A competitive economy
is at the heart of a country's prosperity. Only by producing
products or services at or below world prices can countries create
wealth. The freedom to access a variety of capital
instruments, to hire and fire labor, and to keep the profits
of efforts and innovation enhances the economy's potential for
growth and wealth creation.
For many decades, the
United States has exemplified this truth, and millions of
American families have benefited from America's economic freedom.
However, this may change soon. The growing fiscal burden of
America's government could hold back the U.S. economy's future
by undercutting U.S. competitiveness.
According to the
2006 Index of Economic Freedom, just published by The
Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, America's
economic freedom ranking has trended down since the
Index's inception in 1995. The 161-country survey shows
that, even though U.S. economic freedom has improved in
absolute terms over the past 12 years, the U.S. has not kept
pace with other countries. The degree of improvement has simply not
been enough for America to remain one of the top freest economies
in the world. Other countries, including Ireland, Estonia, Denmark,
and Iceland, have leapfrogged over the United States and now offer
greater economic opportunity.
America is still a
great place to do business, but a closer examination of the reasons
for the slip in its economic freedom ranking shows that America's
personal and corporate tax rates are increasingly
uncompetitive. For example, many countries throughout Europe
have slashed their rates, while the U.S. has done little. If U.S.
tax rates do not keep pace with reforms elsewhere, economic growth
will be compromised and wealth creation will decline,
undermining the government's ability to pay its bills,
including its obligations under the Social Security and Medicare
programs.[1]
Both the Bush
Administration and Congress should support policies that advance
economic freedom so that the U.S. economy can continue to grow
strongly and provide the resources to maintain America's high
standard of living and role as a world leader. To that end, the
Bush Administration and Congress should cut spending to balance the
federal budget, lower corporate and personal income taxes, and
continue to support the expansion of economic freedom. More
economic freedom at home will ensure that a healthy U.S.
economy remains the solid basis of American prosperity and
strength.
Lose Economic
Freedom,
Lose Wealth Creation
Economic freedom is a
measure of how unconstrained ordinary people are in their
ability 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 obstacles to
these activities that exist, the more people can participate in the
economy- working, investing, saving, and consuming. The freer the
economy, the more it surges, putting money in the pockets of
millions of people and thus increasing the country's
wealth.
The Index of
Economic Freedom provides a framework for measuring these
constraints by identifying the most important components of
economic freedom and determining how each country measures up,
factor by factor. The Index assesses economic freedom in 10
different areas of the economy:
-
Trade policy (tariffs
and non-tariff barriers);
-
Fiscal burden (taxes
and government expenditures);
-
Government intervention
in the economy (government consumption);
-
Monetary
policy;
-
Banking and finance
regulations;
-
Capital flows and
foreign investment regulations;
-
Wages and prices
regulations (including subsidies);
-
Protection of property
rights;
-
Regulations to start a
business, including labor and environmental regulations;
and
-
Informal market
activity.[2]
Each country is scored
on each of the 10 areas on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being the
freest and 5 being the most repressed. The average of a
country's 10 scores is the "country score," which is used to
place the country in one of four categories of economic freedom:
free, mostly free, mostly unfree, and repressed. These four
categories are an initial snapshot of how difficult (or easy) it is
for ordinary people to do business in that country. The overall
ranking of the country's score in the Index indicates how
the business environment in that country compares to the rest of
the world.[3]
A "free economy" has a
score of 1 or 2 in all 10 areas of economic freedom. Only in a free
economy do people face minimal barriers to realizing their full
potential, making money, and prospering. As the economy goes from
"free" to "mostly free" or from "mostly free" to "mostly unfree,"
the barriers increase, which means that individuals have fewer
opportunities to produce wealth because working and doing business
become more difficult. The people have the same desires, skills,
and abilities, but the opportunities to employ them become harder
to find. As a result, the country becomes increasingly
poor.
The United States is a
free (and rich) economy. However, it has suffered a relative loss
of economic freedom in the past 12 years. Over that period, the
U.S. has dropped from the world's fourth freest economy to its
ninth freest.[4] Today, in eight countries, the
opportunities for generating wealth are more abundant than in the
United States.
America has lost its
relative economic freedom for several reasons. The most important
is the burden created by government fiscal policies. The
Index measures the fiscal burden of government by the
year-to-year change in government expenditures (as a
percentage of gross domestic product) plus top marginal corporate
and personal income tax rates. This is an area in which the United
States is in free fall. When ranked solely by the fiscal
burden of government, the United States fell from 50th in 1997
to 101st in the 2006 Index-seven places behind Denmark, 18
places behind Sweden, and 45 places behind Germany, which is even
more remarkable given the high personal income tax rates in these
countries. By contrast, Hong Kong is eighth in terms of fiscal
burden, the Slovak Republic is 11th, and Ireland is 16th.[5]
This poor relative
position in fiscal burden is caused primarily by high U.S.
corporate and individual tax rates. The U.S. corporate rate
ranks a dismal 117 out of the 161 countries surveyed in the 2006
Index.[6] The individual rate ranks 83rd. To make
matters worse, rising government spending since 2000 has
contributed to the relative worsening of the fiscal burden as well,
and this situation promises to worsen as the massive commitments of
entitlement programs come due, including the new
prescription drug benefit passed by Congress and signed by
President George W. Bush in 2003.
In contrast, in the
years since the first Index was published in 1995, Germany
has improved its overall fiscal burden score from 4.5 to 3.1
in 2006. (See Table 1.) Germany has achieved this level of
improvement primarily by slashing its top corporate tax rate almost
in half, from a top marginal rate of 50 percent in 1995 to 26.4
percent in the 2006 Index. The Slovak Republic has slashed
both the top personal tax rate (42 percent) and the top
corporate tax rate (40 percent) by more than 50 percent to a flat
19 percent in the 2005 Index. This meant not only that
individuals and corporations had significantly more incentives to
participate in the economy and pay taxes, but also that the flat
tax added efficiency to the economy by reducing the time wasted
completing forms and the fees associated with convoluted tax
systems, such as the U.S. tax system.
Ireland made perhaps
the most dramatic change, slashing the top corporate tax from 40
percent in 1995 to a mere 12.5 percent in 2004. The income tax rate
declined by 6 percentage points over that period. Apart from tax
cuts, the Slovak Republic and Ireland were both able to reduce
government expenditures eight times since 1995, just as the United
States did, while Germany reduced expenditures four times in
the same period. (See Table 1.)

The tax cuts represent
these governments' realization that, in a highly globalized
world, the competition for capital and efficiency of labor is
fierce. Other countries are catching up. For example, Russia
trimmed its personal income tax from 30 percent in 1995 to a flat
13 percent in the 2002 Index, and the top corporate tax from
38 percent in 1995 to 24 percent in the 2003 Index.
Romania announced early in 2005 that it cut both the top personal
income and corporate tax rates from 60 percent and 38 percent,
respectively, to a flat 16 percent in the 2006 Index.
Bulgaria's top income tax rate came down from 50 percent in
1995 to 24 percent in the 2006 Index, and the top
corporate rate was lowered from 40 percent to 15 percent
over the same period.
As economic freedom in
the U.S. falls relative to other countries, so do the relative
opportunities to invest, work, and do business in the United
States. This in turn affects the relative attractiveness of
investing in America. As Chart 1 shows, the net inflow of
foreign direct investment (FDI)-i.e., total inflow minus total
outflow-in the United States has declined sharply since 2000.
According to Table 2, in 2004, the United States had the largest
negative FDI flow relative to the eight freer (or equally free)
economies in the world. Ireland, in contrast, had the largest
positive FDI flow.


The U.S. economy is
certainly still healthy. The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
recently announced a robust 4.3 percent growth in the U.S. economy
in the third quarter of 2005,[7] and the Bureau of Labor
Statistics announced the creation of 215,000 new non-farm jobs in
November 2005 alone.[8] However, it is equally certain that other
economies around the world are creating ways, such as slashing
corporate taxes, to compete for business opportunities and profit
from them. Clearly, the United States can no longer afford to rest
on its laurels of being the great place to do
business.
Spend Less and Cut
Taxes
If U.S. tax rates do
not keep pace with reforms elsewhere, the U.S. will become less
competitive, economic growth will be compromised, and wealth
creation will decline. As a result, it will become increasingly
difficult to pay for the government's expenses, including Medicare
and Social Security.
Cutting taxes should be
the next big policy priority for Congress. For starters,
American corporations should be taxed only for business conducted
on American territory, as opposed to their entire global
operations. At the moment, American corporations are taxed for
income earned both at home and abroad. The only way for these
companies to avoid taxation on foreign operations is to keep the
foreign profits abroad. Global taxation is a huge disincentive for
businesses to return capital to the U.S. and invest it in the U.S.
economy. By remaining abroad, such capital instead goes to other
nations, boosts other economies, and creates jobs outside the
United States. Moreover, it yields little tax revenue.
Second, Congress needs
to strengthen the economy by cutting and streamlining taxes on
both corporate and personal income. The U.S. certainly enjoys
a competitive edge in many areas, including offering a stable
business environment and flexible labor laws. These areas make the
United States a preferred place to do business. However, a growing
number of countries are offering stable business environments,
relaxing their labor conditions, and slashing corporate and income
taxes. Therefore, the Administration and Congress must act to make
the U.S. tax structure more competitive.
Opponents of tax cuts
argue that cutting taxes will undermine the country's ability to
sustain social programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social
Security. However, these opponents fail to see that, to afford
these programs, the U.S. economy must be healthy and
experience strong economic growth. Economic growth (i.e.,
encouraging businesses and individuals to invest in the U.S.
economy) requires offering investors a business environment better
than those found elsewhere.
Congressional Budget
Office projections already show that by mid-century the United
States will barely be able to afford entitlement spending, even if
all other spending is eliminated. According to Brian Riedl, a
budget expert at The Heritage Foundation, the long-term
picture of the entitlement-driven federal budget is "substantially
worse" than previously projected:
[A] realistic budget
projection shows that combined nominal Medicare, Social Security,
and Medicaid spending will double over the next decade. Adding the
costs of the war on terrorism, Hurricane Katrina, and other
congressional spending priorities pushes the total 2015 federal
budget spending well past $4 trillion, and the budget deficit to
$875 billion.[9]
The growth of
entitlement programs will compromise the ability of the U.S.
economy to grow. If the economy does not grow, eventually the U.S.
will have insufficient income to tax in order to pay for such
programs. Consequently, Congress will need either to slash these
programs or to raise taxes sharply.
Both the Bush
Administration and Congress must waste no time in cutting spending
to balance the federal budget, lowering corporate and personal
income taxes, and continuing to support the expansion of economic
freedom. Leaving the U.S. economy shackled to high taxes and a
convoluted tax system while other countries around the world
increasingly are slashing their taxes is irresponsible since it is
already compromising the U.S. economy's ability to grow healthily
for the long term.
Conclusion
For many decades,
America has exemplified the benefits of living in an economically
free society. However, since 1995, when the Index first
started assessing economic freedom, the United States has fallen
behind little by little in the economic freedom race. That is
worrisome because economic freedom is the foundation of U.S.
economic growth and strength, as well as the foundation of
America's high living standards and overall power around the
world.
The United States is
falling behind not only because it has increased federal spending
to the point of compromising the wealth of future generations
and maintains one of the highest top corporate tax rates and a
high top individual tax rate, but also because the U.S. has been
resting on its laurels, enjoying its former reputation as the
world's freest and most business-friendly economy. That
advantage is gone. According to the Index, eight
countries now score better on economic freedom than the United
States.
Both the Bush
Administration and Congress should support policies that advance
economic freedom so that the U.S. economy can continue to grow
strongly and provide the resources to maintain America's high
living standards and to continue its role as a world leader.
To that end, the Bush Administration and Congress should cut
spending to balance the federal budget, lower corporate and
personal income taxes, and continue to support the expansion of
economic freedom. More economic freedom at home will ensure that a
healthy U.S. economy remains the solid basis of American prosperity
and strength.
Ana Isabel
Eiras is Senior Policy Analyst for International
Economics in the Center for International Trade and Economics at
The Heritage Foundation.
[1]If not reformed
soon, entitlement programs threaten to overwhelm the federal
budget. See Brian M. Riedl, "Entitlement-Driven Long-Term Budget
Substantially Worse Than Previously Projected," Heritage Foundation
Backgrounder No. 1897, November 30, 2005, at
www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1897.cfm.
[2]For detailed
information about the variables studied in each of the 10 areas of
economic freedom, see William W. Beach and Marc A. Miles,
"Explaining the Factors of the Index of Economic Freedom,"
Chapter 5 in Marc A. Miles, Kim R. Holmes, and Mary Anastasia
O'Grady, 2006 Index of Economic Freedom (Washington, D.C.:
The Heritage Foundation and Dow Jones & Company, Inc., 2006),
p. 55, at www.heritage.org/index.
[3]The Heritage
Foundation, "Past Scores," from Index of Economic Freedom,
eds. 1996-2006, at
www.heritage.org/research/features/index/downloads/PastScores.xls.
[7]U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, "Gross Domestic Product and
Corporate Profits," November 30, 2005, at
www.bea.doc.gov/bea/newsrelarchive/2005/gdp305p.htm
(December 15, 2005).
[8]U.S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Economic News Releases:
Employment Situation," December 2, 2005, at
www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm (December 15,
2005).
[9]Riedl,
"Entitlement-Driven Long-Term Budget Substantially Worse Than
Previously Projected," p. 1.