Cutting taxes more beneficial than cutting debt

News-2

Ever since the U.S. federal government began running budget surpluses, politicians, economists and others have been debating whether to cut government debt or cut taxes. Now that President-elect George W. Bush approaches the White House, the issue has come to a boil.

The Wall Street Journal argues there is no reason to pay down the national debt – and there are several reasons to maintain it.

  • Maintaining a debt would satisfy people who want to own U.S. debt securities; the Federal Reserve uses Treasury securities to conduct open market operations; they serve as benchmarks against which other assets and derivatives are priced; pension funds are required to hold them; and taking on debt is appropriate when the government purchases long-term assets.
  • On the other hand, tax cuts improve incentives for people to work harder or look for a better job, to save and invest, and to start new businesses.
  • As the American Enterprise Institute’s John Makin has pointed out, if a $1 trillion tax cut added 0.5 percent to average annual growth over the decade, it would lift the underlying average growth rate from 3.5 percent to 4 percent – thereby adding $3.4 trillion to gross domestic product, a return of 13.1 percent.
  • That $3.4 trillion would generate $689 billion in federal revenues, leaving the net revenue reduction at $311 billion – or enough to leave the currently estimated surplus of $5 trillion intact.

    This represents an amazing return of 27 percent a year.

    But there is a third factor in the surplus debate. If it is not returned to taxpayers, does anyone doubt Washington will spend it, rather than retire debt?

    Source: Editorial, The Debt Mirage, Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2001.

    For more on Effects Of Tax Cuts http://www.ncpa.org/pi/taxes/tax21.html

  • Share

    Fund the FMF

    Help FMF to promote the rule of law, personal liberty, and economic freedom.

    For more content like this, Subscribe to FMF