HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy

Regulatory Policy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

Demanding a federal budget that is fair, responsible, and meets our nation's priorities

Home :  Federal Budget & Tax : 
Federal Budget & Tax:      News     Blog     Background    



Thursday, July 31, 2008

The Blind Leading the Blinder?

Yesterday, the Senate voted once again against beginning debate on a package of tax cuts called the "extenders" for the fourth time this year. The vote was 51-43, and will put off any consideration of the legislation until Congress returns from their August recess on September 8.

The two main holdups are a deadlock between Democrats and Republicans over whether and how to address high gas prices (which is unrelated to the extenders bill), and the continuing debate over whether to pass fiscally responsible legislation. As I wrote yesterday, the first appears to be just election-year shenanigans typical these days in Washington. The second issue, however, is central to the debate over the future of the U.S. government's fiscal health and the economic health of our country.

In the wake of the continuing deterioration of both short and long-term budget deficit projections, yet another increase in the country's credit limit, sustained, disturbingly-large military expenditures with no end in sight, and continued woeful economic performance, it is long past time for Congress and the president to wake up to some fiscal realities.

Despite what the president and some Republicans in Congress would have us believe, the U.S. Treasury is not a bottomless money pit. It's time Congress and the president stop passing fiscal policies like they are on spring break with Mom and Dad's credit card and prioritize policies in a fiscally responsible way. We elect our leaders to make difficult decisions - that's part of the job. But the fiscal policies of the last eight years skirt those choices by pretending we can have our cake and eat it too.

Yet the Bush administration continues to care very little about the impact of current policies on future generations. Once again, they released a Statement of Administration Policy (SAP) opposing the extenders bill because it attempts to comply with pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) rules - because it offsets extension of some tax cuts with different tax increases. And the Republicans in the Senate continue to bury their heads in the sand and fall in line with that ideology. Even the usually respectable and sometimes responsible Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), ranking member on the Senate Finance committee, cannot find a compromise that is fiscally responsible (i.e. he won't accept any tax increases). Does Grassley honestly believe we can keep running up debt in the current fiscal environment with no consequences? Does he understand the larger context of the decisions he is making - or more accurately, the ones he is not making?

The Democrats aren't much better. They've talked a good game on fiscal responsibility since taking back Congress in 2006, but when the going gets tough during policy debates or votes on high-priority issues, they lose their gumption. Witness how the Democrats caved last year over the Alternative Minimum Tax debate or the passage this year of the expansion of the G.I. Bill as just a couple of examples. Unfortunately, despite their tough talk, there is little evidence to point to a change this time around.

So, in the end, our nation's fiscal policy comes down to a battle between those willing to look the other way and those who don't know which way to look. Awesome.



Posted by Adam Hughes, 11:18:48 AM



Notes from the Economy: GDP

The Commerce Department, via the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), released initial ("advance") second quarter GDP figures and revisions to previous quarters' estimates. BEA reports that in the second quarter of this year, the economy grew at a tepid 1.9 percent annual rate. Economic growth was spurred by the economic stimulus payments from the government and strong exports boosted by the declining value of the dollar.

The bureau also revised downward first quarter's growth from 1 percent to a 0.9 percent. Noteworthy is BEA's revision of fourth quarter, 2007 growth: that figure was decreased from a plus 0.6 percent to a negative 0.2 percent.

Given dip into negative territory in Q4 and Q2's less-than-expected growth rate, supporters of a second stimulus package now have additional ammunition to argue for such a package in September. Yesterday, Senate Appropriations Committee chair Robert Byrd (D-WV) released details (CongressDaily, $) of $24 billion stimulus package that he plans to take up in September after the August recess. Also yesterday House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) announced (also CD, $, sorry) a September agenda that included room for a second stimulus package.

BEA: Second Quarter GDP News Release

News Coverage:



Posted by Craig Jennings, 10:30:55 AM



Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Senate Republicans Remain Mighty Stubborn

Last night, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed a motion to proceed to a package of tax cuts commonly called the "extenders" for the third time this year. Senate Republicans have blocked consideration of the proposal twice before, insisting that the Senate continue to debate an energy market speculation bill until lawmakers add something dealing with gas prices. While it isn't clear if the Senate will reach the 60 votes necessary to begin debating the bill (the vote is this afternoon), it is certain that time is running out. With only this week left before Congress' typical lengthy August recess, and only three weeks in September before the legislature will likely adjourn for the year, time is of the essence.

The machinations over this bill appear to be due to the usually shenanigans in Washington. Get this - almost all of the Republican Senators blocking the bill support the content of the extenders bill. In fact, not only have over 300 major U.S. companies weighed in with the full Senate giving their strong support to the Democrats' extenders package, but yesterday, over 2,100 high-tech employees who work on research and development from 74 different companies in 39 states sent all senators a letter indicating their support for the research and development credit, calling themselves "dismayed" that Congress has allowed the credit to expire. The R&D credit is the largest provision in the extenders bill.

Add to that the fact that this package of tax cuts includes an expansion of the Child Tax Credit. The legislation would lower the income threshold that parents must meet to qualify for the refundable portion of the tax credit from $12,050 to $8,500. This change would benefit over 13 million children, according to data from the Tax Policy Center. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities also points out that many children who stand to benefit come from families with parents who work year round, include individuals with a disability, and/or contribute to a broad range of jobs in critical services that often pay low wages, such as caring for the elderly or teaching young children.

So, let's see. Hundreds of major U.S. companies support the extenders, high-tech employees support it, and a huge grouping of organizations from faith-based groups to labor and child welfare advocates to direct service providers support the Child Tax Credit expansion. Why is the Senate having such a hard time getting the bill passed? Lord knows it isn't because the package increases the deficit (it does increase the deficit, but few in the Senate care about that). What could the reason be? Hmmmm...

Update:
The Senate failed for the third time to invoke cloture on the tax extenders bill by a vote of 53-43.



Posted by Adam Hughes, 03:06:16 PM



Tuesday, July 22, 2008

JEC Ranking Member Highlights Troubling Trend in Income Inequality

Joint Economic Committee ranking member Jim Saxton (R-NJ) musters moral fibre to stand up for the downtrodden richest one percent among us to lament the growing burden that increasing shares of income are placing upon this voiceless group. It's true: According recently-released IRS data, while the richest one percent of taxpayers (as measured by adjusted gross income) saw their share of income grow from 20.8 percent to 22.1 percent from 2000 to 2006, they also saw their share income taxes climb from 37.4 to 39.9 in that same time.

Meanwhile, those lucky duckies in the bottom 50 percent of income earners -- those earning less than $31,987 -- had their share of the tax load lifted. From 2000 to 2006, when they saw their share of income decrease from 13.0 percent to 12.5 percent, those earners in the lower half of the income distribution were sticking it to the upper half as they reduced their share of the overall income tax burden from 3.9 percent to 3.0 percent.

Fear not, one-percenters! You can look forward to a lighter income tax burden after Thursday, when the minimum wage skyrockets to $6.55. It won't be long before they catch up to your average hourly income of $660 and share equally in your tax burden.


(click to enlarge)


Posted by Craig Jennings, 03:11:55 PM



Monday, July 21, 2008

Claims of "Magical" Tax Cuts Continue

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has released a new report discussing the oft-cited, and completely false claim that tax cuts pay for themselves. Even though this statement has been refuted many times, by CBPP, by outside academics, and even by President Bush's own Treasury Department, the claim continues to float around.

CBPP does a nice job hammering home the facts again about the impact of tax cuts in a very digestible brief:

The claim that tax cuts "pay for themselves" — i.e., cause so much economic growth that revenues rise faster than they would have without the tax cut — has been made repeatedly in recent years and is one of the many tax policy issues that is likely to receive renewed attention in light of the upcoming election. As explained briefly below, this claim is false. The evidence shows clearly that tax cuts lose revenue.

CBPP: EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT TAX CUTS LOSE REVENUE



Posted by Adam Hughes, 02:49:11 PM



Thursday, July 17, 2008

New CBO Report Shows Dire Consequences of Bush Tax Cuts, AMT Patching

The CBO has released a report detailing the effects of indexing the the AMT to inflation (i.e. "patching" it so that fewer households would pay it than otherwise anticipated) and extending the 2001-2003 Bush tax cuts without offsetting the revenue loss.

If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire and if the AMT continues its ever-deepening reach into the middle class, the federal debt held by the public will increase from today's 37 percent of GDP to 115 percent in 2050. If AMT is indexed for inflation to limit its impact on the middle class, that debt figure becomes 115 percent in 2050. If the AMT is indexed for inflation and the Bush tax cuts are extended, federal debt held by the public jumps to 190 percent in 2050.

The Budgetary Effects of Indexing the AMT and Extending the 2001-2003 Bush Tax Cuts
(percent of GDP)
2007203020502082
Bush Tax Cuts Expire, AMT Not Patched
Budget Deficit -1.2-1.0-4.6-18.1
Debt Held by the Public371250240
AMT Indexed to Inflation
Budget Deficit-1.2-3.0-10.0 -29.8
Debt Held by the Public3729115435
Bush Tax Cuts Extended, AMT Indexed to Inflation
Budget Deficit-1.2 -6.1-15.039.3
Debt Held by the Public3763190602
 
Source: Congressional Budget Office

Deficit financing of these tax cuts has a pernicious effect, reducing per capita income by 13 percent in 2050. But, "[b]eyond 2073, projected deficits under those tax policies would become so large and unsustainable that CBO's model cannot calculate their effects."

(click to enlarge)

CBO: Long-Term Effects of Indexing the Alternative Minimum Tax and Extending the Tax Reductions of 2001 and 2003



Posted by Craig Jennings, 03:12:11 PM



Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Republicans Inch Toward Fiscal Responsibility

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate Finance Committee ranking member Charles Grassley (R-IA), and a pair of their caucus members are promulgating ($) new language on legislation that would extend a bevy of tax cuts for another year (collectively known as "extenders") and a one-year AMT patch. The total cost of the bill would be $130 billion; the AMT portion of the measure is about $62 billion.

The language would partially offset the revenue loss with unspecified "spending reductions and appropriate revenue raisers for new tax relief policy." Not exactly something to pin all your fiscal responsibility dreams on, but consider this is a step forward for Republicans who are generally allergic to shifting the tax burden from one group to another (usually wealthy) group. Although, credit should also be given to Congress members who found a loophole so politically repugnant, that the staunchest of revenue-phobes ([cough] McConnell [cough]) would have a difficult time explaining a "no" vote.

The provision in question closes a loophole by which special taxpayers -- like hedge fund managers -- use offshore tax havens to shelter income. Grassley explains the loophole quite well:

So, if a teacher donated his or her entire salary to a charity, he or she would only be able to claim about half of that as a deduction. Meanwhile, a hedge fund manager who sheltered income in the Grand Caymans would be allowed to claim a deduction for the entire amount of his or her sheltered income.


Posted by Craig Jennings, 01:43:35 PM



Friday, July 11, 2008

Competiting Claims on Our Fiscal Future

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has released a report from leading economists and budget experts criticing a recent paper from the Brookings Institute and the Heritage Foundation called "Taking Back Our Fiscal Future." From the CBPP press release:

Sixteen leading economists and budget experts issued a major critique today of a recent proposal to address future federal budget deficits through radical changes in budget procedures for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

These experts, who include a Nobel Laureate in economics, two former Office of Management and Budget Directors, and a former Deputy Director of the Congressional Budget Office, agree that the nation faces large, persistent budget deficits that would ultimately risk significant damage to the economy. They also concur that policymakers should begin now to make the tough choices needed to avert such deficits.

But they believe the methods set forth in "Taking Back Our Fiscal Future" (TBOFF), a recent proposal by some analysts at the Brookings Institution, the Heritage Foundation, and other groups, are misguided. Instead, they believe policymakers should begin the hard work of building consensus on specific spending and tax measures that would start reducing longterm deficits, and they recommend a series of such measures.

So, the Brookings/Heritage paper was signed by 16 "longtime federal budget and policy experts" and now CBPP has released their own report from another 16 prominent and expert folks. Seems like the right-of-centrists and left-of-centrists are gearing up for what could be major reforms to fundamental federal government supports and programs in 2009. Should be quite a fight - stay tuned.

Reports:
CBPP: A Balanced Approach to Restoring Fiscal Responsibility
Brookings/Heritage: Taking Back Our Fiscal Future

Commentary:
Matthew Yglesias (The Atlantic): Fiscal Sanity How?
Matthew Yglesias (The Atlantic): Leninism's Return
Robert Kuttner (The American Prospect): Sensible Budget Wonks Strike Back Against Conservatives
Mark Schmidt (The American Prospect): "Leninist Strategy" 2.0
Matt Lewis (Inclusionist): A Better Way on Long-Term Deficits
Diane Lim Rogers (EconomistMom): But Really, Fiscal Responsibility Is Easier Under a Benevolent Dictatorship



Posted by Adam Hughes, 10:55:51 AM



Wednesday, July 09, 2008

New TPC Analysis of AMT Legislation

The Tax Policy Center has published a distributional analysis of the recently House-passed Alternative Minimum Tax legislation (H.R. 6275).

The TPC has produced distributional estimates for H.R. 6275, the alternative minimum tax (AMT) patch legislation passed by the House on June 25, 2008. In addition, we have updated our estimates of the number of AMT taxpayers, AMT revenue, and the distribution of AMT liability. Finally, we have published an updated list of 12 key facts and projections about the AMT.

Read the TPC Analysis



Posted by Adam Hughes, 04:23:58 PM



Monday, July 07, 2008

Fiscal Policy Agenda Returns to Washington

The Fiscal Policy Team and Congress both return to action this week with a number of fiscal policy issues to be tackled during the next five weeks. Below is a rundown of issues coming up soon, with most of the action happening in the Senate:

  • Debate continues between Senate Democrats and Republicans over whether to offset the cost of a popular package of tax breaks called the "extenders." The latest development is that Senate Republicans are now challenging Democrats to offset the cost of the package with spending cuts rather than other tax increases. BNA ($)
  • The Senate will also resume work on a bill to stave off a cut in payments to Medicare physicians by giving them the same reimbursement levels they had during the first six months of this year. Senate Republicans, who blocked legislation before the July 4 recess by one vote, have agreed to take up the legislation again this week after intense pressure from outside groups, particularly the American Medical Association. AMA Statement, AMA Television Ads
  • Legislation to help people hurt by the mortgage crisis was also blocked before the holiday recess by Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), who wanted to have an amendment added to the bill to give tax cuts to encourage the production of renewable energy. The Senate plans to take another crack at that bill this afternoon.
  • The appropriations season is well under way in Washington, but not much has been accomplished. With only about 10 weeks left until the start of the new fiscal year, neither the House nor Senate has approved any appropriations bills yet. After a old-fashioned temper-tantrum in the House appropriations committee before the July 4 holiday, prospects for completion of even one appropriations bill by Congress this year seems less and less likely.
  • Finally, the Government Accountability Office has a new report out showing the weapons systems currently being developed by the Department of Defense will cost an astronomical $1.6 trillion to complete, of which $335 billion will be needed in the next five years. Yikes! Washington Post



Posted by Adam Hughes, 03:00:13 PM




Latest Entries by Theme

All Themes

Appropriations & Spending

Federal Tax Policy

Income/Wealth Inequality

Budget Projections

Government Performance

Estate Tax

State Fiscal Policy

Watcher

Entitlements

Budget Process

Debt & Deficit

Oversight & Enforcement

Transparency

Privatization

Contact Us

Most Recent Entries for Federal Budget & Tax

Obama Selects Chief Performance Officer

Business Cuts as Stimulus: Somewhat Less Than Effective

CBO 2009 Deficit Projection Tops $1 Trillion

Gates Opines on 2009 War Spending

Details of New House Rules Package

The Case for Tax Cuts in the Recovery Package

Economic Package Details Coming Into View

Douglas Elmendorf Tapped as CBO Chief

Commission Proposals Being Pushed From Day 1

We Wish You a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays

Archived Entries for Federal Tax Policy

January

December, 2008

November, 2008

October, 2008

September, 2008

August, 2008

July, 2008

June, 2008

May, 2008

April, 2008

March, 2008

February, 2008

January, 2008

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004

August, 2004

June, 2004

January, 2004

December, 2003

November, 2003

September, 2003

August, 2003

July, 2003