Thursday, April 29, 2021

Commerce, Justice, Science FY2022

House Appropriations: Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, April 29, 2021

Report Language and the Budget Process

Let me now address spending priorities in Commerce, Justice, Science.

In the best of all worlds, the Census, the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor Statistics would reside in one division of the Department of the Treasury. I suggest this based on our proposal to fund domestic military and civil appropriations with a credit invoice value added tax on goods and services. Movement of these agencies to a Department of Treasury and Commerce would be essential to informing the government as to appropriate tax rates. 

The Securities and Exchange Commission could also be moved to an expanded Department of Treasury and Commerce to collect an Asset Value Added Tax on all trades (including those made by mutual funds) and capital returns (save for sales to qualified Employee Stock Ownership Plans.

This brings us back to the utility of a regional analysis of spending. Spending priorities would be compared with VAT revenues collected in each region, with the goal of achieving balance. 

If the Appropriations Subcommittees were organized, in part, by region, such an exercise would be natural. VAT rates could be regionalized with the goal of a regionally balanced budget, although a constitutional amendment would be necessary for this to occur (such taxes are considered an excise, which must currently be uniform nationwide).

Trade related agencies, including those related to work related visas, could be moved to the Department of Homeland Security.

The remaining agencies of the Department of Commerce and related agencies could become a Department of Science. This includes such agencies as NASA.

NASA funding should be increased at the expense of advanced research, RDT&E and Procurement spending by the Department of Defense. DoD spending cannot easily be converted to just any sort of program. It must fund a similar industrial base or spending for war cannot be reduced. 

One such effort is research on Closed Loop Environmental Support Systems. Doing so could provide alternate means of agriculture, water treatment and home building. It ends the problem of population, conceivably on a worldwide basis. 

Environmental research (as opposed to regionally relevant clean water grants), could be moved to a Department of Science. Transportation research (as opposed to those which are regionally based - such as highway construction and FAA facilities) could also be shifted here. A project that would benefit from such research is development of automated cars with central control (rather than its own AI) and energy distribution (rather than being hampered by economically damaging battery development). The latter is old technology, i.e., electric trains and buses.

The most important spending programs in the Subcommittee’s purview are in the area of justice and care for the mentally ill and less educated.

Job one is to shift from correctional modalities to new methods featuring mental health, education (including ESL programs) and addiction medicine. Warehousing young males of any race, but particularly African-Americans multiplies societal pathologies. While some forms of illness, such as sexual violence and physical violence or murder may require higher security, others can be treated as patients rather than criminals.

The Department of Justice can take the lead in both practice and in developing best practices for state correctional systems. Part of this would be specialized facilities based on the type of crime committed. 

For example, sex offenders would be in facilities of their own. Those who remain dangerous post-sentence would still be detained until they are no longer dangerous. Such decisions must be based on science, not the desire for further punitive measures.

This change would migrate to local law enforcement, i.e., policing. 

A pilot program could be developed to respond to certain incidents (especially those involving mental illness or alcohol) with immediate dispatch of emergency medical teams. This would require more ambulances, more mental health facilities and a pause in applying restraints until medical personnel arrive.

Funding more hospitals and ambulances would be part of this, possibly with some form of federal grant program. Private corrections facilities can also be transformed into contracted medical facilities with security contracting provided as a subcontract to mental health systems, both secular and religious. Catholic Health Association members come to mind. Both public and private educational systems would be an integral part of such facilities and be treated as an essential function, rather than the first item cut when states wish to minimize their spending by essentially torturing (and dehumanizing) inmates.

Such programs would require change outside the scope of appropriations measures. Still, they are worthy of mention.

Job one is to legalize the production, sale and use of cannabis. The war on drugs was always a war on people of color, with youth added to the mix in the 1970s. It is past time to end this, at least regarding these substances (let us not forget hashish or other hallucinogenic drugs).

Stronger drugs, particularly methamphetamines, cocaine and other narcotics, should be treated as mental health issues rather than crimes. To deal with these drugs, as well as untreated mental illness, neither criminality nor catch and release programs (i.e., releasing people when they are no longer a short-term danger to themselves rather than until long term stability is reached) are appropriate. 

New standards of individual and societal protection must be developed. Improved standards of care and security will require much more funding than state and local governments are willing to commit to. This simply drives the problem to the correctional system, which is the largest provider of mental healthcare in this nation. the term for this practice is pennywise and pound-foolish.

A final reform, which will save money and resources, is to create a plea in criminal cases of guilty by reason of insanity. Those who enter this plea would be confined in the facilities detailed above for at least the minimum sentence for their offences, with no release after that if the subject remains a danger to society. 

If relapse occurs or treatment protocols are evaded after release, rehospitalization must be automatic and last until a treatment program is more deeply ingrained. There should, of course, be protections on both sides in the decision to release subjects - both for the protection of the rights of subjects who made be held for punitive, rather than hygienic reasons and, as importantly, the interests of the victims of crime, including but not limited to the possibility of physical danger. Sometimes, exile should be a part of release.

Appropriations Testimony - Report Language

In order to provide a more complete picture of the impact of this appropriation later should be included on the impact of appropriations within each state and federal region. This should be in the appropriation Committee report rather than the legislation itself. 

Reporting should focus on where money is actually used to mandate how funds are spent. This should focus on who benefits from spending rather than who performs the work.

For example if a construction contractor from out of state is tasked to build a federal correctional institution, the report should count the spending where the facility is actually being built. Some calls are easy. National Science Foundation grants  performed at Universities are easy to identify. More complex grants may be split between states.

These data likely already exists or can be easily collected from departmental budget offices. This should be true for both planned spending and historical patterns. Committee staff would then amend these data to take into account the appropriations bill. In the future, submissions will include state and regional data in the current services budget, as well as the President’s proposals.

This information will allow the public and the committee visibility on the distributional equity of the appropriation. Again, this is not to force conformity, however it will allow adjustments to certain projects to assure adequate support for legislation. Information should be for the total appropriation in each region and state, with the number of Representatives and Senators listed for each region and state. 

Explanatory material would address any imbalances in spending (for example, the fact that Massachusetts contains a high number of research universities and associated corporations.

Next, allow me to address the budget process itself. It cannot continue on its present course. For whatever reason, bipartisanship and the desire for an effective government has been found the exception rather than the rule. This requires continuing appropriations, often until February, complicating contracting, especially new contracts. 

The Budget Control Act must be strengthened in the following way. Spending caps should be realistic rather than punitive so that inaction will not stop the appropriations process. A joint resolution would be enacted rather than a concurrent resolution, with automatic enactment of appropriations at current services levels at the beginning of the fiscal year. 

Subcommittees do not lose power, as supplemental appropriations can (and will) be enacted in those cases where action is not completed in time. This takes away the incentive to hold up the process rather than  compromise in a timely manner.

This brings us back to the utility of a regional analysis of spending. Spending priorities would be compared with VAT revenues collected in each region, with the goal of achieving balance. 

If the Appropriations Subcommittees were organized, in part, by region, such an exercise would be natural. VAT rates could be regionalized with the goal of a regionally balanced budget, although a constitutional amendment would be necessary for this to occur (such taxes are considered an excise, which must currently be uniform nationwide).

Video: https://youtu.be/0yerUsBHSeU

Advancing U.S. Economic Competitiveness, Equity, and Sustainability Through Infrastructure Investments

 WM Trade: Advancing U.S. Economic Competitiveness, Equity, and Sustainability Through Infrastructure Investments, April 29, 2021

I notice the similarity between the title of a hearing last year on this subject. I am attaching the core points. While this hearing is focused on physical infrastructure, this is a good opportunity to consider progress on the issue.

Last year, we repeated our previous comments on the WTO. This year, the world is dealing with COVID, so much of that discussion is currently irrelevant.

Our main thrust was on replacing tariffs with a border-adjustable credit invoice value added tax. This is still a concern, which I brought to the Subcommittee’s attention very recently, so I will not repeat them again. I also assume that some on your staff can recite our tax reform plan, so I will not include the usual attachment either.

Please hold hearings on this possibility. I would like to testify, although our friends at the Brookings-Urban Tax Policy Center have done the heavy lifting on VAT mechanics. My focus is on an employer-paid subtraction value added tax and an asset value added tax, allowing most families to avoid filing taxes altogether.

Recent changes to the Child Tax Credit (which should be made permanent) are the best trade infrastructure we can hope for, although a higher minimum wage is even more desirable. People need more money to buy imported goods and to go back into the labor force. There are many discouraged workers, some of which turn to less than legal means to earn an income. It is time to allow them back into the light. Work does not meet the needs of many workers. Now is the time to change this.

On the government side, the Internal Revenue Service has been tasked with distributing the CTC before the end of this tax year. July is the current goal. We can do better. Rather than relying on payments from the IRS, families who already receive some form of government benefit should receive a refundable CTC through their current benefit stream. We can start this today. Computers can be programmed and cash delivered.

Part of the need for economic infrastructure must be an immediate COLA for Social Security beneficiaries. Of late, food prices have gone through the rough. Now that stimulus payments have been spent, many of us will be very hungry, very soon. We cannot even by cola without a COLA.

Benefits to workers are even easier to set up. Simply promise employers that they can take any additional credits paid due to refundability (they can already manage adjusting normal withholding) as a credit to their quarterly payments to the Internal Revenue Service. Easy.

Employee-ownership is still a good idea. This year, it is even better. To get the ball rolling, simply expand the ESOP exemption from private companies to shareholders in public companies. 

Enacting an asset value added tax, with zero rating for option exercise and first sales after inheritance, gift and donation can wait for comprehensive tax reform. We can make this small change now.

In time, we can revisit how the employer contribution to Social Security is credited and how it is distributed. That discussion can wait until more companies choose to set up ESOPs.

I will let the invited witnesses address what can be done to improve roads, bridges and rails, all of which are essential infrastructure investments. Expanding freight rail should be a big part of that story. It saves energy and emits less carbon. While this will impact long-haul trucking, a growing economy, fueled by families with more money, will more than make up the difference in short-haul delivery.

Many ports will need to change configurations to expand freight rail and reduce reliance on long-haul trucking. This is a luxury problem. Such problems are a perfect object for expanded federal assistance to our railroad infrastructure. 

Either loans or grants should fit the bill. Higher motor vehicle fuel taxes can help transport good as well as people. A carbon value added tax (rather than a simple carbon tax embedded in the price) will better allow consumer choice for both consumers and distributors. 

Because energy expenses are inelastic, price information needs invoicing to help make intelligent choices and to educate the public on the necessity for these taxes. Nothing wakes people up like seeing something on an invoice.

Another aspect of infrastructure is essential. We need more workers and they need to have the language skills to allow for even greater involvement in the American economy. Immigration needs reform - and it should be more on the lines proposed by both the current Administration and by President Bush. Before the current GOP went off the rails, W. had many good ideas. This is one of them.

Of course, our biggest improvement is the recent change in Administrations. Our current President will not pursue gunboat trade policy and will make infrastructure happen without having an elusive infrastructure week.

Attachment: 2020 Hearing

Reasserting Congress' Power of the Purse

House Budget, Protecting our Democracy: Reasserting Congress' Power of the Purse, April 29, 2021

While it did not look this way at the time, in the case of Ukraine, the process worked. Fund certifiers did what they were meant to do and the money which the President did not want spent was spent. Time will tell whether the perfect phone call was a cover for giving aid and comfort to Mr. Putin or not. I expect so and further believe that the Eastern District of Virginia will one day show its cards. 

The immediacy of the issue has passed with the inauguration of President Biden, whose respect for the Congress is second to none. In relations to these issues, please see my comments from last year’s hearing.

The Committee’s professional staff has done its usual yeoman’s work in laying out the issues for today’s hearing. While it is important to strengthen legal tools to keep the Executive Branch accountable, these will not give Congress what you are asking for, which is information. With respect to your assigned witnesses, unless they have experience not included in their current titles, they will not have the answer you need.

I have served many roles in my career in and out of federal and District of Columbia government as a program control officer and cost analyst, as a contacted grants office technical representative, a contracted contract administrator (contract specialist), a political appointee in the Office of the City Administrator a congressional intern and a real estate specialist, as well as a proposal writer and coordinator in the private sector. Let us just say that I got good mileage out of my MPA degree.

The coin of the realm in the Executive Branch is budget execution, which then dovetails into budget formulation for the next fiscal year’s submission and contracting in the near term, with auditing and closeout being their poor step-children. If there is money left over, it goes into the M Account, which must be used before expiration. The last is sometimes how needed technology is purchased - not as an abuse but as a necessity.

At every phase, the Office of the Solicitor is available, but this is especially the case in contracting and procurement. Any new process, such as Fair Opportunity, or complex questions coming from regional offices are vetted in this way. While the recent administration attempted to play fast and lose with the rules, the permanent government did not. 

Even those matters such as layovers in Scotland by Air Force Mobility Command flights would have been vetted in this way. This likely relied on DoJ’s case filing on emoluments to justify the position that being a vendor is not the same thing as corruption. Such trips were hardly a hardship for Air Crews. Air Force pilots are notorious golfers, so I am sure they did not object too strongly. 

Likewise, when some genius decided that executive personnel may not fly first class, a whole fleet of executive transport arrangements were made, and likely abused, although the first vendor of choice is always federal air assets, from the Air Force (which has been known to fly members of Congress) to the FAA jet. 

The common feature of all of this is senior contracting leadership not wanting to cross their appointed leaders. Good contracting officers can work with appointees to do things appropriately. When this is not done, errors come to the front and people who could not say no are soon retired or removed from leadership. 

Perhaps making all contracting personnel employees of the General Services Administration may help, but in the end the problem is not with the civil service, it is with untrained (and in the prior Administration untrainable) political appointees. These individuals are the weakest link. 

As I have written elsewhere, it is not the Senior Executives who need better training, it is the cadre of Assistant and Deputy Secretaries. In other places, I have written about creating a Senior Political Service, which would include pre-clearing and a demonstrated level of competence and education in both their area of expertise and administrative law and procedure itself. Sadly, this is a matter outside of the Committee’s silo. I will now return to the matter at hand.

The government of the United States main job is spending money. This happens in three ways. The first, which is outside of the scope of these comments, is distributing money to beneficiaries through the Social Security System, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, Food Stamps and Unemployment Insurance, as well as tax benefits such as the Earned Income and Child tax credits.

The second way is some form of uniformed function, from the military to corrections officers to homeland security to the Fish and Wildlife and Forest Services. These items are fairly straightforward as far as budget execution. You hire people and pay them to service the public.

The third way, which is the focus of this inquiry, is the contract and grant process. I have seen this process from every perspective. Step one is the authorization of programs, all of which is accomplished under the direction of authorizing legislation. Program Office personnel, who after contracts are negotiated are called Contracting (or Grant) Officers Technical Representatives, translate statutory goals into financial plans, working with program control personnel. This work turns into purchasing requests. 

When I was in program control, this was a paper intensive process. Any automation came with budget clerks processing PRs, which were reviewed by a fund certifier, sent to accounting to put into the system and sent to contracts for obligation - all through interoffice mail. In my last year in program control, I served as the technical representative in an effort called STARS, which automated the process. 

My concept, which TRW was to implement, would have been for program office personnel to use the system to allocate their budget by either initiating new contracts or funding existing ones, sending the statement of work along with the request, electronically. Sometimes vendors write a statement of work for the program office, sometimes contracting specialists do so. The goal is the same, to wisely spend the public’s money.

Part two is STRIPES, which is the online contracting module. It was just coming online as I was leaving the Department of Energy. In this system, the Purchase Request is sent to the Contracts Office and assigned to the cognizant specialist, who either funds an existing contract with a contract modification or initiates a new procurement. Both of these are done under a Contracting Office, who holds a warrant to spend the public’s money. In some cases, contracting officers operate without assistance of a contract specialist. STRIPES now does all the work. New procurements are now put out for bid electronically, are received the same way, with proposals coming back electronically. Source selection is made appropriately and contracts are issued. 

Before STRIPES, contracts and modifications were generated using Microsoft Word and upon signature by the Contracting Officer, they were distributed using paper. Part of the process was updating the Federal Procurement Data System - Next Generation. Under STRIPES, this is accomplished by the system. Forms are no longer even signed.

If you are still awake, you will have guessed my point. Data on both budget execution and contracting is now fully electronic. It would not be difficult to create read only access to an information system linking Program Elements to Contracts, including information as to how much of the total has been funded, by fiscal year. 

FPDS-NG does not include fund citation information, but it does exist. Congress should not demand access to every transaction or even request a monthly report. Indeed, Congress could not digest this information and some members would abuse it if they could - either by attempting to interfere with objective source selection decisions or by using such information for personal financial benefit. Political appointees are not the only ones who have abused the system thinking that they would never be caught. 

The proper conduit for this information should be the budget process. When budget requests come in, members and staff can be given access to budget execution summaries on a program element basis. This could be through read-only access and would be paperless. It should only be available to trained personnel, either on Committee staff or congressional agencies. 

If you wish to go down this road, it will take funding to do correctly and ethically. Political hacks whose main purpose is to score partisan points for reelection should have no access. This will require hiring additional staff on a professional basis (with no regard to connection with the member’s home state, district or campaign). It cannot be done on the cheap and anyone who resists such an expense should be denounced for grandstanding by the leadership of both parties.

The main difficulty in doing this, however, is the current inability of Congress to efficiently deal with the budget and appropriations process it has now. There are too many cooks stirring the pot, i.e., too many choke points where action can be stopped, often for reasons that have nothing to do with good government. Obstructing good government seems to have been fashionable in some parts of the Hill. The process must be changed to stop this from happening.

As I have said before, we need automatic tools. These include a new Budget Control Act with realistic budget marks that would come into play if a budget resolution is not passed in a timely manner. This should be a joint resolution authorizing automatic appropriation if actions are not taken by the end of the start of the next fiscal year.

The status quo makes budget execution impossible. It is almost understood that real contracting cannot occur until February or March when Congress finally acts. Money must then be spent by the end of August in most cases - usually on a crash basis. Having STARS and STRIPES simply automates the budgetary dysfunction which comes from Congress. 

The chaos in the current system lends itself to abuse by members of the Executive Branch. If the congressional process works, the budget execution process will work more smoothly. The system to monitor budget execution that I have outlined will only add to the current chaos if it is attempted on the cheap and in concert with a broken budget process.

The second attachment provides more detail on how to fix the budget process. The Committee has seen all of this previously, sometimes in more detail. The problem is not amiability or bipartisanship. Indeed, the recent reforms are not adequate to get the job done. Only an automatic process will force action and consideration. 

Perhaps the best reform would be to pass the Legislative Appropriation last. This  should include any funding to assist the District of Columbia (or better yet, Washington, Douglass Commonwealth) in securing the Capital. Any incentive will do.

Attachment: 2020 Hearing

Attachment: Budget Process

Tuesday, April 27, 2021

Finance Fairer Tax System - WM Advantageous Treatment of the Wealthy

Finance, Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Growth: Creating Opportunity Through a Fairer Tax System, April 27, 2021

WM, Special Revenue, Funding Our Nation's Priorities: Reforming the Tax Code's Advantageous Treatment of the Wealthy, May 12, 2021

If you want to dwarf any wealth tax, adopt the asset value added tax laid out in our tax plan, but end the exception for capital gains and income by mutual funds. This would limit the amount of wealth accumulated by the top 10% of households. 

An impact analysis on households is forthcoming, however note that the Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finance shows that the top 10% of households own 80% of mutual fund assets. That relationship duplicates itself within the top 10%, so that the top 1450 households hold approximately 33% of such assets. An asset value tax, which takes capital gains and returns off of personal income taxes and onto transactions would be a huge moneymaker as it is. End the exemption for mutual funds and the amount doubles.

Zero rate sales to qualified ESOPs and watch capitalists run for the exits. A wealth tax takes advantage of inequality. This provision starts to end it.

The Nature of Wealth

Money is not only a medium to exchange goods. It is also a decision tool to exchange power. Power is the ability to demand resources and labor. Capitalism seeks to consolidate this power into the hands of the owners of capital. Socialism seeks to distribute this power to society, using common action to do so. State capitalism and state socialism are the same thing, with modern mixed economies consisting of private capitalism and social democracy.

Karl Marx understood the economics of production. When he wrote, finance was a game, not a science. He had no idea that the Boom-Bust Cycle exists because of the interaction of tax and finance. Modern Marxists are still obsessed with rewarding production rather than considering the entire enterprise. Enabling workers are as essential as production, from distribution to design to marketing. Worse, they are not really up to speed on how the economics of the CEO and tax policy are interrelated or how to go from democratic socialism to the real thing.

Social Democrats have no clue either. Indeed, most Democratic Socialists, like Bernie Sanders, have mostly Social Democratic tools in their kit. Free college and Medicare for All are not really socialism, they are simply better birdseed. Elizabeth Warren at least admits that she is still a capitalist. So do the Social Democrats of Scandinavia and Western Europe. Their proposals have no clue on how to get from Social Democracy to Democratic Socialism – or to the real thing.

The essential fact in any system that uses money is that money buys work from people. Since work is a function of time, as our lives, money essentially buys people. Another way to look at money and savings is through class analysis. Savings is the power to make others work without working yourself. When realized, savings purchase essentials and luxuries. Even poor people deserve some level of luxury.

In an unbalanced economy, the working class do not even receive the essentials. Scarcity in essential goods is the incentive used to compel work. Inadequate income is used to compel work on a consistent basis. The argument against guaranteed income is that if work can be compelled, hyperinflation and shortages result.

The Nature of Income

Income is the return on assets, including sold labor. This includes the return on taxation of assets. The challenge for public policy is providing for adequate income and assets for all households so that no worker can be considered someone else's property. How badly we have failed at this is impossible to see until we look clearly at the elements of the "supply side."

Absolute Income is adjusted gross income plus unrealized income. Wealth taxes are an attempt to go after part two, in its stored form, on an annual basis. They will never pass because, if done correctly, the wealth will be destroyed. For some, that is likely the goal. If it is done ineffectively (by self-reporting or creating loopholes) it legitimates assets which have no inherent value.

In the macro-economy, absolute income is gross national product plus stored future income plus speculative income. Current economic discourse and statistics do not, and likely cannot, capture the difference between the last two, although looking at income class helps.

This inability to separate future spending from speculation does not mean we cannot quantify unrealized income. Doing so shows why taxing wealth and unrealized income are close to impossible. Here is a hint: it does not really exist. Once that secret is out, capitalism' s days are numbered.

Unrealized income =

the net unrealized gain on traded equity and securitized assets held for less than a year

+ the unrealized net gain on assets held for more than a year

+ additions to retained earnings for the year that are attributable to shareholders or partners if it were to be distributed

+ increased value in a year of physical assets less their distribution expense.

All of the above include increased asset values and undistributed earnings for assets held offshore.

Asset prices and retained income and asset book values can be valued and are related but are not mutually exclusive. Asset prices may or may not reflect retained earnings and physical or market value of real assets and may, in fact, be junk assets based on fraud. Bonds have the same features and are valuable based on currently expected future income - including whether tax income attributable from holding these bonds can ever be collected.

All value is market based. These values may or may not relate to the productive power of the underlying physical and human assets. Mass resignations and innovations may turn today's intellectual property into dust. This is why capitalism is a less than perfect driver of real innovation. Income inequality and hierarchical control are designed to protect against sudden devaluations in both private and state capitalism. Individual and cooperative socialist organizations (from communes to partnerships) always threaten intellectual property held by capitalists.

Taxing Wealth

Anything that can be valued can be taxed. Indeed, it may even be easier to tax than capital gains, which largely rely on self reporting. Either total wealth and growth in wealth can be taxed in the micro level. Unrealized income can be estimated by the entities owned as of December 31st of each year. Any overlap between stock price and retained earnings can be taken into account. Indeed, reporting this would be beneficial to investors. This is the easy part.

The hard part is generating the liquidity to pay the tax. Actually, this is not hard at all. It merely requires the entity owned to write a check. You could not tax corporate income and the investor's share of it twice. If wealth were to be taxed, it is easier to tax the total value of the entity rather than taxing its owners. It is much less work.

Who really shoulders the burden is a more serious concern. Because of the monopsonist nature of most employment and the monopolist nature of most goods, the wealthy will not pay it.

First, stock prices will go down to reduce burden.

Second, wages will go down.

Third, consumer prices will go up.

Firms have people who run the numbers and a duty to maximize shareholder value. Indeed, internal rents will increase because the labor to make such calculations will be taken from the labor surplus generated from extraction, production, distribution and enabling work.

Debt Ownership and Tax Reform

Getting the wealthy and upper-middle classes on board is essential to reform. The way to do this is to make clear who owes and owns the debt. Space limits prevent a thorough discussion of this, but I have attached a summary from my forthcoming book, Debt as Class Warfare in an attachment. When it is complete, I will send copies to the whole Committee and will be available to discuss it in detail.

An Asset Value Added Tax, which is described below, captures a fifth of each trade or return from capital when bought or paid. It is a much more efficient way to extract the money. These include marking the base to market at option exercise and the first sale after inheritance, gift or donation and zero rates sales to qualified Employee Stock Ownership Plans.  There is a huge volume of literature on how employee-ownership expands opportunity, including a fair bit of it by me. We can discuss this as well at a later time.

Please see a second attachment detailing the Center’s Tax Reform proposals. These also include a proposal to create tax prepayment bonds to shift wealth from speculation and market debt to federal debt retirement.

The nation has already taken steps on the journey to reform in passing the American Rescue Plan Act. 

The ARPA has its pluses and its minuses. On the minus side, families who had adequate income during the pandemic now have money to blow. Instead of spending it they are using it to speculate. Masses of people are about to enter the bottom half of EFT and Crypto markets, which will allow the top tiers of the scheme (whose seed money was provided by the Ryan-Brady-Trump tax cuts) to get out.

On the plus side, the increased child tax credit and its new refundability will provide long term economic security families. The second essential step is to increase the minimum wage so that no one has to work for free or have a decreased standard of living without working by living solely on the CTC. 

The minimum wage should be immediately increased to match the Republican offer of $10 per hour. To return wages to 1965 levels, which rewarded productivity gains, the wage should be increased over time to $12 per hour and adjusted for inflation automatically every year, starting now. The current challenge in implementing a higher CTC is how to get the money to families immediately. Doing so through direct IRS payments cannot be a long term solution.

There are two avenues to distribute money to families. The first is to add CTC benefits to unemployment, retirement, educational (TANF and college) and disability benefits. The CTC should be high enough to replace survivor’s benefits for children. 

The second is to distribute them with pay through employers. This can be done with long term tax reform, but in the interim can be accomplished by having employers start increasing wages immediately to distribute the credit to workers and their families, allowing them to subtract these payments from their quarterly corporate or income tax bills.

Over the long-haul, tax reform is necessary to cement these gains. Please see our tax reform plan in the third attachment. It is designed to provide adequate income and services to families (both with increased minimum wages and child tax credits) through employer-paid taxes, funding government services through a goods and services tax, separating out taxation of capital gains and income from income to an asset value added tax and higher tier subtraction VAT collections on wage income up to the $330,000 level and above, with additional personal income taxation for incomes over $425,000. 

The top rates for higher tier subtraction VAT, personal income taxes and asset VAT would all be set to the same rate, say 26%, so that forms of income are not manipulated to avoid taxation. It would also effectively raise taxes on salaried income to 52%, with capital incomes reinvested or investments funded by salary income adding an additional 26% of taxation. Spending money will also trigger taxation. 

Adding the effect of lower tier subtraction VAT collection to taxation on business owners and the top marginal rate approaches 90%. Such taxes are meant to prevent payment of extreme salaries rather than maximizing revenue. This provides more wages to the rest of the population, especially to those who are not adequately compensated at lower income levels.

Reform allows a rebalancing of fiscal responsibilities. The federal child tax credit we propose, plus increases in the minimum wage to at least $12/hour may provide enough family income in most states. Other states would add additional support through a state subtraction VAT.  Comprehensive reform will truly end welfare as we know it by giving families what they need for a decent living.

Human Capital Funding and State Government Participation

The state SVAT would fund education, with options for funding private schools either as donors or clients. Espinoza v. Montana has settled the question of whether this is constitutional. Now the question is the political will to enact such tuition support and for private schools to allow teachers to organize. 

It would also fund remedial education, english as a second language (regardless of immigration status), junior college and technical education and pay for all students who have completed sophomore year in high school or, after their cohort has reached that level.

Retail sales taxes, corporate income and most personal income tax filing would be replaced with the SVAT and a border adjustable goods and services credit-invoice tax (which we call IVAT for short). The state-level IVAT would fund public safety and commercial regulation. Property taxes, without the burden of funding education, would fun both building inspections and local public works, with the latter supplemented by tolls, motor fuel and/or carbon value added taxes (also receipt visible). 

States would collect federal SVAT and IVAT, review compliance audits and investigate and prosecute criminal violations.

An asset VAT at the state level would collect taxes on rental income (as would the federal AVAT), with states collecting an additional AVAT on real property transfers with price appreciation. This levy would be collected at closing and forwarded to states. Other AVAT collections would be collected by brokers and submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 

Any state AVAT collected on financial transactions would be forwarded to the states by the SEC. I would not recommend state enactment of such levies should an international or OECD AVAT rate be negotiated. This type of competition leads to a race to the bottom.

Any state-level debt service and retirement would be satisfied by higher salary surtax. State constitutional amendments to implement these changes would also include permission to incur debt in a federally declared disaster. This debt would be satisfied by any federal disaster assistance and the salary surtax.

Attachment: The Debt as Class Warfare

Attachment: Tax Reform

Climate Challenges and the Tax Code

Finance: Climate Challenges: The Tax Code’s Role in Creating American Jobs, Achieving Energy Independence, and Providing Consumers with Affordable, Clean Energy, April 27, 2021

On warming in general, there is no doubt that it is man-made. While there was a warm period around the first millennium, we came to it gradually. Industrialization may have ended what is called the Little Ice Age, but that warming is sudden and has dire consequences. We do not know that it will stop the way it did in the Middle Ages, indeed, it is not likely to, which makes these hearings vital.

Starting with the coasts, there will be sea level rise. Indeed, the flooding shown in Vice President Gore’s latest film shows how bad it is getting. The wealthy don’t seem to care, because they have flood insurance. 

The most basic step to at least get wealthier taxpayers on board (including the upper-middle class) is to cap flood insurance benefits to a level where beach houses properties  can no longer be insured. Even that small step could never be enacted. Too many donors have beach houses.

Our economic system is the problem. Until we move to something more cooperative, the well-off will turn their economic power into political power.

Without a technical solution, (like fusion, which Koch et all are slow rolling) all the incentives in the world will not stop plutocrats from scuttling every attempt at regulating emissions. Historically, unless people start dying from the air, as they are in China and did in Pennsylvania from the smog, nothing gets done. The river had to be actually burning in Cleveland before anything was done. Expect no less, which is why the hurricanes are coming in handy now.

Polluters will only accept carbon taxes as an alternative to direct regulation. If we dropped fuel efficiency standards and imposed carbon taxes instead, I suspect that car makers and the energy industry would jump on board. Some level of regulation, like some level of social welfare, helps save business owners from themselves. One need only remember the smog that blanketed Beijing during their Olympics to see what happens from minimal regulation. China is now going all in on renewable energy. Will we learn the same lesson?

We have the capacity to do both. Regulations need to be ramped up AND Carbon Value Added Taxes need to be enacted to fund infrastructure and research into technical solutions like Helium-3 fusion and electric cars which receive computer control and power from a covered roof deck - preferably one topped with grass. 

I use the term carbon value added tax (CVAT) because energy prices are tax inelastic. When energy is needed, it is purchased, especially for transportation. Unless gasoline taxes approach $4 per gallon, people simply fill up their SUV’s and cope with the price changes. There is plenty of space to increase gas taxes before consumers change their behavior.

Because energy usage is inelastic, carbon usage must be included on receipts or invoices. It is the only way to assure consumers have the information to purchase responsibly.

The Fair Tax, the Green New Deal, Carbon Taxes, and Goods and Services (Credit Invoice) Taxes all assume some sort of subsidy to hold poor families harmless - some kind of rebate or prebate. Many even believe that levying such taxes could be a good way to increase household income to for poorer families, which would also produce economic growth. I agree that subsidizing families will increase growth, however I submit that the best way to do so is through either existing subsidies or wages.

Increasing the Child Tax Credit, making it permanently refundable and establishing a carbon VAT should all be elements of comprehensive tax reform. The first attachment offers the latest update to the Center for Fiscal Equity’s proposal. Reform should be bipartisan so that it has staying power. One possible point of compromise is to end the requirement for all but the wealthiest to file income tax.

The nation has already taken steps on the journey to reform in passing the American Rescue Plan Act. 

The ARPA has its pluses and its minuses. On the minus side, families who had adequate income during the pandemic now have money to blow. Instead of spending it they are using it to speculate. Masses of people are about to enter the bottom half of EFT and Crypto markets, which will allow the top tiers of the scheme (whose seed money was provided by the Ryan-Brady-Trump tax cuts) to get out.

On the plus side, the increased child tax credit and its new refundability will provide long term economic security families. The second essential step is to increase the minimum wage so that no one has to work for free or have a decreased standard of living without working by living solely on the CTC. 

The minimum wage should be immediately increased to match the Republican offer of $10 per hour. To return wages to 1965 levels, which rewarded productivity gains, the wage should be increased over time to between $11 and $13 an hour, which is a nice range to compromise,

We should also make  a commitment to also decrease what constitutes a full-time work week. 32 hours, with four 8 hour days or five 6.5 hour days would put more people to work at higher wages. Increased minimum wages are important given increases to the Child Tax Credit so that no one will attempt to simply live on what is paid to their children.

The current challenge in implementing a higher CTC is how to get the money to families immediately. Doing so through direct IRS payments cannot be a long term solution.

There are two avenues to distribute money to families. The first is to add CTC benefits to unemployment, retirement, educational (TANF and college) and disability benefits. The CTC should be high enough to replace survivor’s benefits for children. 

The second is to distribute them with pay through employers. This can be done with long term tax reform, but in the interim can be accomplished by having employers start increasing wages immediately to distribute the credit to workers and their families, allowing them to subtract these payments from their quarterly corporate or income tax bills.

Over the long-haul, tax reform is necessary to cement these gains. Our tax reform plan is designed to provide adequate income and services to families (both with increased minimum wages and child tax credits) through employer-paid taxes, funding government services through a goods and services tax, separating out taxation of capital gains and income from income to an asset value added tax and higher tier subtraction VAT collections on wage income up to the $330,000 level and above, with additional personal income taxation for incomes over $425,000. 

The top rates for higher tier subtraction VAT, personal income taxes and asset VAT would all be set to the same rate, say 26%, so that forms of income are not manipulated to avoid taxation. It would also effectively raise taxes on salaried income to 52%, with capital incomes reinvested or investments funded by salary income adding an additional 26% of taxation. Spending money will also trigger taxation. 

Adding the effect of lower tier subtraction VAT collection to taxation on business owners and the top marginal rate approaches 90%. Such taxes are meant to prevent payment of extreme salaries rather than maximizing revenue. This provides more wages to the rest of the population, especially to those who are not adequately compensated at lower income levels.

Reform allows a rebalancing of fiscal responsibilities. The federal child tax credit we propose, plus increases in the minimum wage to at least $12/hour may provide enough family income in most states. Other states would add additional support through a state subtraction VAT.  Comprehensive reform will truly end welfare as we know it by giving families what they need for a decent living.

Please see a second attachment for an updated treatment of energy taxes as a whole, which was first submitted in 2012. Energy taxes can take three forms: infrastructure development, environmental sin taxes and subsidies to industry (and how to avoid them).

Attachment: Tax Reform

Attachment: Energy Taxes


Thursday, April 22, 2021

U.S.-China Relations: Improving U.S. Competitiveness Through Trade

Finance: U.S.-China Relations: Improving U.S. Competitiveness Through Trade, April 22, 2021

The exit of Donald J. Trump from the White House almost instantly improved our trade relationship with China. Since both sides want to return to normal, it should happen rather quickly. Let us not do so too quickly. There are significant human rights abuses that should be addressed before we dot the i’s and cross the t’s. Let us not waste a good crisis to deal with the plight of the Uygurs. If not now, when? See our attachment, which contains our prior comments on slave labor and supply chains. 

While competitiveness is a good thing, justice is a better thing. Consumers may have to pay a bit more for goods produced at home and abroad, but there are worse things.

The Chinese economy depends on migrant labor, with rural migrants going to the coasts to work, but taking their social service systems with them. Peasants do not receive the same benefits as workers from urban China. They are sitting on a time bomb. 

Eventually, these migrants will object to the locality system imposed upon them and demand the same level of pay, benefits and consumerism as is earned by those designated as urban. When this occurs, the valuation of the Yuan will occur, assuming that the Chinese Communist Party survives. We do not make this assumption, however.

Chinese workers are not the only ones getting the short end of the stick in international trade. The CEO/Donor Class attack on unions for the past 30 years trades “competitiveness” for worker rights.. It has taken its toll on the American worker in both immigration and trade.  

Cheap goods and food are part of the equation, but not the only part. Tax policy is a major driver That has been facilitated by decreasing the top marginal income tax rates so that when savings are made to labor costs, the CEOs and stockholders actually benefit.  When tax rates are high, the government gets the cash so wages are not kept low nor unions busted.  As Chinese workers are not allowed to unionize, the working class in both nations become expendable factor in production rather than human beings.  

Increasing marginal tax rates will help. I am confident that a second reconciliation will make that happen, although the proposed rate increases on the richest taxpayers are not large enough to make a major difference. Until there is basic change in the economy, anything this Committee does will be a mere Band-Aid.

True competitiveness for workers can only come from ownership and control of not only the shop floor, but also supply chain decisions. If labor rates for overseas subsidiaries provide the same standard of living received by American workers in the same jobs (with more equal pay scales between them), there will be no thought of competitiveness. If common ownership includes common consumption, global price competition effects will be muted.

The question is how to get there. Merely encouraging worker investment in the market is not enough. It must be targeted toward direct control of the workplace.

The USA accounts proposed by President Clinton had the same feature, although as a supplement to the Social Security benefit rather than a partial replacement, although this feature would be muted by enactment of value added taxes. The flaw in using foreign investment to make up for lost worker revenue is that eventually foreign workers either radicalize or become consumers and demand their own union rights. 

The tendency for consumerism to follow industrialization is why globalization is a poor substitute for expanding the domestic population. Increases to the Child Tax Credit (and adding refundability) in the American Recovery Plan Act were a good first step, but we stop walking too soon. These changes need to be made permanent and sustainable. Government distribution of the benefit is fine when attached to unemployment and disability insurance payments.

Workers need the money regularly, as part of pay. In the short term, the quickest way to distribute money is to offset pre-payment of these credits as part of wages against quarterly income tax payments by corporate and individual filers. In the long term, comprehensive tax reform is required. Our current proposal is included in a second attachment.

An employer-paid subtraction VAT is the best means for distribution of the child tax credit in real time. This will decrease resistance to larger credits and, along with funding either public or private health care (as another credit), will end much of the incentive to resort to franchising, the gig economy and 1099 employment to dodge requirements for direct employment of full-time workers.

Separating out taxation of capital gains and income into an asset value added tax will end the need for all but the wealthiest workers to file income taxes at all. Ending direct filing should be a bipartisan goal. For a while, it certainly helped Mike Huckabee when he proposed it in 2008. Expanding provisions to avoid taxation of capital gains to all shareholders who sell to qualified ESOPs will kick start employee-ownership.

Another essential step toward employee control is repeal of the Taft-Hartley Act prohibitions on concentrated pension fund ownership. Once we are farther down that road, we can discuss how changing the flow social insurance payments might speed up the process. Seen from the perspective of employee-owners, there will be less resistance.

Over a fairly short period of time, much of American industry, if not employee-owned outright  (and there are other policies to accelerate this, like ESOP conversion) will give workers enough of a share to greatly impact wages, management hiring and compensation and dealing with overseas subsidiaries and the supply chain – as well as impacting certain legal provisions that limit the fiduciary impact of management decision to improving short-term profitability (at least that is the excuse managers give for not privileging job retention).  

As previously stated, employee-owners will find it in their own interest to give their overseas subsidiaries and their supply chain’s employees the same deal that they get as far as employee-ownership plus an equivalent standard of living.  The same pay is not necessary, currency markets will adjust once worker standards of living rise.  

Over time, this will change the economies of the nations we trade with, as working in employee-owned companies will become the market preference and force other firms to adopt similar policies (in much the same way that, even without a tax benefit for purchasing stock, employee-owned companies that become more democratic or even more socialistic, will force all other employers to adopt similar measures to compete for the best workers and professionals). 

China could end its peasant labor system in advance of revolution.  Hopefully quick adoption of our suggestions to expand employee-ownership is more likely than revolution in China. If not, trade wars and rumors of trade wars will always be with us, along with the damage they do to both the financial markets and the real economy.

Eventually, trade will no longer be an issue.  Internal company dynamics will replace the need for trade agreements as capitalists lose the ability to pit the interest of one nation’s workers against the other’s.  This approach is also the most effective way to deal with the advance of robotics.  If the workers own the robots, wages are swapped for profits with the profits going where they will enhance consumption. This is the type of competitiveness we should be fostering.

I have not forgotten about the need to increase marginal rates. Separate consumption, employer, asset and high salary taxes will stack payments and remove shetlers, which is something the current system does not do.


Attachment from Finance: Fighting Forced Labor: March 18, 2021

...The other issue with China, as well as south Asia and the global south, is defacto slavery. Boycotting the products of slavery worked in fighting the Confederacy. The mass migration of slaves had more of an impact. A boycott of Xinjiang cotton and tomatoes is problematic during a pandemic, but generally it cannot succeed as a stand-alone action. Even though it may hurt in the short run, we should still do it. 

To make a boycott work, we cannot do it alone. At minimum, Islamic nations must join in as well and start linking the cause of the Uygurs to the New Silk Road. The ethnic Turkmen range from modern Turkey to Xinjiang, so a little solidarity on their part could go a long way. If we do go this route, the whole effort to interfere in Iran must end. We cannot be with South Asian Muslims on some things and expect solidarity with them on others.

On the moral front, I am not sure we have room to talk. We hold migrants in stark conditions prior to deportation. If you doubt it, visit Lewisburg Federal Prison. Also stop in the Federal Prison Industries factory while you are there. Visit any food processing plant with large immigrant workforces (send people undercover) and see how many workers were trafficked and how local law enforcement reacts when they decide they want to leave. Examine the plight of sex workers in the United States and see how many of their pimps have arrangements with local police.

Our best weapon is our example. As long as slavery exists in the United States, our moral voice is compromised. Again, I am not saying to ignore this situation. I am saying to go “All In” to really fight slavery. Also, call it slavery. On the same subject, examine the Chinese treatment of peasant workers at their factories. There is a two-level society, and American consumers benefit from this. Our commitment to abolishing slavery cannot live only in the fringes.

This is not to say that loopholes cannot be closed, although we must stop our own unfair trade practices as well. American food should not show up in countries just before harvest when doing so depresses the price of local agricultural products. Poverty begets slavery. Making others poor is an invitation to exploitation.

Poor farmers can either be individual or tenant farmers who are essentially peons. The drive for lower food prices for American consumers comes at a human cost. This is especially true when only one buyer dominates the market, as is sometimes the case for export to America (if not often). Poor factory workers never have access to collective bargaining. This factor also  drives down wages in American factories - often those with immigrant labor bearing the brunt of bad working conditions, poor wages and lax enforcement. The major difference is that being blacklisted in the United States for attempting to organize is rarely deadly, as it can sometimes be overseas.

Improved enforcement takes money and the willingness to accept higher food prices. More inspectors with more authority are needed at home and abroad. Government or third party inspection is vital to make sure work is safe, fairly compensated and able to organize. We cannot expect worker protection in China or Guatemala if we do not insist on it in North Carolina and Alabama.

Attachment: Tax Reform

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Attachment Energy Taxes

Attachment – Energy Taxes

There are three aspects to consider regarding whether energy policy should be conducted through the tax code: energy taxes as transportation user fees; energy taxes as environmental sin taxes and energy tax policies as a subsidy for business.  How to design provisions for a sustainable energy policy and tax reform will be discussed for each of these areas and we will address certain oversight questions on whether current tax provisions have been implemented efficiently and effectively. 

Energy Taxes as Transportation User Fees

The most familiar energy tax is the excise tax on gasoline.  It essentially functions as an automatic toll, but without the requirement for toll booths.  As such, it has the advantage of charging greater tolls on less fuel efficient cars and lower tolls on more efficient cars, all without requiring purchase of a EZ Pass or counting axles. 

It is a highly efficient tax in this regard, although its effectiveness is limited because it has not kept pace with inflation.  This could be corrected by shifting it from a uniform excise to a uniform percentage tax – however because the price of fuel varies by location, there may be constitutional problems with doing so.  The only other option to increase this tax in order to overcome the nation’s infrastructure deficit – which is appropriately funded with this tax – is to have the courage to increase it. 

In times of high unemployment, such an increase would be a balm to economic growth, as it would put people back to work.  Given the competitive nature of gas prices, there is some question as to whether such an increase would produce a penny for penny increase in gasoline prices.  If the tax elasticity is more inelastic than elastic, the tax will be absorbed in the purchase price and be a levy on producers.  If it is more elastic, it will be a levy on users and will impact congestion (and thus decrease air pollution and overall conservation).  

For many citizens, either prospect is a win-win, given concerns over both climate change and energy industry profits.  The only real question is one of the political courage to do what is necessary for American jobs and infrastructure –and that seems to be a very open question. 

Energy taxes are currently levied through the private sector, rather than through toll booth employees, which from the taxpayer point of view is a savings as it externalizes the pension and benefit requirements associated with hiring such workers. 

In the event that gasoline cars were replaced with electric cars, given either improvements in battery charging technology or in providing continuous supply through overhead wires, much in the same way that electric trains and busses receive power, any excise per kilowatt for the maintenance of roads could be collected in the same way – or the road system could be made part of a consortium with energy providers, car makers and road construction and maintenance contractors – effectively taking the government out of the loop except when eminent domain issues arise (assuming you believe such a tool should be used for private development, we at the Center believe that it should not be). 

The electric option provides an alternative means to using natural gas, besides creating a gas fueling infrastructure, with natural gas power plants providing a more efficient conduit than millions of internal combustion engines.  The electric option allows for the quick implementation of more futuristic fuels, like hydrogen, wind and even Helium3 fusion.  Indeed, if private road companies become dominant under such a model, a very real demand for accelerated fusion research could arise, bypassing the current dependence on governmental funding.

Energy Taxes as Environmental Sin Taxes

Carbon Taxes, Cap and Trade and even the Gasoline Excise are effectively taxes on pollution or perceived pollution and as such, carry the flavor of sin taxes.  As such, they put the government in the position of discouraging vice while at the same time trying to benefit from it.  Our comments above as to whether the tax elasticity of the gasoline excise has an impact on congestion and pollution is applicable to this issue, although tax inelasticity will mute the effect of discouraging “sinful” behavior and instead force producers to internalize what would otherwise be considered externalities – provided of course that the proceeds from these taxes are used to ameliorate problems of both pollution (chest congestion) by paying for health care and traffic congestion in building more roads and making more public transit available – while funding energy research to ease the carbon footprint of modern civilization.

Oddly enough, this approach was once considered the conservative alternative to other more intrusive measures proposed by liberals, like imposing pollution controls on cars and factories or simply closing down source polluters.  When those options are taken off the table, however, or are considered impractical, then the concept of environmental sin taxes becomes liberal and no action at all becomes the conservative position.

These use of environmental sin taxes is by nature much more efficient economically than pollution controls and probably also more efficient than allowing producers and consumers to benefit from externalities like pollution, congestion and asthma.  As with transportation funding, such taxes are only effective if they actually provide adequate funding for amelioration or otherwise change consumer behavior.  If the politics of the day prevent taxes from actually accomplishing these objectives, then their effectiveness is diminished.

The short term political win of keeping taxes too low can only work for so long.  Reality has a way of intruding, either because infrastructure crumbles, congestion becomes too high, children become ill with asthma (for full disclosure purposes, I suffered from this after moving down-wind as a child from an Ohio Edison coal plant) and sea levels rise – destroying vacation homes and the homes of those who support them – and if Edgar Cayce is to be believed – the states that are the heart of the Republican base.

The role of energy taxes as sin taxes are preserved in comprehensive tax reform only if they are preserved in addition to value added and net business receipts taxes.  If there is no separate tax or higher rate for these activities, there is no sin tax effect and the “sin” is effectively forgiven with any amelioration programs funded by the whole of society rather than energy users.

Energy Tax Policies as a Subsidy for Business

There are quite a few ways in which energy tax policy subsidizes business.  The most basic way is the assessment of adequate energy taxes, or taxes generally, to pay for government procurement of infrastructure and research.  If tax reform does not include adequate revenue, the businesses which fulfill these contracts will be forced to either reduce staff or go out of business.  Government spending stimulates the economy when more money is spent because taxes are raised and dedicated (or even earmarked) for these uses. Eliminating specific energy taxes in tax reform forces this work into competition with other government needs.

Let me be clear that the Center does not propose such a move.  Our approach actually favors more, not less, identification of revenues with expenditures, reducing their fungibility, with the expectation that taxes increase when needs are greater and decrease when they are met, either through building in advance of need or finding an alternative private means of providing government services.

The more relevant case to the Committee's question is the existence of research and exploration subsidies as they exist inside of more general levies, such as the Corporate Income Tax.  To the extent to which tax reform eliminates this tax and replaces it with reforms such as the Subtraction Value Added Tax (which taxes both labor and profit), such subsidies are problematic, but not impossible to preserve.

This is one of the virtues of a separate SVAT, rather than replacing the Corporate Income Tax with a VAT or a Fair Tax – which by their nature have no offsetting tax expenditures.  The challenge arises, however, when the existence of such subsidies carry with them the impression that less well connected industries must pay higher taxes in order to preserve these tax subsidies.  Worse is the perception, which would arise with their use in an SVAT,  that such subsidies effectively result in lower wages across the economy.  Such a perception, which has some basis in reality, would be certain death for any subsidy.

One must look deeper into the nature of these activities to determine whether a subsidy is justified, or even possible.  If subsidized activities are purchased from another firm, the nature of credit invoice value added taxes, carbon (receipt visible) value added taxes and employer-paid subtraction value added taxes alleviate the need for any subsidy at all, because the VAT paid implicit in the fees for research and exploration would simply be passed through to the next level on the supply chain and would be considered outside expenditures for SVAT calculation and therefore not taxable.  If research and exploration is conducted in house, then the labor component of these activities would be taxed under both the IVAT and the SVAT, as they are currently taxed under personal income and payroll taxes now. 

The only real issue is whether the profits or losses from these activities receive special tax treatment.  Because profit and loss are not separately calculated under such taxes, which are essentially consumption taxes, the answer must be no.  The ability to socialize losses and privatize profits through the SVAT would cease to exist with the tax it is replacing.

If society continues to value such subsidies, they would have to come as an offset to a carbon tax or cap and trade regime, if at all, as the excise tax for energy is essentially a retail sales tax and the industrial model under which the energy industry operates insulates the gasoline excise from the application of any research and exploration credits.  If the energy companies were to change their model to end independent sales and distribution networks and treat all such franchisees as employees (with the attendant risk of unionization), then the subject subsidies could be preserved – provided that the related energy tax is increased so that the subsidy could actually operate – favoring those who participate in research and development and penalizing those who do not.

In other words, if big oil wants to keep this subsidy when there are no corporate income tax, it must buy up all its franchisees and allow the government to double the gasoline tax with a deduction at payment for research and exploration.

Without taxes, there can be no subsidy.

Tuesday, April 20, 2021

The Tax Code and Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities

Finance: Combating Inequality: The Tax Code and Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities, April 20, 2021

First, we will review income data by race.

As you know, the IRS does not collect information on race, ethnicity or gender when we file taxes. The best we can do is analyze differences in income by race, as estimated by the Current Population Survey published by the U.S. Census Bureau. From this, we can infer the impact on tax collections. To ease presentation, only two categories are used: white non-hispanic and other. 

There are a total of 128.4 million American households, 8.7 million are in the white middle and upper middle classes (top 10%), with 4.5 million non-whites in the top 10%. There are 76.2 million white and 39.1 million non-whites in the bottom 90% of households.  Here is how income is distributed.

Among Whites, the top 10% of households receive 38% of income within the group and 27% of the total population. Among others, the top 10% receive 29% within the group and 8% of the total. The top 10% in the population receive 35% of income. Whites make up 66% of the population, receiving 71% of the income. 

Over time, this has led to wealth inequality. This table is excerpted from our forthcoming volume on who owns the national debt. For more on the topic of debt as class warfare, see the first attachment. Here is how assets are broken down by race, as estimated using the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finance conducted by the Federal Reserve.


This chart shows the mix between race  and class, with all non-White, non-Hispanics combined into a single class. Understanding this table will give you insight into why poor Whites resent minorities and why these two groups vote in separate parties.


This chart shows why lower income Whites and non-Whites need to find unity.


Next, we will turn our attention to current tax policy. Prior to the American Recovery Plan Act, the tax code was what we inherited from the Tax and Job Cuts Act (not a typo) passed in the 116th Congress. As we detailed at the time, this legislation rewarded the speculative sector, including corporations, while simplifying personal income tax filings (although sole proprietors may not see it that way). The Act was supply side economics run amok. One year after these cuts took effect (giving them time to work their way through the economy), economic growth was down by approximately one percent of GDP. Our analysis of the TCJA can be found in Attachment Two.
In January of 2020, I predicted the failure of mortgage backed securities holding single family home rental properties (which have been sold to Exchange Traded Funds) and cryptocurrency. The Federal Reserve's efforts to back toxic securities due to the pandemic prevented Exchange Traded Funds holding ETFs from crashing. The slowing in the economy prevented mass sales of crypto to the general public.
The ARPA has its pluses and its minuses. On the minus side, families who had adequate income during the pandemic now have money to blow. Instead of spending it they are using it to speculate. Masses of people are about to enter the bottom half of EFT and Crypto markets, which will allow the top tiers of the scheme (whose seed money was provided by the Ryan-Brady-Trump tax cuts) to get out.
The increased child tax credit and its new refundability will provide long term economic security to children and their parents, especially their mothers. For some families, one or the other parent can stay home with the children - including the father. When my daughter was born, my wife had a career position and I did not, so it was a no-brainer for me to stay home to be the nurturing parent. The new provisions will give others that chance - especially if credits are expanded to median income levels.
The new CTC provisions are good for women and racial and ethnic minorities, as well as the White Working Class. Giving everyone a better deal will lower the temperature, provided it does not come with the “stink of welfare.”
There are two avenues to distribute money to families. The first is to add CTC benefits to unemployment, retirement, educational (TANF and college) and disability benefits. The CTC should be high enough to replace survivor’s benefits for children.

The second is to distribute them with pay through employers. This can be done with long term tax reform, but in the interim can be accomplished by having employers start increasing wages immediately to distribute the credit to workers and their families, allowing them to subtract these payments from their quarterly corporate or income tax bills.
Over the long-haul, tax reform is necessary to cement these gains. Please see our tax reform plan in the second attachment. It is designed to provide adequate income and services to families (both with increased minimum wages and child tax credits) through employer-paid taxes, funding government services through a goods and services tax, separating out taxation of capital gains and income from income to an asset value added tax and higher tier subtraction VAT collections on wage income up to the $330,000 level and above, with additional personal income taxation for incomes over $425,000.
The top rates for higher tier subtraction VAT, personal income taxes and asset VAT would all be set to the same rate, say 26%, so that forms of income are not manipulated to avoid taxation. It would also effectively raise taxes on salaried income to 52%, with capital incomes reinvested or investments funded by salary income adding an additional 26% of taxation. Spending money will also trigger taxation.
Adding the effect of lower tier subtraction VAT collection to taxation on business owners and the top marginal rate approaches 90%. Such taxes are meant to prevent payment of extreme salaries rather than maximizing revenue. This provides more wages to the rest of the population, especially to those who are not adequately compensated at lower income levels.

Attachment: The Debt as Class Warfare

Attachment: Tax and Job Cuts Act

Attachment: Tax Reform