Thursday, September 1, 2016

Tax Foundation: Tax Expenditures Subsidizing a Specific Industry "Deserves Outright Elimination"

The Tax Foundation released an August report on tax expenditures.

The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as "revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability."

The Tax Foundation wrote that "[l]awmakers interested in reforming this area of the tax code should examine each expenditure individually and first consider what kind of expenditure it is. Does it move us toward a different tax system? Is it spending on an important priority of society at large? Or does it narrowly provide a preference to a specific industry or activity? Answering these questions and classifying the expenditures is critical in determining which are worth keeping."

The Tax Foundation noted that tax expenditures can be divided into three categories. The first category of tax expenditures seeks to modernize our tax code and move it toward some of the tax systems used by our trading partners. The second group of tax expenditures, like the child tax credit, is designed with broader social policy priorities in mind. The final category of tax expenditures subsidizes specific activities and industries, like the credit union exemption from the corporate income taxes.

The Tax Foundation does not believe in the haphazard elimination of tax expenditures to pay for tax reform, as not all tax expenditures are equally worthy of elimination. However, the Tax Foundation believes that tax expenditures that subsidize specific industries "deserve outright elimination."

Read the report.

1 comment:

  1. I guess we better get humple to write one of those cocaine induced reports aka white papers to defend the tax exemption.
    Or maybe Nafcu can re-release their secret analysis that ascribes a benefit to consumers that is somehow 4-5x the tax exemption. Must be nice to not have to explain or defend "analysis" and especially the "assumptions"...sort of like trump tax returns and Clinton deleted emails.
    Our dues money funding the campaign troughs of unaccountable politicians and "analysis".
    Glad we haven't re affiliated like some.
    Not wasting our member's money.



The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.