A UNIVERSAL EITC: SHARING the GAINS from ECONOMIC GROWTH, ENCOURAGING WORK, and SUPPORTING FAMILIES Leonard E

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A UNIVERSAL EITC: SHARING the GAINS from ECONOMIC GROWTH, ENCOURAGING WORK, and SUPPORTING FAMILIES Leonard E A UNIVERSAL EITC: SHARING THE GAINS FROM ECONOMIC GROWTH, ENCOURAGING WORK, AND SUPPORTING FAMILIES Leonard E. Burman May 20, 2019 ABSTRACT This report analyzes a straightforward mechanism to mitigate middle-class wage stagnation: a wage tax credit of 100 percent of earnings up to a maximum credit of $10,000, called a universal earned income tax credit. The child tax credit would increase from $2,000 to $2,500 and be made fully refundable. A broad-based, value- added tax of 11 percent would finance the new credit. The proposal is highly progressive and would nearly end poverty for families headed by a full-time worker. This report compares the proposal with current law, analyzes its economic effects, compares it to alternative reform options, and considers some complementary policy options. ABOUT THE TAX POLICY CENTER The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center aims to provide independent analyses of current and longer-term tax issues and to communicate its analyses to the public and to policymakers in a timely and accessible manner. The Center combines top national experts in tax, expenditure, budget policy, and microsimulation modeling to concentrate on overarching areas of tax policy that are critical to future debate. Copyright © 2019. Tax Policy Center. Permission is granted for reproduction of this file, with attribution to the Urban- Brookings Tax Policy Center. TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BR OOKINGS INSTITUTION ii CONTENTS ABSTRACT II CONTENTS III ACKNOWLEDGMENTS IV INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 MOTIVATION 4 Economic Inequality and Wage Stagnation 4 The Political and Ethical Rationale for Sharing the Gains from Economic Growth 7 Social and Political Benefits of Encouraging Work 8 Support Families 10 Universality 10 THE PROPOSAL 12 COMPARISON OF PROPOSED UEITC AND CTC WITH CURRENT LAW 14 DISTRIBUTIONAL ANALYSIS 18 REVENUE EFFECTS 23 ANALYSIS AND ISSUES 24 Economic Effects 24 Effects on Low-Income Families 24 Compliance Issues 25 Why Not Simply Expand the EITC? 26 Why Not Adopt a Universal Basic Income? 27 Why Propose a VAT? 28 Effects on the Social Security Program 29 Other Possible Enhancements 30 CONCLUSIONS 32 APPENDIX 34 Universal Earned Income Tax Credit 34 Child Tax Credit 34 Value-Added Tax 34 NOTES 36 REFERENCES 39 ABOUT THE AUTHOR 43 TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BR OOKINGS INSTITUTION i ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was supported by Arnold Ventures. The views expressed are those of the author and should not be attributed the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, the Urban Institute, the Brookings Institution, their trustees, or their funders. Funders do not determine research findings or the insights and recommendations of our experts. Further information on Urban’s funding principles is available at http://www.urban.org/aboutus/our-funding/funding-principles; further information on Brookings’ donor guidelines is available at http://www.brookings.edu/support-brookings/donor-guidelines. I’m grateful to Rosanne Altshuler; Ellen Aprill; Reuven Avi-Yonah; Jerry Auten; Jared Bernstein; Karlyn Bowman; Kim Clausing; Chris Faricy; Melissa Favreault; Jonathan Barry Forman; Howard Gleckman; Dan Hiller; Janet Holtzblatt; Chris Hughes; Greg Leiserson; Elaine Maag; Mark Mazur; Ed McCaffery; Deirdre McCloskey; Madonna Harrington Meyer; Jim Nunns; Ben Page; Katie Pratt; Joe Rosenberg; Ted Seto; Robert Shiller; Marshall Steinbaum; Eric Toder; Steve Wamhoff; Bob Williams; Vanessa Williamson; and seminar participants at the Loyola Law School, Maurer School of Law at Indiana University, and the Tax Economists Forum for helpful comments and discussions. Philip Stallworth helped specify details of the proposal, estimated the revenue and distributional effects, and contributed to the appendix. Michael Marazzi edited the document, and Ann Cleven oversaw its production. TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BR OOKINGS INSTITUTION iv INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY This report develops a straightforward mechanism to mitigate wage stagnation: a wage tax credit of 100 percent of earnings up to a maximum credit of $10,000—in other words, a universal earned income tax credit (UEITC). A dedicated, broad-based, value-added tax (VAT) of 11 percent would finance the new credit. The maximum credit would be indexed to economic growth. For the first time in decades, low- and middle-income workers would share in economic gains even if the factors suppressing market wages do not reverse. Workers at all income levels, rather than just the highest earners, would benefit from economic prosperity, finally fulfilling John F. Kennedy’s promise that “a rising tide lifts all boats.”1 Despite strong economic growth, middle-class wages have stagnated for four decades, barely keeping pace with inflation. Policy makers and presidential candidates are finally focusing on middle-class economic insecurity and rising economic inequality more generally, but many of the actual and proposed policy responses are likely to be counterproductive or infeasible. The trade and immigration restrictions favored by the Trump administration will harm the economy and likely make working people worse off (Clausing 2019). Proposals from the left for a much higher minimum wage and more regulation for employers might, similarly, help some low- skilled workers, but such policies risk harming others while doing little for middle-income workers. Enacting a universal health insurance program such as Medicare for All would translate into higher wages if employers passed their premium savings on to workers, but it would be an expensive and controversial new entitlement. A substantial wage subsidy is more efficient and direct, and it fits with Americans’ values. Polls show that the public strongly supports assisting working people. The existing earned income tax credit (EITC), which provides a substantial wage subsidy for lower-income families with children, has garnered broad bipartisan support. But the EITC provides little or no support for workers without children at home or for families with somewhat higher earnings. The proposed UEITC would replace the EITC and provide meaningful assistance for low- and middle-income workers whether or not they have children living with them. Unlike the EITC, the UEITC would not directly penalize two-earner couples. The new wage credit and the corresponding VAT would phase in over four years to minimize disruptions. After the phase-in period, the maximum wage credit would grow with per capita gross domestic product (GDP). Because VAT revenue tends to grow with GDP, the policy would be fiscally sustainable over the long run with little or no adjustment in VAT rates. Because the credit is universal and refundable (that is, it does not phase out with income and workers can receive it even if they do not owe income taxes), workers could safely request an advance payment from one employer (limited to one per year to avoid the risk of excess advance credits that would have to be repaid at tax time). Self-employed workers and those with multiple employers would ultimately claim the credit less any advance payments on income tax returns.2 Like other income, but unlike the EITC and most other tax credits, the UEITC would be subject to income taxes. TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BROOKING S INSTITUTION 1 To partially offset the loss of the EITC, which increases in value with the number of qualifying children (up to three), the current-law child tax credit (CTC) would increase from $2,000 to $2,500 and be made fully refundable—that is, available to people even if they have no income tax liability. (The CTC currently phases in with earnings; thus, low-income families may receive only a partial credit or none at all.) The proposal would be easier for taxpayers to comply with and for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to administer than the current EITC and CTC. All adults with earnings would be eligible for the UEITC, and all low- and middle-income families with qualifying children would be eligible for the full CTC. Although the VAT is regressive—falling disproportionately on those with lower incomes—the overall proposal is quite progressive. Low- and middle-income workers would receive far more in tax credits than they would pay in additional taxes. The program is similar in design to the Social Security system, which pairs a dedicated regressive tax—the payroll tax—with progressive retirement benefits. Social Security is extremely popular, and the payroll tax is viewed more favorably than other more progressive taxes because voters support what the payroll tax finances. I assume the UEITC and VAT would phase in between 2020 and 2023. In 2023, when fully phased in, the proposal would cut average tax bills for most people in the four lowest income quintiles. The federal tax cut for the bottom quintile would average almost $3,890, or 24 percent of after-tax income. The middle quintile would average a tax cut of almost $2,800, or 4.5 percent of after-tax income. The top quintile would face a tax increase averaging over $12,000, or almost 5 percent of after-tax income. Primarily because of the VAT, the tax burden on the top 1 percent of earners would increase by over 7 percent of after-tax income (averaging $125,000). The proposal is similar in some ways to a universal basic income (UBI)—an unrestricted cash grant—in that the UEITC is universal and highly progressive; however, the UEITC is only available to adults over age 16 who have earned income. This is based on my judgment that the primary failure of the market economy is not that jobs aren’t available—unemployment as of March 2019 was 3.8 percent—but that many jobs pay poorly. The proposal has strong political advantages. The UEITC and enhanced CTC are targeted at workers and families with children, two groups that many Democrats and Republicans are willing to support. The public is wary of assisting able-bodied adults who do not work.
Recommended publications
  • 2019-Annual-Report.Pdf
    2019 URBAN INSTITUTE ANNUAL REPORT A Message from the President Dear Friends, Inspired by our 50th anniversary, the Urban Institute kicked off our next 50 years in 2019 with a renewed commitment to advancing upward mobility, equity, and shared prosperity. We also collaborated with changemakers across the country to develop innovative ideas for how Urban could best fulfill our mission in light of trends likely to bring disruptive change in the decades to come. We did not expect such change to arrive in 2020 in the form of a pandemic that has exposed so many fissures in our society, including the disproportionate vulnerability of people of color to health and economic risks. Nor did we anticipate the powerful uprisings that have called needed attention to police brutality, antiblackness, and racism in our country. But as I consider the work Urban is undertaking to inform an inclusive recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and dismantle the systems and structures that drive racism, I am grateful for the many partners who, by engaging with our Next50 initiative in 2019, helped Urban accelerate the development of capacities and initiatives that are having an impact. Among the ways our work made a difference last year: ▪ Influencing efforts to boost Black homeownership. Our groundbreaking work on dramatic declines in Black homeownership helped make the issue an urgent concern in advocacy and policy circles. Urban delivered powerful new findings showing how a set of housing finance innovations can build wealth in communities of color. We also helped launch a collaborative effort with real estate professionals, lenders, and nonprofit leaders to amplify and solidify a framework for reducing the racial homeownership gap.
    [Show full text]
  • Expanding Insurance Coverage for Children
    XPANDING E INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN John Holahan XPANDING EINSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CHILDREN John Holahan Copyright © 1997. The Urban Institute. All rights reserved. Except for short quotes, no part of this publication may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photo- copying, recording, or by information storage or retrieval system, with- out written permission from the Urban Institute. BOARD OF TRUSTEES URBAN INSTITUTE is a non- Richard B. Fisher profit policy research and educa- Chairman tional organization established in Joel L. Fleishman Vice Chairman Washington, D.C., in 1968. Its staff Katharine Graham investigates the social and economic Vice Chairman William Gorham problems confronting the nation and President public and private means to alleviate Jeffrey S. Berg Joan Toland Bok them. The Institute disseminates sig- Marcia L. Carsey nificant findings of its research Carol Thompson Cole Richard C. Green, Jr. through the publications program of Jack Kemp its Press. The goals of the Institute are Robert S. McNamara to sharpen thinking about societal Charles L. Mee, Jr. Robert C. Miller problems and efforts to solve them, Lucio Noto improve government decisions and Hugh B. Price Sol Price performance, and increase citizen Robert M. Solow awareness of important policy choices. Dick Thornburgh Judy Woodruff Through work that ranges from LIFE TRUSTEES broad conceptual studies to adminis- trative and technical assistance, Warren E. Buffett James E. Burke Institute researchers contribute to the Joseph A. Califano, Jr. stock of knowledge available to guide William T. Coleman, Jr. John M. Deutch decision making in the public interest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wind Before the Storm: Aging, Automation, and the Disability Crisis
    The Wind Before the Storm: Aging, Automation, and the Disability Crisis By Zachary Asher Morris A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Social Welfare in the Graduate Division of the University of California-Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Neil Gilbert, Chair Professor Michael Austin Professor Jane Mauldon Spring 2017 The Wind Before the Storm: Aging, Automation, and the Disability Crisis Copyright © 2017 by Zachary Asher Morris. All rights reserved. 1 Abstract The Wind Before the Storm: Aging, Automation, and the Disability Crisis by Zachary Asher Morris Doctor of Philosophy in Social Welfare University of California-Berkeley Professor Neil Gilbert, Chair A substantial and growing share of the working age population of the advanced economies receives disability benefits. The causes of disability benefit expansion can primarily be attributed to an aging population and the deterioration of the low-skilled labor market due largely to technological change – challenges that also promise to strain other social welfare programs in the future. Using contemporary international disability benefit reforms as a case study, this dissertation argues that a new welfare state settlement is needed that no longer assumes a sustainable male breadwinner economy. The first chapter traces the history of disability benefits and argues that the traditional model for disability determination is ill suited for the post-industrial era. The second chapter provides a comparative policy analysis of major reforms to the disability determination processes in Denmark, Great Britain, and the Netherlands that shifts away from the traditional model and to a model focusing on work-capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • Universal Basic Income Proposals in Light of ILO Standards: Key Issues and Global Costing
    ESS – EXTENSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY Universal Basic Income proposals in light of ILO standards: Key issues and global costing Isabel Ortiz Christina Behrendt Andrés Acuña-Ulate Quynh Anh Nguyen ESS ─ Working Paper No. 62 Social Protection Department INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE, GENEVA Copyright © International Labour Organization 2018 First published 2018 Publications of the International Labour Office enjoy copyright under Protocol 2 of the Universal Copyright Convention. Nevertheless, short excerpts from them may be reproduced without authorization, on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation, application should be made to ILO Publications (Rights and Licensing), International Labour Office, CH-1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland, or by email: [email protected] . The International Labour Office welcomes such applications. Libraries, institutions and other users registered with a reproduction rights organization may make copies in accordance with the licences issued to them for this purpose. Visit www.ifrro.org to find the reproduction rights organization in your country. ISSN 1020-9581 ; 1020-959X (web pdf) The designations employed in ILO publications, which are in conformity with United Nations practice, and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the International Labour Office concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers. The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed articles, studies and other contributions rests solely with their authors, and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the International Labour Office of the opinions expressed in them. Reference to names of firms and commercial products and processes does not imply their endorsement by the International Labour Office, and any failure to mention a particular firm, commercial product or process is not a sign of disapproval.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation: Rebuild by Design Phase I June 2014
    EVALUATION OFFICE EVALUATION THE Rockefeller Foundation Rockefeller Evaluation: Rebuild by Design Phase I June 2014 Financial support provided by About the Urban Institute Founded in 1968 to understand the problems facing America’s cities and assess the programs of the War on Poverty, the Urban Institute brings decades of objective analysis and expertise to policy debates – in city halls and state houses, Congress and the White House, and emerging democracies around the world. Today, our research portfolio ranges from the social safety net to health and tax policies; the well-being of families and neigh- borhoods; and trends in work, earnings, and wealth building. Our scholars have a distin- guished track record of turning evidence into solutions. About the Rockefeller Foundation Evaluation Office For more than 100 years, the Rockefeller Foundation’s mission has been to promote the well-being of humanity throughout the world. Today, the Rockefeller Foundation pursues this mission through dual goals: advancing inclusive economies that expand opportunities for more broadly shared prosperity, and building resilience by helping people, communi- ties and institutions prepare for, withstand and emerge stronger from acute shocks and chronic stresses. Committed to supporting learning, accountability and performance im- provements, the Evaluation Office of the Rockefeller Foundation works with staff, grantees and partners to strengthen evaluation practice and to support innovative approaches to monitoring, evaluation and learning. Cover photo: Cameron Blaylock Evaluation: Rebuild by Design Phase I June 2014 THE Rockefeller Foundation Rockefeller EVALUATION OFFICE EVALUATION Financial support provided by The contents of this report are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Rockefeller Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Do Trade Unions Form an Obstacle to the Introduction of a Basic Income ?
    Do Trade Unions Form an Obstacle to the Introduction of a Basic Income ? Some lessons from an empirical study on five OECD countries by Yannick Vanderborght [Research fellow, National Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS) & Hoover Chair for Economic and Social Ethics, Belgium [email protected]] paper to be presented at the Xth Congress of the Basic Income European Network, September 18-19, Barcelona, Spain. [Parallel session 4.4: Basic Income as an Instrument of Trade Union Policy: North and South Perspectives, Chair : Àlex Boso (Universitat Pompeu Fabra) & Sergi Raventós (Universitat de Barcelona)] IMPORTANT NOTICE: THIS IS A FIRST DRAFT VERSION (July 2004) WORK IN PROGRESS, COMMENTS ARE MOST WELCOME 1 “The introduction of such an unconditional income is to be viewed not as the dismantling but as the culmination of the welfare state” Philippe Van Parijs1 Introduction In most OECD countries, trade unions remain key players in the field of welfare state reform. In areas where they still represent an important fraction of the workforce, such as in Belgium and Scandinavia, they constitute traditional and pivotal partners in every reform process. In other countries, even in case of low membership levels (such as in France) they have often been able to mobilize mass support in favor of the status quo, sometimes through huge demonstrations and paralyzing strikes. Hence, it is quite surprising that so little attention has been paid by universal basic income (BI) proponents to the very position of workers unions on the radical reform they are advocating.2 This paper, which draws upon a study on the political feasibility of a unconditional minimum income in five industrialized countries (Belgium, Canada, France, Ireland, and the Netherlands) but will mainly focus on three of them, 3 focuses – briefly, at this stage – on this issue in two complementary ways.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Report of the President.” ______
    REFERENCES Chapter 1 American Civil Liberties Union. 2013. “The War on Marijuana in Black and White.” Accessed January 31, 2016. Aizer, Anna, Shari Eli, Joseph P. Ferrie, and Adriana Lleras-Muney. 2014. “The Long Term Impact of Cash Transfers to Poor Families.” NBER Working Paper 20103. Autor, David. 2010. “The Polarization of Job Opportunities in the U.S. Labor Market.” Center for American Progress, the Hamilton Project. Bakija, Jon, Adam Cole and Bradley T. Heim. 2010. “Jobs and Income Growth of Top Earners and the Causes of Changing Income Inequality: Evidence from U.S. Tax Return Data.” Department of Economics Working Paper 2010–24. Williams College. Boskin, Michael J. 1972. “Unions and Relative Real Wages.” The American Economic Review 62(3): 466-472. Bricker, Jesse, Lisa J. Dettling, Alice Henriques, Joanne W. Hsu, Kevin B. Moore, John Sabelhaus, Jeffrey Thompson, and Richard A. Windle. 2014. “Changes in U.S. Family Finances from 2010 to 2013: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances.” Federal Reserve Bulletin, Vol. 100, No. 4. Brown, David W., Amanda E. Kowalski, and Ithai Z. Lurie. 2015. “Medicaid as an Investment in Children: What is the Long-term Impact on Tax Receipts?” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 20835. Card, David, Thomas Lemieux, and W. Craig Riddell. 2004. “Unions and Wage Inequality.” Journal of Labor Research, 25(4): 519-559. 331 Carson, Ann. 2015. “Prisoners in 2014.” Bureau of Justice Statistics, Depart- ment of Justice. Chetty, Raj, Nathaniel Hendren, Patrick Kline, Emmanuel Saez, and Nich- olas Turner. 2014. “Is the United States Still a Land of Opportunity? Recent Trends in Intergenerational Mobility.” NBER Working Paper 19844.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Poverty While Increasing Employment: a Robert Haveman Primer on Alternative Strategies, and a Blueprint
    OECD Jobs Study Working Papers No. 7 Reducing Poverty while Increasing Employment: A Robert Haveman Primer on Alternative Strategies, and a Blueprint https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/281684483135 GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OCDE/GD(95)68 THE OECD JOBS STUDY WORKING PAPER SERIES NO.7 REDUCING POVERTY WHILE INCREASING EMPLOYMENT: A PRIMER ON ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES, AND A BLUEPRINT by Robert Haveman University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Paris 1995 COMPLETE DOCUMENT AVAILABLE ON OLIS IN ITS ORIGINAL FORMAT THE OECD JOBS STUDY: WORKING PAPER SERIES This series is designed to make available to a wider readership selected papers prepared for use in the context of the OECD Jobs Study. The principal results of this study have been published in the form of a concise synthesis report entitled: The OECD Jobs Study: Facts, Analyses, Strategies, followed by a detailed background report (in two volumes) entitled: The OECD Jobs Study: Evidence and Explanations. The working papers are generally available only in their original language -- English or French -- with a summary in the other. The opinions expressed and arguments employed here are the responsibility of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the OECD. Copyright OECD, 1995 Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this material should be made to: Head of Publications Service, OECD, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, France 2 SUMMARY Policy to reduce poverty has often foundered on the issue of work incentives. The issue is a manifestation of the traditional conflict between equity and efficiency; the redistribution of income from higher to lower income people typically leads to reduced incentives for both groups to supply labor to the market, or to exercise initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Poverty While Increasing Employment: a Primer on Alternative Strategies
    OECD Economic Studies No. 26. 1996A REDUCING POVERTY WHILE INCREASING EMPLOYMENT: A PRIMER ON ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES. AND A BLUEPRINT Robert H aveman TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................................................... 8 The Policy Setting ................................................... 8 Alternative policy strategies designed to increase employment and reduce the povertytrap .................................................. 11 Four income support strategies ....................................... 12 Two labour market strategies ......................................... 14 The six policy strategies: analytics and assessment .......................... 15 The credit income tax .............................................. 16 The negative income tax ............................................ 20 The basic income guarantee ......................................... 23 Earnings supplement (ES) or earned income tax credit (EITC) plans ............ 25 A wage rate subsidy: objectives, impacts, and issues ....................... 27 An employer-based marginal employment subsidy: objectives, impacts, and issues 28 Employment-centred social policy: a stylised reform strategy ................... 29 A prototypical growth-with-equity strategy ............................... 30 A Final note on the dilemma of some OECD countries ........................ 35 Bibliography ....................................................... 41 The author is lohn Bascom Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin- Madison
    [Show full text]
  • Housing Policy in the Great Society, Part Two
    Joint Center for Housing Studies Harvard University Into the Wild Blue Yonder: The Urban Crisis, Rocket Science, and the Pursuit of Transformation Housing Policy in the Great Society, Part Two Alexander von Hoffman March 2011 W11-3 The research for this working paper was conducted with the support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, The Ford Foundation, and the Fannie Mae Foundation. © by Alexander von Hoffman. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Off we go into the wild blue yonder, Climbing high into the sun Introduction Of the several large and important domestic housing and urban programs produced by Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society administration, the best-known is Model Cities. Although it lasted only from 1966 to 1974, its advocates believed Model Cities had promised a better tomorrow for America’s cities and bitterly lamented its termination—blaming Richard Nixon’s policies, diversion of funds for the Vietnam war, and the nation’s lack of commitment to social progress. Yet the legislation that created Model Cities was ambitious, contradictory, and vague. As such, it vividly expressed the idealistic impulses, currents of thought, and reactions to events that converged, however incoherently, in national urban policy of the 1960s. At the center of the fervor for domestic policy was the president of the United States, Lyndon Johnson, who hungered for dramatic new programs that would transform the country the way New Deal policies had reshaped America in his youth.
    [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]
  • A Case of Wishful Thinking Contribution to GTI Forum Universal Basic Income: Has the Time Come?
    November 2020 A Case of Wishful Thinking Contribution to GTI Forum Universal Basic Income: Has the Time Come? Francine Mestrum It is astonishing to see the same arguments, based exclusively on thin air, always coming back in discussions on a universal basic Income (UBI). No, the cost of a UBI is not too high (where are the numbers?). It will give people freedom (Three different types of freedom!). We will tax the rich (When? How?). Basic income will even lead to the end of rentier capitalism (How?). We now even hear that COVID-19 has “brought into sharp relief the irretrievable breakdown of the post-war income distribution system” (Really? How? Where? When?). In this contribution, I want to highlight three points: cost, the link between work and income, and the importance of public goods. But let me start by underscoring two points on which progressive advocates and opponents of UBI fully agree. Yes, work has to be redefined: this is an old social demand of the workers’ movement and more particularly of feminists, so that the now all too often unpaid care work can be integrated into economic thinking. And yes, income security is crucial: it is a source of mental and material well-being and should be a priority for all policymakers. There is not one single argument to state that these two demands can only be met with a universal basic income. On the contrary, a comprehensive universal social protection system, or social commons, can do the job much better. The Cost of a Universal Basic Income I want to start with the question of cost because it is of utmost importance and determines the non-sustainability of all UBI proposals.
    [Show full text]