The Palm Beach Post

Trump tax cut looking like much-hyped cuts of past

- Paul Krugman He writes for the New York Times.

So far, Donald Trump and his allies in Congress have achieved one and only one major legislativ­e victory: passing a large tax cut, mainly aimed at corporatio­ns and business owners. The tax cut’s proponents promised that it would lead to a dramatic accelerati­on of economic growth and produce big gains in wages; they hoped that it would also yield big political dividends for the midterm elections.

So how’s it going? Politicall­y, the tax cut is a damp squib. But what about the economics?

You might be tempted to say it’s too early to tell. After all, the law has been in effect only a few months, and we got our first look at post-tax-cut economic growth only last week. But here’s the thing: To deliver on its backers’ promises, the tax cut would have to produce a huge surge in business investment — not in the long run but more or less right away. And there’s no sign that anything like that is happening.

Anything that increases the budget deficit should, other things being the same, lead to higher overall spending and a short-run bump in the economy. But if you want to boost overall spending, you don’t have to give huge tax breaks to corporatio­ns. You could do lots of other things instead — say, spend money on fixing America’s crumbling infrastruc­ture, an issue on which Trump keeps promising a plan but never delivers.

It never made sense to believe that corporatio­ns would immediatel­y share their tax-cut bounty with workers, and they haven’t. Any news organizati­ons that let themselves be bamboozled by cherry-picked stories of firms announcing worker bonuses after the tax bill passed should be ashamed of their credulity.

The real logic behind corporate tax cuts is that they’re supposed to lead to higher investment. This investment, in turn, would gradually increase the stock of capital, simultaneo­usly driving down the pretax rate of return on investment and pushing up wages.

There are two questions about this supposed process. One is how much wages will rise in the long run. Most independen­t estimates predict only modest gains. Still, to be fair, that’s not a question on which the data have had time to speak.

But the other, equally important question is, how long is the long run? As Greg Leiserson of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth points out, “every month in which wage rates are not sharply higher than they would have been absent the legislatio­n, and investment returns are not sharply lower, is a month in which the benefits of those corporate tax cuts accrue primarily to shareholde­rs.”

To get major wage gains before, for example, the 2024 election — never mind 2020 — we’d need to have a huge near-term boom in business investment, mainly financed by inflows of capital from overseas. I mean really, really huge. And there’s no sign this is happening.

In short, the effects of the Trump tax cut are already looking like the effects of the Brownback tax cut in Kansas, the Bush tax cut and every other much-hyped tax cut of the past three decades: big talk, big promises, but no results aside from a swollen budget deficit.

You might think that the GOP would eventually learn something from this experience, realize that tax cuts aren’t magical, and come up with some different ideas.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States