(Archived document, may contain errors)
1 lf20l 316
HOW THE KASTEN-WEBER TAX CUT WILL SPUR ECONOMIC GROWTH
The deep and painful recession afflicting America is the result of
seriously flawed economic policies sup- ported by George Bush and
Congress. Record tax increases, costly new regulator y burdens, and
unprecedented in- cre,ases in federal spending all have combined to
discourage job creation and entrepreneurship. Even though the
evidence is clear that the economy remains stagnant, Bush
Administration economic advisors actively am oppos- i ng growth
legislation. And Bush apparently is following their bad advice.
Warned The Wall Street Journal this week in an editorial: "Even as
lusty a beast as the U.S. economy can take only so much punishment
from its political masters in Washington. The l o ng and short of
it is: The world's most important economy is in the grip of
economic incompetents." As long as it remains in their grip,
American workers and families will remain con- demned to lower
living standards and rising unemployment. Yet the econo m y can
grow again if policy makers remove the shackles placed on it last
year by the tax and spending increase. To do so, lawmakers must
reverse course and correct the mistakes that are causing the reces-
sion and adopt policies that encourage job creation and increase
incentives to work, save, and invest. A good s tan is the Economic
Growth and Family Tax Freedom Act of 1991 (S. 1920, H.R. 3744)
mitroduced by Senator Robert Kasten of Wisconsin and Representative
Vin Weber of Minnesota, both Republicans. Th e Kas- ten-Weber
growth package cuts the tax on savings and investment, technically
known as the "capital gains tax," lowers taxes on business
investment, expands Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), offers
real estate tax relief, and establishes enterpr i se zones.
Kasten-Weber also relieves the tax burden on families by granting a
$ 1,000 non- refundable tax credit for children under age 6 and a
similar credit of $300 for children age 6 to 18. The creft sig-
nificantly would reverse the rising tax burden o n families caused
by inflation's- erosion of the dependent exemp- tion over the past
four decades. With the economy mired in recession, the portion of
the Kasten-Weber package designed to promote economic growth is
particularly critical. Its key features: 15 Percent Capital Gains
Tax-Germany, Hong Kong, the Republic of China on Taiwan, and South
Korea do not tax long-term capital gains, the difference between an
asset's purchase and sale price. In Japan, the maxi- mum tax on
capital gains is a mere 5 perce n t. In the United States, by
contrast, capital gains are subject to a 28 percent tax. To make
matters worse, the tax code ignores the fact that much of the
higher sales prices and profits on savings and investments are due
to inflation. American investors c annot use indexing to ensure
that taxes only are paid on actual gains rather than changes in
asset value caused by inflation. The Kasten-Weber proposal would
cut to 15 percent the capital gains tax for savers and investors in
the upper tax brackets and to 7.5 percent for those in the lower
bracket. To prevent the unfair taxing of gains that reflect only
inflation, the legislation also permits indexing. By calling for a
lower rate and including indexation, the Kas- ten-Weber capital
gains proposal goes well beyond the anemic proposal endorsed by the
White House and would provide a much stronger stimulus to the
economy.
Washington-based economists Gary Robbins. and Aldona Robbins. of
Fiscal: Associates, Inc., estimate that lowering the tax to 15
percent woul d create more than 900,000 new.jobs over ten years.
and boost gross national. product growth by an average of 0.36
percent for. each year over the ten-year period. Other economists
find similg impact from a capital gains. tax cut. Allen Sinai,
Chief Econo m ist of The Boston Company, estimates that a 15
percent capital gains tax would boost employment by 600,009 within
five years and increase, the gross qa- tional product by 0.2
percent annually. Reducing the capital gains. tax also would boost
asset .values , thus strengthening American banks and homeowners
as. well as reducing the cost of bailing out the federal
gove.rnment's savings and loan deposit insurance scheme.. Neutral
Capital Cost Recovery-Kasten-Weber increases the. amount of
deductions businesses c an take for. investment expenses by
adjusting "depreciation!' schedules for inflation and the value of
money. This refiorm'sub- A :i S;antially wo4ld boost capital
formation by reducing the after-tax cost of investment. Under
current tax law, b i Msi- nes s es cannot deduct the cost of
investments. in the year when they are incurred. Instead,-these
costs must be "dqprcciated7' over time, up to 31 years. Eventually,
of course, the business is permitted to. deduct the entire. nominal
amount invested. But the t r ue value of this deduction is eroded
enormousl by inflation. y The Kasten-Weber neutral capital cost
recovery approach would address the tax code's bias against busines
in s in- vestment. If a business originally was supposed. to
depreciate $10 million of an investment in the second yea.'r, for
instance, Kasten-Weber might increase that depreciation to $10.8
million, with similar adjustments M4 followin years so that the
value of the deduction would keep pace with inflation and the cost
of funds. Correctly struc- tured, neutral capital cost recovery
would provide the same incentive for increased investment as plans
permitting immediate deductibility of business investment in the
first year. This would remove some of the current penalty on
productive investm e nt. IRA-Plus--Kasten-Weber expands upon
current IRAs by giving all taxpayers the option to invest in In-.
dividual Retirement Accounts. Savers, moreover, would get the
option of investing in IRAs that would allow for. tax-free
withdrawal of both principal and interest income upon retirement.
Taxpayers taking advantage of this @'back`-ended!'IRA, however,
would not be able to ded .uct contributions in the year they are
made. In addition'to allowing tax-free withdrawals upon retirement,
Kasten-Weber would pe r mit 25 percent of the IRA Ito'be withdrawn
before retirement for initial home purchases, education, and
medical emergencies. Passive Loss Reform-As part of the 1986 Tax
Reform Act, so-called passive investors in real estate, those
d.qfined as not principa l ly engaged in the business, cannot use
rental propei-des lossesio, offset other income. Many experts say
that this provision has helped trigger. the decline in American
real estate values and thus has in- creased the cost'6f the savings
and loan deposit i n surance bailout. Kasten-Weber would reform
passive .loss rules for real estate so they more closely resemble
guidelines for other business investments. Enterprise Zones-To
encourage economic growth in impoverished urban centers and other
particularly depr e ssed sectors of the country, Kasten-Weber would
allow the creation of 50 enterprise zones. Employers open- ing
operations in the zone would receive a tax credit for workers in
the zone. No taxes would be levied on cgp@tal i the year they are
in gains in t h e zone, and investments in zones could be
immediately deducted from taxes n curred. These zones especially
would help create jobs in inner cities. Bush Administration and
congressional policies have made it unprofitable for businesses to
hire new workers a nd for investors to put their money at risk.
Excessive taxation and overregulation have. ground the economy to a
halt and pushed nearly two million additional Americans into
unemployment lines. Meanwhile, Washington policy makers seek not
answers, but how to assign blame elsewhere. Bush clumsily blames
credit card issuers for high interest rates, while liberals in
Congress think higheitaxes on the "rich" will spur growth. There is
no mystery about how to restore growth: simply reduce or remove
govenurient p enalties on job crea-' #on, savings, and investment.
The Kasten-Weber bill will not solve every economic problem created
by policy' mistakes, but enactment of the pro-growth legislation
would stimulate increased economic.aFtivity and reduce the tax
burden on families. Daniel J. M tchell John NL Olin Senior
Fellow
}}