Still in Books and Arts; Book Review;Tax reform in America;A simple bare necessity;
文藝;書評;美國稅改;必須做的一件事;
The Benefit and the Burden: Tax Reform—Why We Need It and What It Will Take. By Bruce Bartlett.
《效益與負擔:稅改——我們為什么需要稅改,推行稅改需要什么》。布魯斯·巴特利特著。
Few subjects match tax reform for economic importance and utter lack of sex appeal. With a government bleeding red ink, an ageing population and growth lagging, reform is back on America's political agenda. Bruce Bartlett, a supply-side economist, tax expert and former adviser to President Reagan, is among those best equipped to help navigate the murky terrain. Mr Bartlett held influential economic positions during the country's last great spasm of reform in the 1980s, but he is now held an apostate by many Republicans, for whom the only acceptable tax changes are cuts. His balanced, well-researched primer on America's tax system, “The Benefit and the Burden”, will not endear him further to ideologues, but it is a refreshing entrée to a difficult subject.

很少有話題能像稅收改革那樣具有經濟意義,也很少有話題能像稅收改革這樣枯燥無味。政府赤字還在增加,人口老齡化還在加劇,經濟增長依然遲緩,稅收改革又重新回到美國的政治議程。一些人秣馬厲兵幫助美國共渡難關,供應學派經濟學家布魯斯·巴特萊特就是其中的一位,他是一位稅務專家,曾在里根政府里擔任顧問。在上世紀80年代的美國改革陣痛中,巴特萊特先生確立了他在經濟領域的重要地位,然而現在許多共和黨人視他為“叛徒”,因為唯一可以接受的稅改方案因他而被刪除。他那本結構平衡、條分縷析介紹美國稅制的普及讀本《福利及稅負》不再使他更受理論家的追捧,但把這本書當作一個困難話題的“開口小菜”倒是不錯。
The book's no-nonsense approach to tax policy proves surprisingly engaging. Mr Bartlett walks readers through discussions on income and spending—basic concepts made baffling within the context of the tax code. He offers a dose of history and the useful perspective of a seasoned Washington hand. America's labyrinthine tax rules are hardly the product of intelligent design, he explains. The popular deduction for home-mortgage interest that helped create suburban America, for example, was not adopted to boost home-ownership but included quite innocently in a 1913 income-tax law that spared interest of any kind. Where economics has useful things to say about tax Mr Bartlett is quick to cite research. And he is prepared to let empirical analysis speak for itself.
該書對稅收政策的講述比較嚴肅,后經證明這是一種引人入勝的方式。巴特萊特先生讓讀者領會了財政收支問題,在稅收法典中這些基本概念常讓人感到困惑。他提供的是一劑歷史良藥,他提供給讀者的是身經百戰的政府官員才能具備的有用視角。巴特萊特先生解釋說,美國的稅收規則如迷宮一般,幾乎不是智慧設計的產物。例如,幫助美國郊區快速發展的按揭貸款利息扣除的流行做法,就沒有被采用以提高住房的自有率,但卻被十分天真地寫到美國1913年所得稅法當中,按照該方法,各類利息都可以免除。經濟學中談及稅收的有用章節都會很快被巴特萊特先生引用。他準備讓經驗分析自己證明這一切。
Mr Bartlett's critique of America's tax system is that it creates a deceptive picture of the influence of government, and is far too costly. On revenues as a share of GDP, America's government looks small relative to its European peers. The difference is illusory. European health spending shows up on the government's ledgers whereas America's tax preferences for health insurance do not. But the government intervention is there all the same. In 2012 the deduction for employer-provided insurance cost some $434 billion, or roughly 3% of GDP. Include these “tax expenditures” in the budget, Mr Bartlett says, and America's state looks as bloated as any in Europe. Net social spending rises to 27.2% of GDP—above the level in Italy and Denmark and higher than the OECD average.
巴特萊特先生對美國稅制提出批評,認為它制造了一種政府影響力的假象,而且成本太高。看上去美國稅收收入與GDP之間的比率比歐洲國家要低。兩者之間的區別是不真實的。歐洲國家的保健支出在政府賬上顯示為增加,而美國健康保險的稅收優惠卻沒有增加。但美國和歐洲國家政府的介入一直是一致的。2012年,雇主提供的保險成本扣除數為4340億美元左右,約占GDP的3%。巴特萊特先生表示,包括這些預算中“稅收支出”在內,美國的狀況看起來與歐洲任何國家一樣龐大。社會凈支出增加到GDP的27.2%,超過了意大利和丹麥,也高于經合組織的平均水平。
It is also needlessly costly, riddled with quirks of the sort that allow Warren Buffett, an American billionaire, and the Republican presidential contender, Mitt Romney, to pay a lower average tax rate than many poorer households. Rates should be cut, Mr Bartlett argues, but one must also broaden the tax base, leaving few loopholes through which revenue might escape. The value-added tax (VAT) that is common in Europe is a better way. VAT is a tax on consumption; firms receive credits for tax paid on business supplies. The structure improves compliance and efficiency. Europe raises more money than America at less cost to growth; some high-tax countries like Denmark outperform America in real growth per head.
也不必說它的成本高昂了,有很多奇怪的制度設計使得美國億萬富翁巴菲特、共和黨總統競爭者羅姆尼比許多貧困家庭支付的稅率還要低。巴特萊特先生認為,稅率應該降低,但稅基必須擴大,使得收入沒有太多的漏洞可鉆。歐洲普遍實施的增值稅就是一個比較好的方法。增值稅是一種消費稅,公司收到供應商的貨物,也就收到了的稅收信用,這種設計能夠加強人們對稅法的遵守,能夠提高效率。歐洲比美國的稅收更高,而稅收成本增長更小。像丹麥這樣的高稅收國家,人均實際增長比美國要好。
Mr Bartlett favours the introduction of VAT, but reckons that politics will make this hard to do. It is doubly abhorrent to Republicans, who oppose any new taxes, and who fear that the “painless” efficiency of VAT may make the American government too eager to spend. Democrats, on the other hand, worry that VAT will harm low-income households relative to income tax, which is more progressive. European welfare states often rely on tax systems that are flatter than America's, using welfare spending to smooth out inequities.
巴特萊特先生傾向于引進增值稅,但他認為美國政治將為這個問題增加難度。也會增加共和黨的憎惡,因為他們反對任何新的稅種,他們擔心增值稅的“無痛”功效可能促使美國政府急于花錢。另一方面,民主黨則擔心增值稅會損害到與所得稅這個更先進的稅收相關的低收入家庭的利益。歐洲福利國家常依靠比美國更低的稅收制度,使用福利支出來彌合社會不公。
America's politics seem ill-prepared for such reforms. Democrats, riding populist outrage at the rich, want to protect the welfare state and pay for it through tax rises on the wealthy. On the right, well-heeled Americans fume that nearly half of all households pay no federal income tax. Mr Bartlett's political diagnosis is perhaps the book's least satisfying aspect. Little will be accomplished until congressional Republicans are willing to compromise, he writes, and America's best chance may be to elect a reform-minded Republican president and a Democratic Congress—and to hope. In the end, the weaknesses in America's tax code are not half as debilitating as those in its politics.
面臨稅制改革,美國政府似乎準備不足。民主黨將平民主義的憤怒發泄到富人身上,他們想要保住福利制度,通過對富人增稅解決這個問題。在右派這邊,富有的美國人憤怒地說,將近一半的美國家庭不繳聯邦所得稅。巴特萊特先生對美國政治的診斷也許是該書是不能令人滿意的地方。他在書中寫道,除非國會中的共和黨人愿意作出妥協,否則很難取得進展,美國最好的局面可能是,由一位具有改革精神的共和黨人做總統,由民主黨人領導國會。他希望如此。最后,美國稅典中的缺點所帶來的負面影響遠不及美國政治大。