BrianGarst.com

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

Taxes Archive

Thursday

24

September 2009

0

COMMENTS

We Want Ideas, Just Not Good Ones

Written by , Posted in Taxes

The White House blog informs us that the Tax Reform Subcommittee wants your ideas for tax reform!

President Obama has asked the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board (PERAB) to develop options for tax reform. The members of the tax subcommittee are preparing ideas to be considered by the board and would like to give anyone a chance to have input into the process on this important issue. Anyone wanting to share ideas and opinions for consideration by the subcommittee can do so here. The deadline for submissions is October 15th, 2009.

Sounds great! Until you reach this little caveat:

Note: The mandate to the PERAB is NOT to recommend a new tax system. They are to consider ideas on tax simplification, better enforcement of tax law, and reforming corporate taxes and to present the pros and cons of potential tax options. They were instructed not to consider options that involve raising taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year. So be mindful of their constraints when submitting ideas.

“We want your ideas, but only if they are actually the ideas we already have.”

So no FairTax, no flat tax, no taking a hatchet to the monstrosity of tax code.  That would be too much change to hope for.

Saturday

5

September 2009

0

COMMENTS

Suddenly, Saving Is Good

Written by , Posted in Economics & the Economy, Taxes

The Obama administration has consistently parroted the Paul Krugman view of economic recovery: spend, spend, spend.  Based on faulty Keynesian economics, this demand-side framework thinks too much saving is a bad thing.  According to this Krugman approved theory, there is a global savings glut and if America starts saving too then we’ll all be doomed!

This kind of Keynesian claptrap has dominated the administration’s economic thinking to date.  Yet now the President has inexplicably decided that saving is good, and therefore we need more of it:

The government is trying to make it easier for Americans to save for retirement, President Obama said Saturday, as he noted the toll the recession has taken on extra income and savings accounts.

One initiative will allow people to have their federal tax refunds sent as savings bonds. Others are meant to require workers to take action to stay out of an employer-run savings program rather than having to take action to join it.

If the President is serious, I have a simple suggestion to encourage greater savings in America: lower taxes and let Americans keep more of the money they earn.

Sunday

12

July 2009

0

COMMENTS

The Government's Cut

Written by , Posted in Taxes

While in Ghana, President Barack Obama had this to say:

No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves — (applause) — or if police — if police can be bought off by drug traffickers. (Applause.) No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top — (applause) — or the head of the Port Authority is corrupt. No person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery.

I’m sure the businesses right here in America would love it if the United States government could limit itself to only taking 20% off the top.

Friday

26

June 2009

0

COMMENTS

America: Tax Oppressed

Written by , Posted in Taxes

A recently released study from an institute based in Switzerland highlights some faults in America’s tax system. The study, entitled “Tax burden and individual rights in the OECD: an international comparison,” looked at three variables to create a Tax Oppression Index, then compared the rankings of the OECD countries.  The variables included the overall tax burden, public governance, and taxpayer rights.  America did particularly bad on public governance, due to corruption and inefficiency in DC, and taxpayer rights.

Hat tip: Dan Mitchell

Wednesday

24

June 2009

0

COMMENTS

Supply Side Cuts Come To…Maine?

Written by , Posted in Taxes

I guess miracles do happen:

This month the Democratic legislature and Governor John Baldacci broke with Obamanomics and enacted a sweeping tax reform that is almost, but not quite, a flat tax. The new law junks the state’s graduated income tax structure with a top rate of 8.5% and replaces it with a simple 6.5% flat rate tax on almost everyone. Those with earnings above $250,000 will pay a surtax rate of 0.35%, for a 6.85% rate. Maine’s tax rate will fall to 20th from seventh highest among the states. To offset the lower rates and a larger family deduction, the plan cuts the state budget by some $300 million to $5.8 billion, closes tax loopholes and expands the 5% state sales tax to services that have been exempt, such as ski lift tickets.

This is a big income tax cut, especially given that so many other states in the Northeast and East — Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York — have been increasing rates. “We’re definitely going against the grain here,” Mr. Baldacci tells us. “We hope these lower tax rates will encourage and reward work, and that the lower capital gains tax [of 6.85%] brings more investment into the state.”

While liberals in New York do everything they can to drive wealth out of the state, Maine seems to have this crazy idea that attracting wealth and investment might be a wiser strategy.  Which state do you think will get the best of it?

Saturday

23

May 2009

1

COMMENTS

Incentives (Still) Matter

Written by , Posted in Taxes

Tom Galisano, billionaire owner of the Sabres, is fed up and ready to leave New York.  He tells us why:

I love New York. But how much should it cost to call New York home? Decades of out of control budgets, spending increases and relentless borrowing have made New York simply too expensive.

Politicians like to talk about incentives: incentives for businesses to relocate, incentives to buy local and incentives to make smart decisions. After reviewing the 2009 budget I have identified the most compelling incentive of all: a major tax break immediately available to all New Yorkers. To be eligible, you need only do one thing: move out of New York State.

Modern economic thought provides with a very simple explanation: incentives matter. Russel Roberts on incentives:

…Incentives matter. The most famous example in economics is the idea of the demand curve—when something gets more expensive, people buy less of it. When it gets less expensive, people buy more of it.

Some find this bedrock principle of economics hard to accept, based on introspection. “When the price of gas goes up, I still buy gasoline,” says the skeptic. Or in its more extreme form: “You need gasoline, so people will keep buying it even when it gets more expensive.”

You may still buy gasoline when it gets more expensive. But you will try and find ways to buy less. Not necessarily zero, less.

For the wealthy, the price of living in New York has just gone up.  The predictable consequence is that there will be less wealthy people choosing to “purchase” the privilege to live there.

Monday

18

May 2009

1

COMMENTS

Tax Competition Shows Why Federalism Matters

Written by , Posted in Taxes

I have previously written about the diminishing influence of the principle of federalism in America.  From Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore, we today see an excellent example of why this principle is so important.  In their Opinion Journal piece, the two economists describe the consequences faced by state governments that seek to soak the rich: the loss of rich people.

Here’s the problem for states that want to pry more money out of the wallets of rich people. It never works because people, investment capital and businesses are mobile: They can leave tax-unfriendly states and move to tax-friendly states.

…Updating some research from Richard Vedder of Ohio University, we found that from 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts.

Whether it be the USSR, Cuba or California, it seems that fleeing from statism is universal.  The ability to vote with one’s feet is an important check on the abusive growth of government.  Unfortunately, there’s no reason to believe the collectivist will stop there.  When faced with the reality that people choose not to accept their forms of government, the typical statist response is to eliminate anything else as a choice.  In Europe, the  high tax nations have pushed to make tax competition illegal.  That is, they want to make it so that their neighbors can’t offer anything lower than their own oppressive rates.

It’s unlikely we’ll see a similar push here, as that’s probably too illegal even for our constitutionally oblivious government.  But the same thing can be accomplished by different means.  By federalizing government roles, they can remove the benefits of moving from state to state.  The more functions of government that are funded by the federal government, the fewer oppressive taxes you can escape by relocating.  They can’t redistribute money within states, because the rich can just leave before they get fleeced, but they can do it between all states.  If state governments get their money from Washington, which can tax across all states, rather than their own constituents, then there is no where left to run.  That’s why it is imperative to oppose this trend of federal infringement on state sovereignty and to reject the infusion of federal dollars into state coffers.  It’s not the rights of state bureaucrats that are important and in need of protection, but our own.

Friday

8

May 2009

0

COMMENTS

Tuesday

3

March 2009

0

COMMENTS

Newsflash: Incentives Matter

Written by , Posted in Economics & the Economy, Taxes

ABC News has discovered that raising taxes* only on people making more than $250,000 harms more than just people making over $250,000:

A 63-year-old attorney based in Lafayette, La., who asked not to be named, told ABCNews.com that she plans to cut back on her business to get her annual income under the quarter million mark should the Obama tax plan be passed by Congress and become law.

So far, Obama’s tax plan is being looked at skeptically by both Democrats and Republicans and therefore may not pass at all.

“We are going to try to figure out how to make our income $249,999.00,” she said.

“We have to find a way out where we can make just what we need to just under the line so we can benefit from Obama’s tax plan,” she added. “Why kill yourself working if you’re going to give it all away to people who aren’t working as hard?”

Dr. Sharon Poczatek, who runs her own dental practice in Boulder, Colo., said that she too is trying to figure out ways to get out of paying the taxes proposed in Obama’s plan.

“I’ve put thought into how to get under $250,000,” said Poczatek. “It would mean working fewer days which means having fewer employees, seeing fewer patients and taking time off.”

Generally it means being less productive,” she said.

Incentives matter.  Obama is creating disincentives to work and produce.  This is not a recipe for economic growth.

ABC News, predictably, tried to push a biased poll with the story, asking if it’s “fair” that people try and “sidestep” tax proposals.  The premise is stupid, because people have a right to decide how much and how hard they work, so of course it’s fair.  It’s called freedom, and nothing is more fair than that.  And despite stacking the possible answers, their agenda was thwarted.  As of now 5,137 out of 7,799 respondents agreed with that statement, “Yes. I also would find ways to decrease my salary to avoid taxes.” Only 714 agreed with the class warfare statements of “No. The rich have had too many tax breaks. They should be ashamed for finagling the system” or “No. I have to pay high taxes and so should that high-income bracket. They can afford it.”

*Actually, Obama’s energy and environment agenda will raise taxes on everyone, but he continously equates income taxes with all taxes.

Sunday

22

February 2009

0

COMMENTS