If there is one thing
about America that inspires the rest of the world, it is its level
of economic freedom. Or at least it used to. According to the
just-released 2005 Index of Economic Freedom, published
jointly by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street
Journal, the United States is no longer among the world's 10
freest economies. In fact, the United States is becoming
uncompetitive in economic freedom.
One reason for this
decline is a combination of onerous taxes and increasing government
expenditures, which worsens the fiscal burden on
businesses. Another reason is that countries like Australia,
Chile, and Iceland have leapfrogged past America by decisively and
repeatedly cutting taxes, privatizing, and deregulating, thus
creating friendlier business environments. The degree of
economic freedom that the United States had 10 years ago, when it
was ranked the fifth freest economy, is clearly no longer good
enough.
This plunge in the
economic freedom ranking is a warning bell. Economic freedom is the
foundation of U.S. economic strength, and economic strength is the
foundation of America's high standard of living, military
power, and status as a world leader. To regain its leadership in
this important area, America must cut taxes, cut government
expenditures, eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade, and
further deregulate some sectors of the economy. A freer U.S.
economy will grow faster, and with faster growth, America will have
the resources to raise its high living standard and to preserve its
military power and status as a world leader.
Falling
Behind
Economic freedom
measures the opportunity for people to engage in all
levels of economic activity-from starting a business to
opening a bank account to using a credit card; from buying
groceries, traveling, and fixing their homes to being able to
obtain good health care; from buying a car, sending their children
to school, and finding a job to counting on sound law enforcement
and courts to protect their personal liberties and private
property. The fewer the obstacles to these activities, the more
people can participate in the economy by working, investing,
saving, and consuming. The freer the economy, the more people can
use their abilities to create wealth, putting money in the
pockets of millions of families.
Until recently,
America epitomized the benefits of living in a free society. When
the first Index was published in 1995, the United States was
the fifth freest economy in the world, and it hovered at the
top for the rest of the 1990s. The economy was booming during
those six years. The compounded average growth rate from 1995 to
2000 was 4.1 percent,[1] driven largely by higher business
productivity. Unemployment and inflation rates were at their
lowest. The dollar was strong. Americans were consuming and
investing fiercely.
However, in the four
years since 2001, the U.S. ranking has fallen sharply from sixth
place in 2001 to 12th place in 2005. Meanwhile countries such as
Chile, Australia, and Iceland were opening their markets, improving
their economic freedom. (See Chart 1.) During this time, U.S. government spending ballooned, and this continuous expansion
of government expenditures has seriously hurt the U.S. ranking.[2]

The U.S. government
has blamed the spending binge on the tragic events of September 11,
2001. However, according to Heritage Foundation analyst Brian
Riedl, the majority of the government's spending spree since 2001
is unrelated to 9/11 or national defense.[3] For example, the increased
expenditures have largely supported financially troubled programs
like Social Security and Medicare; subsidized the rich, the
famous, and the elected through farm subsidies to their expensive
ranches;[4] and funded a myriad of special-interest
projects such as "therapeutic horseback riding" and "a school
mariachi music curriculum."[5] The money used to support those programs is
money that U.S. workers and businesses have earned but cannot use
for their own families or interests.
In other important
areas of economic openness-taxes, non-tariff barriers, and
regulations affecting local and foreign investment-the United
States has simply failed to keep pace with a changing world.
Recent reforms undertaken by countries now ranked in the top 10 in
economic freedom illustrate the point.
First,
all of these
countries strongly protect property rights.
Second,
Chile, Hong
Kong,[6] Singapore, Estonia, Iceland, and
Ireland have average top corporate tax rates that are half of
the U.S. rate. Singapore, Estonia, Hong Kong, and Switzerland
have much lower top personal income tax rates.
Third,
Singapore, Hong
Kong, and Estonia are virtually duty-free with few non-tariff
barriers. Chile has a weighted average tariff rate that is almost
as low as the U.S. tariff rate, but with considerably fewer
non-tariff barriers (e.g., quotas and antidumping laws).
Finally,
Hong Kong,
Singapore, New Zealand, Luxembourg, Estonia, and Ireland have fewer
restrictions on foreign investment and on the free movement of
capital. In addition, Hong Kong, Singapore, and Denmark have fewer
regulations on establishing a new business, including
labor laws, environmental and zoning regulations, and bureaucratic
steps required to start a business.[7]
Should We
Worry?
Should the United
States, as a large economy, worry that it is losing its freedom
"podium" to small economies like Chile, Iceland, New Zealand, or
Estonia? Absolutely. One can never overestimate the damage caused
by continuously poor policymaking.
For example, in the
early 1900s, Argentina was the world's seventh wealthiest economy.
Its wealth was driven largely by foreign direct investment from
England and by strong enforcement of property rights. It took no
more than 40 years of continuously poor policymaking, starting in
the 1930s, to erode this wealth. Today, with its world leadership
lost, Argentina is a poor country mired in crisis, with a currency
that moneychangers around the world refuse to handle. Argentina did
not become poor overnight. Its road to poverty began when it became
blind to the eventual implications of poor policy.
The perception of the
United States as the most attractive place to do business is
changing as the downward trend in U.S. economic freedom
continues. That perception plummets as spending swells the
U.S. federal deficit, as Congress threatens more trade restrictions
and tariffs and passes legislation to expand underfunded transfer
programs like Medicare and Social Security, as tax rates remain
among the highest in the world, as the U.S. remains one of the few
countries to tax the overseas earnings of its corporations,
and as some in the Administration support corporate welfare
programs such as agricultural subsidies.
Four Reforms to Regain
U.S. Leadership in Economic Freedom
It is time for America
to rediscover the advantages that flow from increased economic
freedom. Specifically, America needs sustained economic growth to
maintain its high standard of living, military power, and
leadership in the world, and to foster this economic growth, the
United States needs to increase economic freedom by advancing four
reforms.
Reform #1: Cut tax
rates.
One area in which the
top 10 economically freest countries in the world distinguish
themselves is low corporate tax rates. (See Table 1.) Estonia,
which does not tax corporations, has the lowest rate.[8]
Ireland, Chile, Hong Kong, and Iceland have a corporate
tax rate that is only half that of the United States. Singapore and
Luxembourg tax 13 percentage points less than the U.S., and
Australia, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand have
slightly lower corporate tax rates than the United
States.

The U.S. must find a
way to slash its corporate tax significantly in order to be more
competitive, providing businesses with better opportunities for
increased production.
Reform #2: Cut
government expenditures.
Rising government
expenditures are imposing a burden on American families and future
generations that will be hard to remove. According to David
Walker, Comptroller General of the United States, the official debt
of the United States government today is $7 trillion.[9] If the
"promises" that the U.S. government has made to retirees and users
of government health care services are added, "the real debt is $42
trillion," which amounts to "18 times the current federal budget,
or three-and-one-half [times] the size of the current Gross
Domestic Product."[10] In per capita terms, this obligation
represents "over $140,000 for every person in America."[11]
Just to pay this debt,
the U.S. economy would have to grow an average of 3 percent
annually for the next 45 years, or 6 percent annually for the next
23 years, and incur no further obligations. These growth targets
illustrate the extent to which current government actions have
already affected the future of children born this year, who most
likely will have to endure higher tax rates, higher interest rates,
a much more difficult business environment, and a lower standard of
living. For the government to leave them with such an inherited
burden is just as irresponsible as it would be for their own
parents to leave them with a long list of bills to pay.
In one of the 2004
presidential debates, President George W. Bush said that he
would spend whatever it takes to make sure that America is safe.
The American people expect nothing less of their President.
However, Americans also expect both Congress and the Bush
Administration to use taxpayers' money wisely so that financing the
war on terrorism does not unnecessarily burden future
generations.
To reduce the unfunded
debt burden on American families, the Administration should
immediately advance proposals to reform Social Security,
Medicare, and Medicaid. Also important, the
Administration should stop supporting corporate welfare
programs like the farm subsidies for the elite and wasteful
pork-barrel projects like therapeutic horseback riding and
mariachi music curricula. By cutting wasteful programs, the
Administration would avoid burdening future generations.
Reform #3: Support
free trade, especially at home.
The Bush
Administration has decisively advanced free trade agreements with
other countries. So far, the Administration has signed agreements
with Chile and Singapore and has completed negotiations with
Central America, Australia, and Morocco. It should continue to
negotiate free trade agreements with other countries around the
world, and Congress should approve these trade
agreements.
The U.S. record is
dubious, though, when it comes to removing domestic barriers to
trade, such as protectionist tariffs and antidumping laws. One of
the worst cases is the stubborn protectionism of U.S. sugar
growers. At the current level of protection, sugar sells in
U.S. supermarkets at three times the world market price. Despite
its size, however- the sugar industry supports only 61,000 direct
jobs-its lobbying efforts are so strong that, according to Mary
Anastasia O'Grady, editor of the "Americas" column at The Wall
Street Journal, the sugar lobby is about to succeed in
excluding the Dominican Republic from the Central America Free
Trade Agreement (CAFTA) because, under CAFTA, the Dominican
Republic would "win a market access quota equal to 1.7% of US
production, after 15 years."[12] Excluding opportunities
presented by trade with the Dominican Republic is a high price for
average Americans to pay for such a tiny threat to the tiny sugar
industry. Moreover, U.S. protectionism is just as bad in other
industries, such as orange juice, peanuts, and dairy
products.
Even worse are the
U.S. antidumping laws. In principle, these laws give U.S. producers
the right to request protectionist tariffs when a foreign producer
sells his products in the United States at a lower price than it
sells for in its own country. In practice, they create incentives
for industries to seek ridiculous protections at the expense
of taxpayers.
It all starts with the
government's requirement that 25 percent of the industry making the
product must support such a claim. To assess the level of
support, the Department of Commerce surveys the industry with
a form that producers must complete. Here the Byrd Amendment-in its
effects, the most distorting antidumping law-comes into play. Under
the amendment, once the antidumping duty is approved, the producers
that support a dumping case are eligible to receive a portion of
the duties collected.[13] This obviously creates a strong incentive
to support a petition, and approval of every antidumping
investigation is virtually guaranteed. A flawed methodology for
identifying instances of dumping and the accompanying protection
margins-a methodology that is usually biased against foreign
producers-further compounds the problem.[14]
The damage does not
stop there, though. With antidumping laws, producers have a
mechanism for requesting protectionist tariffs where no tariff
actually exists. In other words, no matter how many free trade
agreements the U.S. makes or how many tariffs Congress tears down
unilaterally, as long as the antidumping laws exist, U.S. producers
will have an avenue they can use to pursue protectionism.
Since success breeds imitation, many countries around the world now
use antidumping laws as well. The U.S. government must repeal its
antidumping laws, not just to preserve the interests of millions of
U.S. consumers, but also to advance effectively free trade
throughout the world.
Reform #4:
Deregulate.
America's business
environment is still perceived as one of the world's most
business-friendly. Yet the flow of new regulations continues
unabated, and the U.S. must address this problem in order to ease
the regulatory burden on businesses. For example, foreigners should
be allowed to invest in certain sectors that are currently off
limits, such as nuclear energy, maritime and air shipping,
broadcasting, and communications. In addition, many
regulations (e.g., some health and product safety
standards, and food and drug labeling requirements), although
well-intentioned, can be particularly burdensome to small and
medium-size businesses and should be removed.
Conclusion
America has fallen
behind 11 countries in the economic freedom rankings in the 2005
Index of Economic Freedom because it has failed to advance
reform at home while other countries have continued to cut tax
rates, lower trade barriers, and deregulate. This decline is
serious because economic freedom is the foundation of U.S. economic
strength, and economic strength is the foundation of America's high
standard of living, military power, and status as a world
leader.
To encourage greater
economic growth, the United States must cut taxes, cut government
expenditures, eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade, and further
deregulate the economy. With greater freedom, America will grow
faster, continue to inspire other nations, and leave a more
promising future for future generations.
Ana Isabel
Eiras is Senior Policy Analyst for International
Economics in the Center for International Trade and Economics at
The Heritage Foundation. The author would like to thank Anthony Kim
for his valuable contribution to this paper.
[1]World Bank Group,
World Development Indicators Online, 2004, at
publications.worldbank.org/WDI (January 4, 2005;
subscription required).
[2]For further
reference, see Ana Isabel Eiras, "The United States Is No Longer
the Champion of Economic Freedom," Heritage Foundation
Backgrounder No. 1781, July 23, 2004, at
www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/bg1781.cfm.
[3]Brian M. Riedl,
"$20,000 per Household: The Highest Level of Federal Spending Since
World War II," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 1710,
December 3, 2003, p. 1, at
www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/BG1710.cfm. The 2001
rankings are based on spending increases thatoccurred in 1999, and
the 2005 rankings are based on increases that occurred in
2003.
[4]Brian M. Riedl,
"Another Year at the Federal Trough: Farm Subsidies for the Rich,
Famous, and Elected Jumped Again in 2002," Heritage Foundation
Backgrounder No. 1763, May 24, 2004, at
www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1763.cfm.
[5]Brian M. Riedl
and Keith Miller, "Another Pork-Laden Spending Omnibus Bill,"
Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 613, November 22, 2004, at
www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm613.cfm.
[6]The Index
treats the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region as a separate
economy or "country."
[7]Eiras, "The
United States Is No Longer the Champion of Economic
Freedom."
[8]Resident
companies and permanent establishments of non-resident companies
registered with the Estonian authorities are not subject to tax on
their income.
[9]Robert E. Moffit,
Ph.D., "Can Congress Contain Explosive Medicare Costs?" Heritage
Foundation WebMemo No. 523, June 18, 2004, at
www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm523.cfm.
[12]Mary Anastasia
O'Grady, "Sugar Daddy Decadence," The Wall Street Journal,
November 19, 2004, p. A17.
[13]Brink Lindsey and
Daniel Ikenson, "Antidumping 101: The Devilish Details of 'Unfair
Trade' Law," Cato Institute, Center for Trade Policy Studies
Trade Policy Analysis No. 20, November 26, 2002, at
www.freetrade.org/pubs/pas/tpa-020es.html (January 3,
2005).