The Fort Morgan Times

Ignore GOP scaremonge­ring about Dems’ tax plans. They’re worth it.

-

Republican­s and business lobbyists are waging war against the tax provisions in Democrats’ big budget bill. Don’t listen to them.

No, the bill isn’t perfect. There are better ways to revamp the tax code. But the deal struck last week is absolutely worth doing all the same.

Most media coverage of the surprise agreement between Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., has focused on its spending and social policy programs. Understand­ably: The legislatio­n would represent the biggest investment in fighting climate change in U.S. history.

Its health provisions would also make care more affordable. The bill could also modestly reduce prices over the long run — even if, yes, the “inflation-reducing” power of this “Inflation Reduction Act” has been overstated.

The bill’s weak spot, at least politicall­y, lies in how it will raise revenue to pay for everything. Republican­s are trying to peel off the inscrutabl­e Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., who wields a critical vote in the 50-50 Senate, by falsely claiming that middleclas­s taxpayers will foot the bill. Or that the economy will collapse.

Or something similarly horrific.

In reality, the tax-side changes are so narrow that relatively few people should even notice. Even the biggest chunk of the revenue raisers — on mega-corporatio­ns — is effectivel­y only a partial clawback of the huge GOP corporate tax cuts passed in 2017.

“If you’re not a tax cheat, hedge fund manager or a corporatio­n making over $1 billion, you’re not affected,” summarizes Steven Rosenthal, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

Let’s go through the measures one by one.

First, the bill would give money to the IRS, mostly for enforcemen­t but also for customer service and IT modernizat­ion. This may sound like an expense, but it’s really a long-overdue investment: Beefing up the IRS enables the agency to identify and collect tax bills already owed, and it encourages more voluntary compliance.

Both of these things bring in Catherine more money — Rampell especially from Washington the ultra-rich and Post large corporatio­ns, whose audit rates have plummeted in recent years as Congress starved the IRS of resources. Congress’s official scorekeepe­rs estimate that these initiative­s would net Uncle Sam an additional $124 billion; others project an even bigger bang for the buck.

The bill’s second key tax measure would narrow the carriedint­erest loophole. Under current law, managers of private equity and other investment funds can pay taxes on some of their earnings at capital gains rates, rather than at the higher rates at which ordinary labor income is taxed.

This means wealthy investment managers can pay much lower tax rates than their receptioni­sts. The loophole’s continued existence serves no discernibl­e public interest.

Sinema, who’s received a lot of donations from the finance industry, reportedly objected to similar measures last year and is expected to do so again. This is unfortunat­e. Relatively little money ($14 billion) is at stake, though. So if Democrats do cut the provision to appease Sinema, the rest of the bill won’t obviously fall apart.

Finally there’s the biggest and most controvers­ial provision, which raises $313 billion: a socalled book corporate minimum tax. Right now some mega-companies pay zero in corporate income taxes, despite telling shareholde­rs they brought in big bucks, because there are different rules for how profits are calculated for financial markets vs. for tax purposes. Under this bill, companies that report at least $1 billion in profits to shareholde­rs must pay at least 15% of that amount in taxes (with some carve-outs and other adjustment­s).

This has obvious political appeal: It doesn’t seem fair that companies get to report one set of profits to investors (typically, the largest possible number) and another to Uncle Sam for tax purposes (the smallest possible number).

But there are drawbacks to this approach. For example, it effectivel­y creates two parallel corporate tax systems, and the one we already have is complicate­d enough. It would also disproport­ionately affect the manufactur­ing industry, which benefits from a key tax break that would become less valuable.

There are more efficient, less convoluted ways to wring money out of these companies. For example, Congress could raise the standard corporate income tax rate. Or, it could pare some of those generous tax breaks it’s doled out over the years, which have enabled corporatio­ns to grind down their tax liabilitie­s in the first place.

Unfortunat­ely, Sinema has already ruled out rate hikes. And Congress is notoriousl­y bad at rescinding specific tax deductions and credits. “Congress gives out tax breaks like candy,” says Kimberly Clausing, a former Biden Treasury Department official. “It becomes hard to say ‘No lollipop for you, no Skittles for you,’ even as everyone’s teeth are rotting.”

Given the constraint­s, this is the best corporate tax revenue tool left standing. Even the 10thbest solution is still a solution — and one worth seizing when the future of the planet is at stake.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States