Ryan's tax cut worse for American economy

House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wis. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 6, 2017, regarding the announcement that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., will temporarily step side from the panel's investigation of Russian meddling in the election because of the complaints. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wis. pauses during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 6, 2017, regarding the announcement that House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., will temporarily step side from the panel's investigation of Russian meddling in the election because of the complaints. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Published Apr 18, 2017

Share

Washington - A Republican plan for tax reform could be worse

for the American economy than previously thought, according to an estimate published

Monday by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Centre.

In a fresh look at a tax plan being pitched by House Speaker

Paul Ryan, the centre estimated the proposal could reduce growth in the gross

domestic product by 0.5 percent after a decade and by 2.6 percent after 20

years.

Ryan's proposal calls for imposing what on paper would be a

new tax on imports and exempting any exports from taxes. Sceptics say that this

provision, known as a border adjustment, would make goods imported from around

the world more expensive for American consumers, eating into any tax cuts the

plan would grant middle-class families. 

The plan's supporters say that

fluctuations in global currency markets would cancel out the new tax on

imports.The Tax Policy Centre’s new forecast is an update from a

previous center estimate that the GOP plan would have little effect on the

economy over the long term.

The revised report, however, also contains a bit of good

news for the Republican effort on taxes, suggesting the plan could give poor

and middle-class households a more generous tax cut.

In the previous version, the authors assumed that the border

adjustment would increase the prices of goods from overseas purchased by

ordinary families. If, as proponents argue, consumers did not pay the tax, a

typical household could expect their income to increase by at least 1 percent.

The Tax Policy Centre is an influential organization that

produces analyses cited by both Republicans and Democrats. The new data offer a

preview of how Congress's official nonpartisan referees might evaluate the plan

if Republicans formally present legislation.

All the same, the forecasts are uncertain, in part because

predicting how changes in taxation will affect the overall economy is an

immensely complicated task. Last year's report on the GOP plan was the centre’s

first attempt at doing so, part of a shift in Washington away from narrowly

concentrating analyses on the federal government's finances and attempting to

forecast broader, so-called "dynamic" effects on the country as

whole.

Benjamin Page, an economist at the centre, said the previous

version contained an error resulting from incompatibility between his and his

colleagues' work and that of a separate group at the University of

Pennsylvania. The two teams of researchers had been collaborating to simulate

those dynamic effects over the long term.

"We're more confident in the current estimates,"

Page said. The revised analysis was published in a special issue of the

Columbia Journal of Tax Law.

After making corrections, Page and his colleagues only found

that the GOP plan would yield benefits overall, increasing economic activity by

about 1 percent in the long run, if they relied on optimistic assumptions about

how households and business would respond to reductions in taxes and how much

foreign investors would lend to the US government. Making especially

pessimistic assumptions, the report's authors predicted that the plan would

diminish the economy by as much as 9 percent by 2040.

The GOP plan would reduce taxes on businesses and households

would encourage spending and investment in the short term, stimulating the

economy. Over the long term, however, the government would borrow more money to

make up for the foregone revenue from taxes. That increased borrowing would

hamper economic activity.

Republicans such as Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, who is the

chairman of the Ways and Means Committee and one of the chief advocates of the

bill, have said that their legislation will not increase the deficit. Most

analysts agree that to achieve that goal, Republicans would have to combine the

tax relief in their plan with reduced federal spending or settle for more

modest cuts. Either option would put a check on borrowing and lessen the

negative economic effects of reform.

Read also:  RMI buys into Merchant Capital 

"The growth estimate is inaccurate because it doesn't

reflect the actual content of our tax reform blueprint," said Emily

Schillinger, a spokeswoman for Brady, in a statement. "Instead of

including over $2 trillion worth of deficits that are not part of our

blueprint, we encourage the Tax Policy Centre to study our actual proposal and

release a new report about real growth estimates."

Republicans could also settle for more modest reductions in

taxes, but doing so would also limit the economic benefits they could expect in

the short term. Although the new report puts forward a worse forecast for the

economy overall, the revisions suggest that some groups would benefit more from

the GOP plan.

The older version of the report had projected that the plan

would give the middle class a relatively stingy tax cut, with the country's

wealthiest families enjoying the bulk of the savings. A typical household would

save about $260 in the first year after the reform, compared to over $200,000 a

year for a household in the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.

According to the corrected forecast, it is possible that the

relief for the middle class could be double that initial projection -- but the

real amount would depend on the border adjustment, one of the most

controversial and uncertain elements of the GOP plan.

In their original analysis in the fall, Rosenberg and his

colleagues took the skeptics' position, calculating that consumers would have

to pay a new tax on imports. If so, the GOP plan would increase the typical

American household's income by just 0.5 percent in the first year.

On Monday, the authors accounted for the chance that

currency markets would absorb the new tax on imports, in which case the typical

household's income would rise by between 0.8 percent and 1.1 percent.

The Tax Policy Centre’s Joseph Rosenberg, another one of the

authors, said that the larger figures would likely prove more accurate in the

long term as prices and currency markets would eventually adjust to the new

system.

"In the short run, that's not guaranteed," he

said. "There are a lot of things that are up in the air."

WASHINGTON POST

 

Related Topics: