Get PJ Media on your Apple

Small Problems with the Tax Code Beg for a Large Solution

Lawmakers should redouble their efforts to pull up the current tax code by its roots and begin anew.

Ike Brannon and Eileen J. O’Connor


June 29, 2012 - 12:00 am
<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page

A list of the unintended consequences of well-meaning tax provisions could fill a book. For just one recent example, look at the addition of an “alternative energy credit” to the tax code. Shortly after the credit’s enactment, the IRS determined that the paper industry’s use of “black liquor” — a paper-processing byproduct the industry had already used for decades to generate power — qualified for it. Lawmakers neither intended nor foresaw this application of the credit, and enacted a provision to close this loophole, but not before the industry claimed a few billion dollars in the credits. Rather than merely clarifying the law, however, lawmakers deemed the “fix” a loophole-closer that would “raise” $23 billion in new revenue, thus permitting them to use it to “pay” for $23 billion in new spending.

The amount of tax revenue the U.S. Treasury loses by “hybrid mismatch arrangements” is small in the scheme of things — roughly $175 million per year. Rather than spend a moment of effort to address OECD’s proposal, lawmakers need to resist the temptation to solve every perceived problem of social and economic behavior with a tax incentive or disincentive, and find the fortitude to create a tax code that looks, in the words of a former Treasury secretary, like it was designed on purpose.

<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page
Ike Brannon is Director of Economic Policy at the American Action Forum. Eileen J. O’Connor was Assistant Attorney General of the United States from 2001 to 2007
Click here to view the 15 legacy comments

Comments are closed.