Convention speeches are not supposed to be State of the Union laundry lists. They are intended to frame a candidate’s vision. But for that vision to mean anything, it needs to be buttressed by real policy. And that went missing at both conventions, though in very different ways.
Tax subsidies and mandatory savings systems are both policies designed to promote saving and investing, but which is more effective?
In last night’s acceptance speech, Mitt Romney sketched out his personal biography and delivered an effective brief on why we shouldn’t reelect President Obama. But, oddly, when it came to taxes he was nearly silent.
While the Romney camp is sure to argue their candidate's fiscal policy is of his own making, his new running mate Paul Ryan’s more comprehensive and controversial plans will likely be a major campaign issue.
Our tax expert crunches the numbers of the Paul Ryan financial plan. end result? While Romney's pick for vice president is often called a deficit hawk, in fact balancing the budget is not one of his high priorities.
Romney tax plan avoids several key Simpson-Bowles proposals that would raise taxes overall and reduce the deficit. Instead, Romney tax plan relies solely on mostly unspecified spending cuts to trim deficit.
The idea that Olympic medals should be tax-exempt is one of the few things Republicans and Democrats can agree on. And they're both wrong.
Mitt Romney's tax plan may not hike taxes for the middle class, as the Obamam camp claims. Still, the plan is so full of contradictions that Mitt Romney won't be able to do everything he promises.
Tax-exempt organizations won’t be immune from the debate over tax reform, and their special treatment may be jeopardized as Congress looks for ways to broaden the tax base. The growing commercial activity of many charities should make us rethink their status.
Soon, the Senate will vote on the first of two competing efforts to temporarily extend tax cuts passed between 2001 and 2010. Neither the Democratic nor Republican measures will pass in the hyper-partisan Senate, but it is instructive to see how the measures stack up.
Voting this week to let tax cuts expire for the wealthy, Democratic senators are likely to make a curious exception for taxes on dividends.
With a budget that encourages consumption rather than savings, the gap between the American Dream and reality will only widen, some at the Tax Policy Center fear. One solution: Rethink those tax subsidies that too often hinder mobility in the name of enhancing it.
By jumping off the fiscal cliff, Congress can magically turn a tax increase into a tax cut. All it has to do is let existing tax cuts expire.
The presidential campaign would like Americans to think the very fate of the country rests on what happens to the Bush tax cuts. But the Congressional Budget Office reminds us there is actually a lot more going on in the economy besides taxes.
It's not impossible for pay for individual tax rate reductions by cutting tax expenditures. But it is very hard. Congress could fix that huge distribution problem by raising tax rates on capital gains and dividends — but it is a very unpopular platform.
Obama had an opportunity to at least tie an extension of the Bush-era tax cuts to tax reform and deficit reduction next year in his address to Congress yesterday. But instead of using his platform to demand such a linkage, Obama offered little more than a rehash of past, unproductive arguments.
The Affordable Care Act’s tax on those who do not have health insurance will be modest and difficult to collect. But will it be enough to get people to buy coverage? If not, healthy people may opt out until they get sick, driving up premiums for those who do buy in.
The Affordable Care Act’s tax was the essential final piece of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law’s constitutionality. But in reality, the tax itself is modest, at least to start. It will affect relatively few people be hard to enforce.
The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress can require people to either have health insurance or pay a tax if they don’t. The political fate of the Affordable Care Act remains to be seen, of course, but at least we know it is constitutional.
Suddenly, the tough budget reform proposed by Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles is getting a second look. Oh, politicians don’t love the real plan, but they are positively enamored of their own self-edited, stripped-down versions.