President Obama's 2014 budget would taxes on the highest-income American households, Gleckman writes, but middle-income households would also pay slightly more in taxes than under today’s law.
Months ago, several Republican governors proposed major tax reform plans, Gleckman writes, but by tax day, two of those governors had abandoned their tax reform plans. What happened?
Most Social Security experts, no matter their political persuasion, know that Social Security must be redesigned, Gleckman writes. With President Obama proposing to change the way government adjusts Social Security benefits, why not redesign it now?
Corporate tax reform is not a bad idea, Gleckman writes, but it may be harder than either President Obama or key Republicans want to admit.
With both interest rates and prices so low, this could be the ideal time to redesign the tax subsidy for home ownership, Gleckman writes. That goes against many who say that the housing market remains so shaky that ending the deduction would send home prices back into a tailspin.
There is a reason for the lack of detail in the Senate Democrats' budget, Gleckman writes: Raising nearly $1 trillion by eliminating tax preferences for some businesses and a tiny slice of households is very hard to do.
The Ryan budget is only half-a-plan, Gleckman writes. It outlines politically attractive tax cuts but says nothing about the tax increases necessary to pay for them.
Paul Ryan's tax play mimics the tactics of the 2012 campaign, Gleckman writes, promising tax reform built around wildly ambitious but gauzy rate reductions without a word about how to pay for them.
Bubbling just beneath the surface of the debate over whether states should expand Medicaid under the 2010 Affordable Care Act is an issue of trust, Gleckman writes: Would the feds keep their part of the bargain?
Republicans and many economists argue for shifting to a more accurate inflation measure, Gleckman writes, but a new report suggests that move would raise taxes by nearly as much as it would slow Social Security spending over the next decade.
The sequester is not written on stone tablets. Like every other budget gimmick Congress invents, this one can be rewritten, waived, and otherwise adjusted. And like every one before it, it probably will be.
In much public discourse, direct government aid for the poor is easily dismissed by the pejorative “welfare,” Gleckman writes, but spending-like subsidies administered through the revenue code provoke far less outrage.
Making the tax code less complicated and more efficient may not achieve the rate-cutting, base-broadening reform many want, Gleckman writes, but it can have important consequences for real people.
The Bowles-Simpson framework seems a plausible alternative to the current game of sequester-and-gridlock, Gleckman writes.
In his State of the Union address Tuesday, Obama continued to express a willingness to slow the growth of Medicare, but only around the edges, Gleckman writes.
President Barack Obama's State of the Union address will likely touch on tax reform, Gleckman writes, but it remains to be seen whether even corporate reform is possible in 2013.
The income tax’s ever-narrowing base simply cannot support the nation’s spending demands, Gleckman writes.
Payroll tax cuts might play a bigger role than many thought in reversing economic slumps, Gleckman writes, according to new research by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Republicans and Democrats are setting out fiscal goals that are light-years apart, Gleckman writes. Here are five stumbling blocks to a budget deal:
President Barack Obama's second inaugural address perfectly defined what will be the great domestic policy debate of not only the next four years but the next decade, Gleckman writes.