Tax Policy Beliefs and Investment: Evidence from the 2016 U.S. Election and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Gallemore ◽  
Stephan Hollander ◽  
Martin Jacob ◽  
Xiang Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Jobs Act ◽  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Henry ◽  
George A. Plesko ◽  
Steven Utke


2018 ◽  
Vol 71 (4) ◽  
pp. 635-660 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Henry ◽  
George A. Plesko ◽  
Steven Utke


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Renee Irvin ◽  
Jes Sokolowski

AbstractContemporary scholars argue that high wealth donors in the U.S. influence political decision making through generous funding of nonprofit organizations like think tanks. In response to that potential influence, some endorse curbs on implicit subsidies that favor higher-income donors more than lower-income donors. To highlight the debate, this study selects a particular topic – tax policy – that generates highly partisan viewpoints and political agendas. The article first models predicted partisan operational differences, based on donors’ ideological differences. The study then explores the financial, staffing, and board resources of think tanks and associated advocacy organizations. The data were collected in the year immediately prior to the passage of the 2017 U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, providing a snapshot view of contrasting operations of left-, centrist, and right-leaning tax policy think tanks. Given the notably more generous resources utilized by right-leaning tax policy organizations, it is possible that donor wealth differences enabled right-leaning nonprofits to contribute their influence to get the historic tax reform package passed. However, the successful passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act could have resulted as well from the more targeted messaging and narrative framing employed by right-leaning think tanks and advocacy organizations.



Author(s):  
Scott Haveman ◽  
Colin O’Reilly

Studies of how the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act 2017 will affect charitable giving narrowly focus on the increase in the standard deduction. Based on these studies, the media and policy analysts warned that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would lead to a sharp decrease in charitable giving. However, these predictions did not fully account for some of the nuances in the tax code and the political economy of changes to tax policy. We explain that a richer analysis includes the political response of interest groups. Tax provisions other than changes to the standard deduction, such as an increase in the adjusted gross income limit, mean that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act may change the composition of giving but that it is unlikely to have a large impact on overall giving. To supplement our analytical narrative, we present statistics on the pattern of charitable giving and estimate a predictive autoregressive model of overall charitable giving. The results show that the change in giving after the implementation of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cannot be distinguished from zero. We conclude that misleading interpretations about the effect of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on overall charitable giving are due to the omission of political economy from the analysis.





Author(s):  
Brett L. Bueltel ◽  
Andrew Duxbury

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act made significant changes to the U.S. taxation of foreign earnings. The most significant change is the 100 percent dividends-received deduction that generally applies to income earned by foreign subsidiaries. This represents a shift from U.S. tax deferral to U.S. tax exemption of foreign profits, which increases the potential benefit to shifting U.S. income to low-tax foreign jurisdictions. To limit this potential income shifting, Congress enacted new rules, known as GILTI, to supplement the already existing Subpart F rules. In this article, we briefly review the history of U.S. international tax policy and analyze the technical aspects of GILTI. We then discuss some general tax planning strategies and propose four specific tax strategies for companies to consider for minimizing the increased tax burden associated with GILTI. Lastly, we consider whether GILTI is good tax policy and make recommendations to improve the legislation.



2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 97-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Auerbach

On December 22, 2017, President Donald Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the most sweeping revision of US tax law since the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The law introduced many significant changes. However, perhaps none was as important as the changes in the treatment of traditional “C” corporations—those corporations subject to a separate corporate income tax. Beginning in 2018, the federal corporate tax rate fell from 35 percent to 21 percent, some investment qualified for immediate deduction as an expense, and multinational corporations faced a substantially modified treatment of their activities. This paper seeks to evaluate the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to understand its effects on resource allocation and distribution. It compares US corporate tax rates to other countries before the 2017 tax law, and describes ways in which the US corporate sector has evolved that are especially relevant to tax policy. The discussion then turns the main changes of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 for the corporate income tax. A range of estimates suggests that the law is likely to contribute to increased US capital investment and, through that, an increase in US wages. The magnitude of these increases is extremely difficult to predict. Indeed, the public debate about the benefits of the new corporate tax provisions enacted (and the alternatives not adopted) has highlighted the limitations of standard approaches in distributional analysis to assigning corporate tax burdens.



2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 806-808
Author(s):  
Michael S. Sinha ◽  
Aaron S. Kesselheim


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 73-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Slemrod

Based on the experience of recent decades, the United States apparently musters the political will to change its tax system comprehensively about every 30 years, so it seems especially important to get it right when the chance arises. Based on the strong public statements of economists opposing and supporting the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, a causal observer might wonder whether this law was tax reform or mere confusion. In this paper, I address that question and, more importantly, offer an assessment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The law is clearly not “tax reform” as economists usually use that term: that is, it does not seek to broaden the tax base and reduce marginal rates in a roughly revenue-neutral manner. However, the law is not just a muddle. It seeks to address some widely acknowledged issues with corporate taxation, and takes some steps toward broadening the tax base, in part by reducing the incentive to itemize deductions.



2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivalina Kalcheva ◽  
James Plecnik ◽  
Hai Tran ◽  
Jason Turkiela


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document