Untaxing Dividends

Wrong name, Mr. President.

The economic stimulus package you plan to announce on Tuesday should be called an economic sustainability package.

Despite the lagging indicator of 6 percent unemployment, the economy is already getting back on its feet after a Big Shakeout from the phony accounting of the '90s and the bursting of the high-tech bubble. Investors are just waiting to see if companies have absorbed all the lessons and new regulations that came out of that rah-rah-crash era.

Your plan's centerpiece - reducing or even eliminating the tax that many investors now pay on profits shared by companies as dividends - would provide a needed long-term correction to corporate behavior and help sustain the recovery.

Instead of viewing the stock market like a casino for quick capital gains, more investors would have the tax incentive to demand bird-in-hand dividends from CEOs. And instead of just trying to boost their stock prices by such tricks as mergers, companies would need to boost productivity and hand over a greater portion of profits.

Higher dividend income for investors would sustain job growth better than another '90s-style stock boom. Dividends are based on real growth and allow investors to better distribute their money to the best-run companies.

Previous presidents, including Jimmy Carter, have recommended this tax change, mainly because of the unfairness in taxing both a company and its investors on the same profits. But the '90s showed that many companies need to pay out more in dividends. One sign: Dividend-paying stocks have outperformed nondividend stocks for the past three years.

Political posturing will try to prevent this needed reform. Mr. Bush didn't help by calling it a stimulus. Democrats forget how many middle-income Americans now invest outside their 401(k) plans.

But it's the jobless who really need companies that will better sustain growth the old-fashioned way: by giving a return on investments.

Tax reform on dividends = real investments = sustainable jobs.

Share this story:

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Save for later

Save
Cancel

Saved ( of items)

This item has been saved to read later from any device.
Access saved items through your user name at the top of the page.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You reached the limit of 20 saved items.
Please visit following link to manage you saved items.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You have already saved this item.

View Saved Items

OK