THE STUDY FEBRUARY 13, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Congressional Republicans, still licking their wounds after a bruising, losing fight with President Obama over the payroll tax cut last December, have preemptively surrendered this time around. Late last year, they fought against a payroll tax cut extension and succeeded in limiting it to only two months. But the politics of the fight were disastrous, and this time they’ve offered to extend the holiday without even insisting on offsets. What does this mean for the economy?
A 2011 report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities inspires relief, but not optimism. By avoiding a premature halt to payroll tax holiday, we may have avoided what the report calls a “self-inflicted blow,” but the authors note that because the tax cut is already in effect, its extension “would provide no new boost to the economy—it would simply prevent the withdrawal of existing support for economic growth.” That said, the tax cut’s impact is substantial: It saves the average family about $934 per year, and in 2011 it boosted all workers’ take-home pay by about $120 billion. Independent economists argued that a failure to extend the tax cut could reduce economic growth by about two-thirds of a percentage point in early 2012, and as much as a whole percentage point over the course of the year—leading to perhaps one million fewer jobs by year’s end. Feels good to have dodged that bullet, doesn’t it?
2 comments
"That said, the tax cut’s impact is substantial: It saves the average family about $934 per year . . ." I favor the "tax holiday" for the tax, the payroll tax, paid by low to middle income folks; and I also favor an increase in the tax, the income tax, paid by upper to high income folks. But I will be consistent: a tax "cut" for anybody that isn't matched by reductions in spending isn't a tax "cut" at all; it's a tax deferral. A tax deferral in a time of high unemployment and low output is okay if it's stimulative. This one is.
- rayward
February 13, 2012 at 5:39pm
I'm with Rayward on this. We should organize our taxes by the least damaging to the economy (the payroll tax is high on the least of damaging, the top rate and the estate tax are low on the list of damaging) and organize our spending in the same fashion (unemployment benefits are high on the list for helpful, infrastructure is high, and foreign aid spent in other countries is low on the list). When the economy does well, all the problems we have get smaller. Running deficits while spending vast amounts overseas and with low taxes on capital gains and dividends has a low deficit to economic boost ratio.
- Nusholtz
February 14, 2012 at 9:13am