10 Golden Rules of Effective Taxation

by
Skip

Obama on "effective" taxation:

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

Fairness?  A very subjective judgement – another Hope and Change, which is not something on which to base public policy revenues.  This is when things go off the rails – when tax policies enforce ideologies instead of their main purpose – to fund the essential functions of government.  I’d rather go with something much more objective.  To the rescue- Art Laffer on Effective Taxation (Rich States, Poor States, 4th edition, ALEC.ORG):

1. When you tax something more you get less of it, and when you tax something less you get more of it.

2. Individuals work and produce goods and services to earn money for present or future consumption.

3. Taxes create a wedge between the cost of working and the rewards from working.

4. An increase in tax rates will not lead to a dollar-for-dollar increase in tax revenues, and a reduction in tax rates that encourages production will lead to less than a dollar-for-dollar reduction in tax revenues.

5. If tax rates become too high, they may lead to a reduction in tax receipts.  The relationship between tax rates and tax receipts has been described by the Laffer Curve.

6. The more mobile the factors being taxed, the larger the response to a change in tax rates.  The less mobile the factor, the smaller the change in the tax base for a given change in tax rates.

7. Raising tax rates on one source of revenue may reduce the tax revenue from other sources, while reducing the tax rate on one activity may raise the taxes raised from other activities.

8. An economically efficient tax system has a sensible broad tax base and a low tax rate.

9. Income transfer (welfare) payments also create a de factor tax on work and, thus, have a high impact on the vitality of a state’s economy.

10. If A and B are two locations, and if taxes are raised in B and lowered in A, producers and manufactureres will ahve a greater incentive to move from B to A.

Heh! An additional bonus: Steps to a Priority-Based Budget.  To gain control of a state budget, the following questions should be answered:

  • What is the role of government?
  • What are the essential services the government must provide to fulfill its purpose?
  • How will we know if government is doing a good job?
  • What should all of this cost?
  • When cuts must be made, how will they be properly prioritized?

 

 

The entire conversation:

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It’s now 15 percent. That’s almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year — $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.

And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don’t have it and that we’re able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can’t do that for free.

OBAMA: And you can’t take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children and our grandchildren, and then say that you’re cutting taxes, which is essentially what John McCain has been talking about.

And that is irresponsible. I believe in the principle that you pay as you go. And, you know, you don’t propose tax cuts, unless you are closing other tax breaks for individuals. And you don’t increase spending, unless you’re eliminating some spending or you’re finding some new revenue. That’s how we got an additional $4 trillion worth of debt under George Bush. That is helping to undermine our economy. And it’s going to change when I’m president of the United States.

GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

OBAMA: Well, that might happen, or it might not. It depends on what’s happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we’ve got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we got have a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.

And if we can stabilize that market, and we can get credit flowing again, then I think we’ll see stocks do well. And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.

Author

  • Skip

    Co-founder of GraniteGrok, my concern is around Individual Liberty and Freedom and how the Government is taking that away. As an evangelical Christian and Conservative with small "L" libertarian leanings, my fight is with Progressives forcing a collectivized, secular humanistic future upon us. As a TEA Party activist, citizen journalist, and pundit!, my goal is to use the New Media to advance the radical notions of America's Founders back into our culture.

Share to...