Not all tax cuts good for economy

  • Follow Your Business

How will the economy respond to the elections?

Of course, this may be a question to ask a political science professor. As an economist, my answer will probably differ. In addition, I do not have much interest in politics.

Does that mean my answer is unbiased? Probably not. But here is my answer for the record.

The presidency may have a lot of power and prestige, but there are checks and balances in place. This is the main reason that it bothers me when people want to place blame on the president for the current woes of the economy.

Where might the newly elected president have opportunities to change the economy -- through fiscal policy and by changing taxes or government spending.

Here is a brief breakdown of the known plans of the two candidates:

Mr. McCain is for cutting corporate taxes (to 25 percent) and Mr. Obama is for cutting income taxes for the working class.

Just a quick side note: Will someone define working class or middle class? For that matter, can you define the poor? This is where policy, in my opinion, becomes problematic. Once you start delineating these classes, then you alter the incentive mechanism for the poor, working class, or middle class.

Back to the different tax policies. Interestingly, cutting the corporate tax would lead to higher after-tax profits for companies. As such, higher profits for companies would increase their stock price, allowing for more capital investment. Higher capital investment can lead to higher levels of productivity and, when workers are more productive, they demand higher wages. Sounds good, sign me up.

Yes, I said higher after-tax profits for companies is a good idea. If this is applied across the board, then companies will still need to compete with one another. This will force companies to continue to innovate or they will no longer be in business. Companies will reinvest those profits into new technologies, new research, and new developments. In the end, our standard of living will increase.

Now, what effect does lowering income taxes for the working class have? I see, besides the incentive mechanism being skewed, that the working class will have more to spend. The additional spending would also provide a boost to the consumer market. However, there are no long-term benefits. Think about the recent economic stimulus plan. Short-term boost.

So what is different about these two options? First, corporate tax cuts do not have voter appeal., and corporations do not vote. The income tax cut has voter appeal and especially for the of the working class.

However, these two tax cuts are not equal in their impact on the economy. First, we must pay for these tax cuts if we want to continue our current level of spending. Let me add another point here. I am not advocating that we continue our current level of spending. I am just keeping the example simple.

The corporate tax cut will increase economic growth. This increase will indirectly increase tax revenues from other sources. Now, I am not sure that it will completely pay for itself, but the income tax cut will not come close. So, the government will need to raise taxes elsewhere or lower spending further.

While the president and his office have little direct impact on the economy, policies can influence the economy in the long run. We need to look at them from a long-run perspective and consider all the costs associated with them. Often, policies take time to work through the economy with indirect effects.

Hopefully, my own biases are left out, but you decide.

A final thought: Think of an example where government intervention benefited one group without hurting another group. Is there one?

MARK A. THOMPSON IS THE CREE-WALKER PROFESSOR OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AT AUGUSTA STATE UNIVERSITY. HE CAN BE REACHED AT MTHOMPSON@AUG.EDU.

Comments

patriciathomas

It seems pretty simple to me. One thing Mr Thompson didn't mention is that increased corporate taxes are passed along to the consumer as operating costs. (hidden tax for the consumer) "Punishing the wealthy", as the Dems propose, hurts all consumers.

I4PUTT

Giving a stimulus check to the poor or working class will not create new jobs. The only way to create new jobs is to give corporate tax cuts and incentives. Entitlement programs are not successful either. Not many folks on unemployment hire many folks. Welfare & food stamp recepients rarely even pay income tax and almost never use their savings to open a thriving business.

bentman

The mentality that says we must pay for tax cuts reflects an attitude that a person's income all belongs to the government and, out of the benevolence of the government, it decides how much that person can keep. In fact, because we are on the far side of the Laffer curve, tax cuts will increase the revenue collected. It's obvious the bleeding hearts have no interest other than penalizing achievers by promoting class envy and playing on that envy by telling the public we're going to soak the rich. They use the tax code not to raise revenue, but to engage in social architecture.

disssman

The good prof forgets one thing, a successful business depends on employees. The employee is the vital key to the success of any size business with 2 or more employees. Unfortunately, many business owners and Corporations think that employees are replaceable and should not have a say in the day-to-day operation of the business. Now to the meat of his letter. If employees in a sector were increasing production and demanding higher wages, the result would be to replace them with lower wage employees. This is especially true of non-union businesses. The result of that thinking would be a reduction in buying ability and result in the business closing or off-shored. I will let you guess which one the U.S.A. has opted for the last 8-10 years. It is amazing that the working public sees no problem with an executive salary going astronomical, but if workers demand a small increase then they are classified as greedy. The professor needs to do a paper on why Augusta is the lowest wage base for workers, in the state of Georgia. I believe it comes down to "if workers make less and pay more taxes, who will buy products ?"

disssman

By the way PT if corporate taxes are"passed along" how does it hurt the wealthy? That makes no sense to me unless the republicans are double taxing items. Please explain how a PASSED ON TAX punishes anyone but the consumer. By the way it dosen't have to be passed on as a higher cost, the manufacturer can lower the cost for competition or go out of business.

patriciathomas

disssman, read your 3:26 comment. What does it mean and how does it relate to what I posted?

patriciathomas

Excellent bentman! I agree totally.

Online Database by Caspio
Click here to load this Caspio Online Database.
Loading...