The Limits to Tax: Efficiency, Equity and International Competition
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 1 Irwin Stelzer The Limits to Tax: Efficiency, Equity and International Competition The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 2 POLITEIA: A Forum for Social and Economic Thinking Politeia commissions and publishes discussions by specialists about social and economic ideas and policies. It aims to encourage public discussion on the relationship between the state and the people. Its aim is not to influence people to support any given political party, candidates for election, or position in a referendum, but to inform public discussion of policy. The forum is independently funded, and the publications do not express a corporate opinion, but the views of their individual authors. Patron The Most Hon The Marquess of Salisbury DL Director Dr Sheila Lawlor Advisory Council Professor Tim Congdon CBE Professor David Dilks Professor Harold James Professor Deepak Lal Sir Geoffrey Leigh The Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP The Rt Hon Francis Maude MP Stuart Wheeler David Willetts MP Sir Brian Williamson CBE Founder Directors Maurice Cowling (d. August 2005) Sheila Lawlor The Reverend Canon The Lord Pilkington of Oxenford The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 3 The Limits to Tax: Efficiency, Equity and International Competition Irwin Stelzer POLITEIA 2006 The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 4 First published in 2006 by Politeia 22 Charing Cross Road London WC2H 0QP Tel: 020 7240 5070 Fax: 020 7240 5095 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.politeia.co.uk © Politeia 2006 Policy Series No. 55 Support for this study has been granted by the Foundation for Social and Economic Thinking Politeia gratefully acknowledges support towards the tax series from Ernst & Young LLP ISBN 1 900 525 87 9 Cover design by John Marenbon Printed in Great Britain by 4 Print 138 Molesey Avenue West Molesey Surrey KT8 2RY The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 5 The Author Dr Irwin Stelzer is Director of Economic Policy Studies at the Hudson Institute in Washington and a columnist both in the US and London where he writes for The Sunday Times. His academic career has been mainly in the US, where he has taught at Cornell University, The University of Connecticut and New York University. He has widely written on economic, regulatory and antitrust law subjects. For Politeia he has written, Good for the Public! Competition, technology and the shrinking state (February 2006). The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 6 CONTENTS Introduction 1 I The Economy and Tax Policy: To cut … or not to cut? 2 II Tax, Society and the Expanding State 7 III Competition, a Shrinking State and Economic Growth 10 IV A New Tax Debate 14 The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 1 Introduction I approach this assignment with some trepidation, for three reasons. First, Politeia has already sponsored so much good work on tax policy that I fear I have very little to add. Second, the various aspects of tax policy are too numerous to address in a brief pamphlet. As Eugene Steuerile has pointed out, tax policy today involves far more than issues of how to collect revenues fairly and efficiently. It has evolved into a major tool for both macro and monetary policy and, more than ever, for expenditure and social policy.1 We know that tax policy affects economic growth; that it is related to monetary policy, with loose fiscal policy heightening central bankers’ fears of inflation sufficiently to affect their decisions on interest rates; and that every decent society accepts the fact that tax policy must be sufficiently humane to permit those disadvantaged by circumstances beyond their control to afford a decent existence. Third, I do not want to overemphasise the effect of tax policy on economic growth. High-tax jurisdictions with superb transport and other public services can be more attractive to businesses, and to the highly educated employees on whom they increasingly rely, than low-tax jurisdictions with poor transport, rotten schools and polluted air. Worst of all, of course, are high-tax jurisdictions with public services so inefficient that the high level of expenditure does not produce an attractive level of services. With these caveats, I will try to add something useful to Politeia’s extensive discussion of this immensely important subject. 1 Eugene Steuerle, ‘Tax Policy From 1990 to 2001’, in American Economic Policy in the 1990s, Jeffrey Frankel and Peter Orszag (eds.). Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 2002, p.139. Mr Steuerle is a Senior Fellow at the Urban Institute, and has served in the Treasury Department under four different presidents. The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 2 I The Economy and Tax Policy: To cut … or not to cut? This is a good time to discuss tax policy, since rarely has there been so much nonsense spoken by politicians of all stripes on this subject. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, a man with a complete and deep understanding of the theory of taxation, seems committed to a perpetual increase in the tax burden, despite what he sees before him: the stagnant, high-tax, major European economies; a rapidly growing, low-tax Ireland; and the flight of capital to low-tax Eastern Europe. None of these factors, nor the demonstrated inefficiency with which the state disposes of its taxpayers’ hard-earned funds, appears to suggest to the Chancellor that he is steering the British economy from the prosperous condition in which he found it to stagnation at best, and penury at worst. On the other side of the aisle we have a Tory Party that has managed to insulate itself from the past decade’s learning about the relationship between taxation and fiscal stability – what is called in the trade ‘dynamic scoring’ which counts against revenues foregone those generated by cuts in tax rates. The shadow chancellor would have us believe that our choice is between tax cuts and economic stability. In fact, properly crafted tax cuts contribute to, rather than detract from, economic stability. Before deciding that tax cuts are dangerous to a nation’s economic health, and contribute to the ‘black holes’ that so worry the City, ‘we must carefully think through what happens to the overall economy as well as to individual taxpayers when tax rates are cut.’2 Larry Lindsey, the economist who crafted the tax cuts that helped President Bush rescue America from a recession, and whom I have just quoted, points out that the direct effect of a tax cut is to reduce revenues, other things remaining equal. But, he quickly adds, in the case of other-than trivial tax cuts, other things do not remain equal: tax rates affect economic behaviour. For one thing, a reduction in tax rates allows workers and 2 Lawrence B. Lindsey, The Growth Experiment: How The New Tax Policy Is Transforming the U.S. Economy. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1990, p.57. 2 The Limits to Tax 5/12/06 3:14 pm Page 3 The Limits to Tax: Efficiency, Equity and International Competition entrepreneurs to keep more of what they earn. That increases their incentive to work harder, and to take risks, both of which stimulate economic growth and, with it, tax receipts. A reduction in tax rates also stimulates inbound investment,3 other things being equal – a phrase I add to make it clear that I doubt that Mr Mugabe could do much to his nation’s tax structure to make Zimbabwe attractive to foreign investors. Whether the increase in receipts will compensate fully, or more, for the revenue loss resulting from a reduction in tax rates will depend on many factors, including the precise nature of the reduction in rates; the stage of the business cycle at the time the reductions become effective; and cultural factors that affect the elasticity of the supply curve of labour and of entrepreneurship. The trade-off between work and leisure, and risk and safety, varies from country to country. There is another effect of a reduction in tax rates that cannot be ignored. Lowering the tax on corporate profits makes it more attractive to own shares, since a large portion of pre-tax profits flows through to shareholders, and less attractive to incur debt, since the deductible feature of interest payments becomes less valuable. Those who worry about over-leveraging might give this effect of a reduction of tax rates, especially corporate tax rates, some thought. They encourage higher equity: debt ratios. Finally, in a world in which international competition is becoming more heated, the ability of capital to flow more or less freely across borders (with the possible exception of the borders of France) allows companies to flee high-tax jurisdictions in favour of countries with more benign and welcoming tax regimes, taking jobs with them. This potential for relocation of investment and jobs in response to tax differences is not as great as some industry associations allege: as I have said, tax rates are only one component of any location decision. But neither is it a factor that finance ministers and politicians can ignore, witness the east-bound movement of some segments of German industry, and the desire of France’s politicians, including the so-called reformers, to ‘harmonise’ tax rates throughout the EU in order to eliminate the competitive disadvantage under which France’s highly taxed industries operate. 3 ‘This study demonstrates with great clarity that countries cutting taxes – especially on business – see more inward investment, higher growth and higher tax revenues.’ Charlie Elphicke and William Norton, ‘The Case For Reducing Business Taxes’, Centre for Policy Studies, London, February 2006, p.1.