Mr Romney can spare the bottom 40% any loss of income from reduced tax expenditures relatively easily. Whereas that group gets the lion’s share of refundable tax credits such as those for children, for earned income and for university expenditures, they collectively enjoy just 11% of all tax expenditures, according to the TPC. The reason is that exclusions and deductions are worth more to those who pay higher rates of tax; and those, of course, are the affluent.
羅姆尼可相對容易地使底層40%的人免受由于稅收支出減少而收入減少之苦。然而正是這個群體享用了退稅政策的精華部分,根據稅收政策中心的數據,他們總計才占據了稅收支出11%。原因在于稅收減免對于賦重稅人來說價值更大;而這些人,當然都是富人。
The bigger challenge is crafting a reform that does not hurt the middle class at the expense of the rich. Mr Romney has pledged not to raise the preferential rate on capital gains and dividends; 75% of those benefits go to the top 1% of households. That group also prospers most from Mr Romney’s proposed cut in the top income-tax rate, to 28% from 35%. So Mr Romney would probably have to target the rest of the upper quintile, the upper-middle class who gain from other big tax breaks for employer-provided health care, mortgage interest, retirement savings, state and local taxes and municipal bond interest.
更大的挑戰是進行一場并不會傷害中產階級利益,并損害富余階層利益的改革。羅姆尼已保證不會提高資本收入和股息的稅率;1%頂尖的家庭將享受這些福利中的75%。這一群體從羅姆尼提出的將高收入稅率由35%降至28%政策中獲益最多。所以羅姆尼可能將不得不瞄準其余的上層階級分度,即那些從雇主提供的醫療保險,按揭利息,養老儲蓄,國家,地方,市級的證券利息中獲得大筆稅收減免的中上層階級。
Even if Mr Romney could devise a workable plan, overcoming political resistance is another matter. Optimists note that a 33-year-old tax credit for ethanol, after surviving numerous assassination attempts, finally died last year. But the $6 billion saved by that was trivial. By contrast, Congress has steadfastly ignored Mr Obama’s proposal in his first budget (repeated ever since) to limit the tax break for mortgage interest and charitable deductions for rich households. Both ideas were fiercely condemned by interest groups. “As much as I’m a card-carrying member of the broaden-the-base, lower-the-rates, go-after-tax-expenditures club,” says Mr Marron of the TPC, “the politics and underlying economics suggest it’s hard to raise the money you need for these grand plans.”
即便羅姆尼可以想出一個可行的計劃,要抵御政治上的阻力又是另一回事了。樂觀主義者注意到,實行長達33年之久的對乙醇的稅收補貼,盡管扛住多次試圖廢除它的努力,最終還是在去年被廢除。然而省下的60億美金不過是滄海一粟。與此相反的是,國會堅持不懈的忽視奧巴馬總統在他的首次預算中提出的(從此之后一直重申的)限制對于按揭利息和富裕家庭慈善性減稅的稅收減免。這兩種想法都受到了相關利益群體的強烈譴責。來自稅收政策中心的馬蘭先生說道“只要我還是擴大稅基,降低稅率,追逐稅收支出的正式一員,政治局勢和潛在的經濟狀況表明,難以收集那些偉大計劃所需的錢。”