The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

13
The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code September 27, 2011 Rob Atkinson, President, ITIF
  • date post

    19-Oct-2014
  • Category

    Technology

  • view

    456
  • download

    0

description

There is growing interest in the issue of corporate tax reform as a way to boost economic growth and U.S. international competitiveness. While any comprehensive tax reform involves a multitude of issues, one important issue is the extent to which a reformed tax code should include, or even stress, specific incentives to shape corporate behavior.

Transcript of The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Page 1: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

September 27, 2011

Rob Atkinson, President, ITIF

Page 2: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

The Obama Administration’s Economic Recovery Board report on tax reform:

“The combination of a high statutory rate and numerous deductions and exclusions results in an inefficient tax system that distorts corporate behavior in multiple ways. Because certain assets and investments are tax favored, tax considerations drive overinvestment in those assets at the expense of more economically productive investments.

The New Conventional Wisdom: “The Tax Code Should be Neutral”

2

Page 3: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Markets generally get it right There are few market failures; and The lion’s share of growth comes from allocating goods and services according to market price signals alone.

Neoclassical Economics Assumes:

3

Page 4: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Tax incentives distort allocative efficiency. The most efficient tax code is one that is neutral between corporate decisions – ala 86 Tax Reform Act

Neoclassical Economics Assumes:

4

Page 5: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

The goal of economic policy is to spur the effective creation of new goods and services and increased productivity. Market forces alone often do not always produce optimal outcomes and policies to correct for these mismatches can enhance societal welfare. As Aleb ab Iorwerth argues, “There is no presumption that distortions are necessarily welfare-reducing. Distortions that favor the contributors to long-run growth will be welfare-enhancing.”

Innovation Economics Assumes:

5

Page 6: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Key Inputs to U.S. Economic Performance Are Down Cap ex growth rates are down

Expenditures on workforce training are down as share

of GDP Corporate R&D is not growing

U.S. competitiveness has fallen.

The Case For Tax Incentives

6

Page 7: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis

-50%

0%

50%

100%

150%

200%

250%

300%

350%

400%

1959-1969 1969-1979 1979-1989 1989-1999 1999-2009

Percentage Change in Fixed Asset Investment, by Decade

Manufacturing

Total private fixed assets

Performing arts andspectator sports

Funds, trusts, and otherfinancial vehicles

Investments in Fixed Assets is Falling

Page 8: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

U.S. Ranks 43rd in Rate of Progress on Innovation-Based Competitiveness (1999-2011)

8

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0Chi

naS. K

orea

Cyp

rus

Slo

veni

aEst

onia

Cze

ch R

ep.

Latv

iaSin

gapo

reEU

-10

Por

tuga

lH

unga

ryLi

thua

nia

Indi

aAus

tria

Chi

leG

reec

eJa

pan

Slo

vaki

aFi

nlan

dD

enm

ark

Aus

tral

iaIn

done

sia

Irel

and

UK

Bra

zil

Mex

ico

Pol

and

EU

-25

Net

herlan

dsTu

rkey

Spa

inArg

entina

Rus

sia

Can

ada

Mal

aysi

aEU

-15

Fran

ceG

erm

any

Sw

eden

Bel

gium

NA

FTA

Sou

th A

fric

aU

.S.

Ital

y

Page 9: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

U.S. Manufacturing Job Growth Was the Worst of A Sample of OECD Nations

9

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

manuf job growth as share of pop growth -97-2010

Correlation between change in manufacturing jobs from 87 to 2005 and total change in employment from 2005 to 2010 was 0.57

Page 10: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Can Counter U.S. Corporate Short-Termism

• As the Business Roundtable reported, “The obsession with short-term results by investors, asset management firms, and corporate managers collectively leads to the unintended consequences of destroying long-term value, decreasing market efficiency, reducing investment returns, and impeding efforts to strengthen corporate governance.”

The Case For Tax Incentives

10

Page 11: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Most Incentives Are Focused on “Traded Sectors” Where Tax Competition Has Large Impact on the Location of Economic Activity.

• 85 percent of the value of the deductions claimed under the

Domestic Production Deduction are claimed by traded sectors such as manufacturing, information technology, or mining.

The Case For Tax Incentives

11

Page 12: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

R&E Credit

Accelerated Depreciation and Expensing of Capital Equipment

Investments.

The Domestic Production Deduction

Key Incentives

12

Page 13: The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code

Robert Atkinson [email protected]

Facebook: facebook.com/innovationpolicy

Blog: www.innovationpolicy.org

YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/techpolicy

Website: www.itif.org

Twitter: @robatkinsonitif

Follow ITIF:

Thank You