Getting the economy back on track, and quickly, would be easy. It
would take just two steps. First, rescind, in one fell swoop, all
$251 billion (as of Jan. 15) of “stimulus” funds that remain
unspent from last year’s gargantuan package. Second, eliminate
the corporate income tax, for U.S.-based companies, entirely and
forever.
Businesses anticipating a return to health would
immediately start reinvesting. Companies that have outsourced
business to foreign climes would rush to return their operations
to the United States. Foreign companies would establish American
subsidiaries, and hire American workers, to take advantage of the
no-tax opportunity. Long-term market investors worried about
exploding national debt, or about the worth of the dollar, would
take heart from the elimination of stimulus spending and would
start buying again.
The economy would skyrocket like a July 4th display on the
Capitol Mall. Unlike Independence Day fireworks, though, the
light would not dissipate. The positive effects would be
long-lasting.
The left would complain about the supposed loss of
“stimulus” from rescinding the projects. The left would be wrong.
No harm would be done. None.
Up until this point, $172 billion of the “stimulus” has
been spent, with another $157 billion “in process” of being
spent, according to
ProPublica. Another $93 billion worth of specially targeted
tax cuts also have taken effect. (Word to the wise: Targeting tax
cuts for specific functions rarely works. All it does it provide
more incentives for people to game the system. Broad-based tax
cuts are just about the only tax cuts worth doing, from a
macroeconomic standpoint.) Yet more than a net 3 million
Americans are jobless now than were jobless before Barack Obama
became president. And that doesn’t count the chronically
underemployed or those who have left the workforce. The stimulus
hasn’t worked. The Associated Press, in a
story by superb, Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Brett
Blackledge along with Matt Apuzzo (with whom I need to become
more familiar, I guess), absolutely exploded the idea that the
stimulus package has had demonstrably beneficial effects.
And if the whole idea for the stimulus was to catalyze an
immediate jolt to the economy, then the very fact that $251
billion still hasn’t even become “in process” of being spent yet,
a year later, is evidence that it is ill-designed for the
stimulus purpose in the first place — even if the stimulus would
work — which, as the AP showed, it didn’t.
So if the unspent stimulus funds remain unspent, AND the
“cost” of much of the $119 billion in yet-unused tax cuts is also
made moot because most of them are business tax breaks that would
be absorbed within the “cost” of eliminating the corporate income
tax (about which, below), then we’re talking about a one-year
savings of approximately $350 billion — and, of course, all the
interest payments on that $350 billion in the out years down the
road.
The corporate income tax brought
in about $339 billion in 2009. We thus see that for at least
the first year, the loss of corporate income tax receipts would
be covered by the savings from rescinding the whole remaining
stimulus package. And, as I have argued
elsewhere several times, eliminating the corporate income tax
would come close to paying for itself even without putting undue
faith in supply-side nostrums. (Please do read that linked
column, to allow me not to repeat all the arguments.) It also
would be a pro-labor policy, both become of all the jobs
in-sourced instead of outsourced and for all sorts of other
technical reasons that led the Congressional Budget Office to
note that “domestic labor bears slightly more than 70 percent
of the burden of the corporate income tax.”
I took most of my arguments from a now-dead blog called The
Conservative Compact, which cited
a respected left-leaning numbers cruncher [and former
Democratic staffer] who puts evidence ahead of ideology. Here
are the bullet points he gave me for what such a major policy
change would accomplish:
-
And, of course, the increased economic efficiency from
corporations doing things because they make economic sense
rather than because of the tax advantages will be a huge boon
to the economy.
-
Eliminate about 2/3 of IRS, the part involved with
collecting corporate taxes.
-
Eliminating corporate taxes and tax preparation costs
means much higher profits for most corporations. Higher
profits means higher prices on Wall Street for their stock.
That should result in a dramatic and sudden increase in the
value of pension fund holdings and retirement plans.
-
Corporations will finance their operations with equity
instead of debt because debt will no longer be deductible
(nothing to deduct it from). That means fewer corporate
bonds.
-
Fewer corporate bonds mean an increasing demand for
government debt. That will decrease the interest rates on
federal bonds, bills, and notes so federal interest payments
should drop significantly.
My left-leaning friend added a couple of points in person
that he didn’t include in the written bullet points. First,
this really would come close to being the proverbial “tax cut
that pays for itself.” Three factors make it so. Eliminating
about two-thirds of the IRS would save about $6 billion.
Cutting federal interest payments would save tens of billions
of dollars annually. And the “huge boon to the economy” from
all the bullet points combined would vastly increase federal
tax collections in other areas, including for capital gains,
dividends, and personal income taxes. Second, corporations
wouldn’t merely pocket all their windfalls as profits, but
would instead be likely to cut a lot of prices as well. So as
labor unions (and virtually all workers, for that matter) would
benefit from the higher pension fund values, consumers
obviously would benefit from the lower prices.
Obviously, too, if the Obamites do not move to extend the
expiring Bush tax cuts on capital gains, the government’s
extra-added receipts from that tax also will help the corporate
income tax elimination move closer to “paying for itself” — and,
because the businesses will gain far more from eliminating the
corporate income tax than their shareholders will lose from a 5
percent hike in capital gains and dividend taxes, there won’t be
any move at all away from the market even if those latter two
taxes do rise.
The point of all this arithmetic is that it makes no sense
to say that the government “can’t afford” to eliminate the
corporate income tax. The truth is that in some ways, it can’t
afford not to do so. And if it rescinds the remaining
stimulus funds, affordability even by static budget scoring
becomes almost moot.
….. Now, since we in this column are living in a world of
What-Should-Be rather than of what the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Axis
actually will do, then if we just combine the one-two
prescription outlined above with conservative health-care
reforms, Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget, a sound-dollar policy at the
Federal Reserve and at Treasury, a combination of the G.W. Bush
and Fred Thompson Social Security plans, and some serious
discretionary fiscal discipline — well, then, presto! — we will
have both a booming economy and a balanced budget again before
private citizens Sasha and Malia Obama are even in college
yet.
And with the economy booming along, President Mike Pence
will be able to concentrate on eliminating terrorists and
securing world peace….