $25,000. 6. Moving Expenses.—Moving expense deductions are allowed when changing jobs for househunting trips, for temporary living expenses prior to locating a new home, and for the expenses of selling an old home or buying a new one. 7. Limit on Tax Preferences.—In those cases where tax preferences are not fully subject to tax, provision is made for a minimum tax on individuals having tax preferences in excess of their taxable in- come.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • BEYOND PUBLIC CHOICE and PUBLIC INTEREST: a STUDY of the LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AS ILLUSTRATED by TAX LEGISLATION in the 1980S
    University of Pennsylvania Law Review FOUNDED 1852 Formerly American Law Register VOL. 139 NOVEMBER 1990 No. 1 ARTICLES BEYOND PUBLIC CHOICE AND PUBLIC INTEREST: A STUDY OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS AS ILLUSTRATED BY TAX LEGISLATION IN THE 1980s DANIEL SHAVIRO" TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................. 3 II. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF CYCLICAL TAX LEGISLATION ... 11 A. Legislation From the Beginning of the Income Tax Through the 1970s: The Evolution of Tax Instrumentalism and Tax Reform ..................................... 11 t Assistant Professor, University of Chicago Law School. The author was a Legislation Attorney with theJoint Committee of Taxation during the enactment of the 1986 tax bill discussed in this Article. He is grateful to Walter Blum, Richard Posner, Cass Sunstein, and the participants in a Harvard Law School seminar on Current Research in Taxation, held in Chatham, Massachusetts on August 23-26, 1990, for helpful comments on earlier drafts, to Joanne Fay and Michael Bonarti for research assistance, and to the WalterJ. Blum Faculty Research Fund and the Kirkland & Ellis Faculty Fund for financial support. 2 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 139: 1 B. The 1981 Act and Its Aftermath ................... 19 C. The 1986 Act ............................... 23 D. Aftermath of the 198.6 Act ......................... 29 E. Summary .................................. 30 III. THE PUBLIC INTEREST THEORY OF LEGISLATION ........ 31 A. The Various Strands of Public Interest Theory .......... 31 1. Public Interest Theory in Economics ............ 31 2. The Pluralist School in Political Science .......... 33 3. Ideological Views of the Public Interest .......... 35 B. Criticisms of PublicInterest Theory .................. 36 1. (Largely Theoretical) Criticisms by Economists ... 36 a. When Everyone "Wins," Everyone May Lose ..
    [Show full text]
  • Mayo Clinic, a Minnesota Corporation
    United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-3189 ___________________________ Mayo Clinic, a Minnesota Corporation lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota ____________ Submitted: October 20, 2020 Filed: May 13, 2021 ____________ Before SMITH, Chief Judge, LOKEN and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ____________ LOKEN, Circuit Judge. Mayo Clinic (“Mayo”), a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, oversees healthcare system subsidiaries and operates the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science (“Mayo College”). Mayo is a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3).1 After an audit in 2009, the Internal Revenue Service concluded that Mayo owed unrelated business income tax (“UBIT”) on certain investment income it received from the investment pool it manages for its subsidiaries. The IRS issued a Notice of Proposed Adjustment and reaffirmed its position in a 2013 Technical Advice Memorandum. At issue is $11,501,621 in UBIT for tax years 2003, 2005-2007, and 2010-2012. Mayo2 paid the tax and brought this refund action. The issue, briefly stated, is whether Mayo is a “qualified organization” exempted from paying UBIT on “unrelated debt-financed income” under IRC § 514(c)(9)(C)(i). Qualified organizations include “an organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii) . .” Section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii) describes “an educational organization which normally maintains a regular faculty and curriculum and normally has a regularly enrolled body of pupils or students in attendance at the place where its educational activities are regularly carried on.” The IRS denied Mayo the exemption because it is not an “educational organization” as defined in 26 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Report No. 82-156 Gov Major Acts of Congress And
    REPORT NO. 82-156 GOV MAJOR ACTS OF CONGRESS AND TREATIES APPROVED BY THE SENATE 1789-1980 Christopher Dell Stephen W. Stathis Analysts in American National Governent Government Division September 1982 CONmGHnItNA^l JK 1000 B RE filmH C SE HVICA^^ ABSTRACT During the nearly two centuries since the framing of the Constitution, more than 41,000 public bills have been approved by Congress, submitted to the President for his approval and become law. The seven hundred or so acts summarized in this compilation represent the major acts approved by Congress in its efforts to determine national policies to be carried out by the executive branch, to authorize appropriations to carry out these policies, and to fulfill its responsibility of assuring that such actions are being carried out in accordance with congressional intent. Also included are those treaties considered to be of similar importance. An extensive index allows each entry in this work to be located with relative ease. The authors wish to credit Daphine Lee, Larry Nunley, and Lenora Pruitt for the secretarial production of this report. CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................. 111 CONGRESSES: 1st (March 4, 1789-March 3, 1791)..................................... 3 2nd (October 24, 1791-March 2, 1793)................................... 7 3rd (December 2, 1793-March 3, 1795).................................. 8 4th (December 7, 1795-March 3, 1797).................................. 9 5th (May 15, 1797-March 3, 1799)....................................... 11 6th (December 2, 1799-March 3, 1801)................................... 13 7th (December 7, 1801-Marh 3, 1803)................................... 14 8th (October 17, 1803-March 3, 1805)....... ........................... 15 9th (December 2, 1805-March 3, 1807)................................... 16 10th (October 26, 1807-March 3, 1809)..................................
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 6, No. 2: Full Issue
    Denver Journal of International Law & Policy Volume 6 Number 2 Spring Article 11 May 2020 Vol. 6, no. 2: Full Issue Denver Journal International Law & Policy Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/djilp Recommended Citation 6 Denv. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y This Full Issue is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Denver Sturm College of Law at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Journal of International Law & Policy by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],dig- [email protected]. DENVER JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND POLICY VOLUME 6 1976-1977 Denver Journal OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND POLICY VOLUME 6 NUMBER 2 SPRING 1977 INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF THE TAX REFORM ACT OF 1976 TAXING BoYcorrs AND BRIBES ........................................... G. C . Hufbauer J. G. Taylor 589 The authors examine the tax penalty provisions of the Tax Reform Act of 1976 and the Export Administration Act Amendments of 1977 in relation to U.S. persons who "participate in or cooperate with" international boycotts or bribery. The article discusses the various types of international boycotts and the penalty, computational, and reporting requirements imposed on participants as clarified by the Treasury Guidelines and Revenue Proce- dures. The authors conclude with a discussion of the novelty, complexity, and potential impact of the legislation. TAKING SIDES: AN OVERVIEW OF THE U.S. LEGISLATIVE RESPONSE TO THE ARAB BOYCOTT ............................................ John M . Tate Ralph B. Lake 613 The current legislative scheme in opposition to the Arab boycott is generally directed against the Arab League countries' secondary and tertiary, indirect forms of boycott.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Economic Way Of
    |America’s Economic Way of War How did economic and financial factors determine how America waged war in the twentieth century? This important new book exposes the influence of economics and finance on the questions of whether the nation should go to war, how wars would be fought, how resources would be mobilized, and the long-term consequences for the American economy. Ranging from the Spanish–American War to the Gulf War, Hugh Rockoff explores the ways in which war can provide unique opportunities for understanding the basic principles of economics as wars produce immense changes in monetary and fiscal policy and so provide a wealth of infor- mation about how these policies actually work. He shows that wars have been more costly to the United States than most Americans realize as a substantial reliance on borrowing from the public, money creation, and other strategies to finance America’s war efforts have hidden the true cost of war. hugh rockoff is a professor of Economics at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, and a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research. His publications include numerous papers in professional journals, The Free Banking Era: A Re-examination (1975), Drastic Measures: A History of Wage and Price Controls in the United States (1984), and a textbook, History of the American Economy (2010, with Gary Walton). NEW APPROACHES TO ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL HISTORY series editors Nigel Goose, University of Hertfordshire Larry Neal, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign New Approaches to Economic and Social History is an important new textbook series published in association with the Economic History Society.
    [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]
  • Description of Provisions Listed for Further Hearings by the Committee on Finance On
    [COMMITTEE PEINT] DESCRIPTION OF PROVISIONS LISTED FOR FURTHER HEARINGS BY THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCE ON JULY 20, 21, AND 22, 1976 Prepaeed for the Use of the COMMITTEE ON FINANCE BY THE STAFF OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL REVENUE TAXATION JULY 19, 1976 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 74-376 WASHINGTON : 1976 JCS-30-76 •/[ TABLE OF CONTENTS Paee I. Introduction 1 II. Description of Provisions : 2 1. At-Risk Limitation for Limited Partners (see. 210 of the bill) 2 2. Refunds of Unutilized Investment Tax Credits (sec. 802 of the bill) 4 3. Expiring Investment and Foreign Tax Credits (sec. 803 of the bill) ,5 4. Investment Credit in the Case of Vessels Constructed from Capital Construction Funds (sec. 806 of the I»ill) (^ 5. Foreign Trusts Having One or More U.S. Beneficiaries To Be Taxed Currently to Grantor (sec. 1011 of the bill) 7 6. Investment in U.S. Property by Controlled Foreign Corpora- tions (sec. 1021 of the bill) 7 7. Exclusion from Subpart F of Certain Earnings of Insurance Companies (sec. 1023 of the bill) 8 8. Shipping Profits of Foreign Corporations (sec. 1024 of the bill) .____ 10 9. Limitation on Definition of Tax Haven Income for Agricultural Products (sec. 1025 of the bill) 11 10. Repeal of the Per-Country Foreign Tax Credit Limitation ( sec. 1031 of the bill) 12 11. Recapture of Foreign Losses (sec. 1032 of the bill) 13 12. Transitional Carryback of Foreign Taxes on Oil and Gas Extraction Income (sec. 103.> of the bill) : 15 13. Transitional Rule for Recapture of Foreign Oil-Related Losses (sec.
    [Show full text]
  • International Tax Policy for the 21St Century
    NFTC1a Volume1_part2Chap1-5.qxd 12/17/01 4:23 PM Page 147 The NFTC Foreign Income Project: International Tax Policy for the 21st Century Part Two Relief of International Double Taxation NFTC1a Volume1_part2Chap1-5.qxd 12/17/01 4:23 PM Page 148 NFTC1a Volume1_part2Chap1-5.qxd 12/17/01 4:23 PM Page 149 Origins of the Foreign Tax Credit Chapter 1 Origins of the Foreign Tax Credit I. Introduction The United States’ current system for taxing international income was creat- ed during the period from 1918 through 1928.1 From the introduction of 149 the income tax (in 1913 for individuals and in 1909 for corporations) until 1918, foreign taxes were deducted in the same way as any other business expense.2 In 1918, the United States enacted the foreign tax credit,3 a unilat- eral step taken fundamentally to redress the unfairness of “double taxation” of foreign-source income. By way of contrast, until the 1940s, the United Kingdom allowed a credit only for foreign taxes paid within the British 1 For further description and analysis of this formative period of U.S. international income tax policy, see Michael J. Graetz & Michael M. O’Hear, The ‘Original Intent’ of U.S. International Taxation, 46 DUKE L.J. 1021, 1026 (1997) [hereinafter “Graetz & O’Hear”]. The material in this chapter is largely taken from this source. 2 The reasoning behind the international tax aspects of the 1913 Act is difficult to discern from the historical sources. One scholar has concluded “it is quite likely that Congress gave little or no thought to the effect of the Revenue Act of 1913 on the foreign income of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Reactions of High-Income Taxpayers to Major Tax Legislation
    National Tax Journal, December 2016, 69 (4), 935–964 https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2016.4.10 REACTIONS OF HIGH-INCOME TAXPAYERS TO MAJOR TAX LEGISLATION Gerald Auten, David Splinter, and Susan Nelson This paper examines how high-income taxpayers reacted to major tax legislation that affected incentives for realizations of capital gains, the form of compensation, type of investments, and the choice of organizational form for businesses. The Tax Reform Act of 1969, the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the Omnibus Budget Reconcili- ation Act of 1993, and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 are considered. The paper summarizes prior research and provides new evidence of short-term and longer-term responses of high-income taxpayers. The analysis uses individual and business tax return information to examine some of the most salient features of each of these laws. Examining the responses to prior reforms can inform discussion of the effects of future tax reform proposals. Keywords: tax reform, tax avoidance, income shifting JEL Codes: H24, H25, H26 I. INTRODUCTION ver the last 50 years, several landmark tax laws targeted high-income taxpayers in Oways that affected incentives for earning and realizing income. Some of these laws raised tax rates for high-income taxpayers while others reduced them. Some broadened the tax base by repealing tax expenditures or loopholes that fostered tax avoidance, while others narrowed it by creating new or more generous deductions and exclusions. Top tax rates on ordinary income changed significantly seven times over this 50-year period (Figure 1). Top tax rates on long-term capital gains changed even more often.
    [Show full text]
  • Subject Index
    SUBJECT INDEX A Construction of facilities, research and Page Page development, etc., appropriation Accounts, Bureau of, appropriation for 385, authorization. 368 399, 872 Western Interstate Nuclear Board, Adams, President John Quincy, bust of, cooperation 986 loan to Smithsonian Institution 2192 Aeronautics and Space Administration Administrative Conference of the United Authorization Act, 1970, National, States, appropriation for 878 Amendment, employees and former Adoption of Child, District of Columbia, employees, reporting requirements.- 373 consent of natural father 1086 Aeronautics and Space Administration Adult Education, National Advisory Authorization Act, 1971, National— 368 Council on, establishment 163 Aeronautics and Space Council, National, Adult Education Act: appropriation for 388, 1454 Amendment, allocation of funds, new Aeronautical and Space Sciences Com­ formula 1669 mittee, hearings on space program Appropriation for effecting provisions 35, benefits, printing of additional copies. 2186 36, 802 African Countries, sale of military equip­ Citation of title 159 ment to, ceiling 2053 National Advisory Council on Adult Age, minimum voting 318 Education, establishment 163 Age, Voting, Virgin Islands, establishment. 978 Secondary school curiiculum, addition Age Discrimination in Employment Act of to program 160 1967, appropriation for effecting pro­ Adult Education Act of 1966, appropria­ visions 25 tion for effecting provisions 35, 36, 802 Aged: Advisory Commission on Intergovern­ Food stamp program, delivered pre­ mental
    [Show full text]
  • Political Hot Potato: How Closing Loopholes Can Get Policymakers Cooked Stephanie Hunter Mcmahon
    Journal of Legislation Volume 37 | Issue 2 Article 1 5-1-2011 Political Hot Potato: How Closing Loopholes Can Get Policymakers Cooked Stephanie Hunter McMahon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg Recommended Citation McMahon, Stephanie Hunter (2011) "Political Hot Potato: How Closing Loopholes Can Get Policymakers Cooked," Journal of Legislation: Vol. 37: Iss. 2, Article 1. Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg/vol37/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journal of Legislation at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Legislation by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. POLITICAL HOT POTATO: HOW CLOSING LOOPHOLES CAN GET POLICYMAKERS COOKED Stephanie HunterMcMahon* ABSTRACT Loopholes in the law are weaknesses that allow the law to be circumvented Once created, they prove hard to eliminate. A case study of the evolving tax unit used in the federal income tax explores policymakers' response to loopholes. The 1913 income tax created an opportunity for wealthy married couples to shift ownership of family income between spouses, then to file separately, and, as a result, to reduce their collective taxes. In 1948, Congress closed this loophole by extending the income-splitting benefit to all married taxpayers filing jointly. Congress acted only after the federal judiciary and Treasury Department pleaded for congressional reform and, receiving none, reduced their roles policing wealthy couples' tax abuse. The other branches would no longer accept the delegated power to regulate the tax unit. By examining these developments, this article explores the impact of the separation of powers on the closing of loopholes and adds to our understandingof how the government operates.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Reform and Capital Gains: the Aw R Against Unfari Taxes Is Far from Over Richard A
    Journal of Legislation Volume 14 | Issue 1 Article 1 1-1-1987 Tax Reform and Capital Gains: The aW r against Unfari Taxes Is Far from Over Richard A. Gephardt Michael R. Wessel Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg Recommended Citation Gephardt, Richard A. and Wessel, Michael R. (1987) "Tax Reform and Capital Gains: The aW r against Unfari Taxes Is Far from Over," Journal of Legislation: Vol. 14: Iss. 1, Article 1. Available at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/jleg/vol14/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journal of Legislation at NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Legislation by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TAX REFORM AND CAPITAL GAINS: THE WAR AGAINST UNFAIR TAXES IS FAR FROM OVER Richard A. Gephardt* with Michael R. Wessel** INTRODUCTION In the fall of 1986, Congress completed the process of fundamen- tally reforming the U.S. Tax Code. The House of Representatives passed a comprehensive tax reform bill late in December 1985.1 The bill underwent radical change in the Senate Finance Committee. 2 Pres- ident Reagan signed the Tax Reform Act of 19861 on October 22, 1986. The U.S. Tax Code has grown from eighty-nine pages in 19134 to thousands of pages in 1987. Additionally, the regulations and case law needed to interpret the Code require analysis of volumes of reference materials.' The Deficit Reduction Act of 19846 alone topped 1,300. pages.
    [Show full text]