Although
this page presents a highly simplified account
of US taxation of corporations, in reality
the Tax Code is an enormous mountain of nightmarish
complexity. Politicians and businessmen alike
want to fix it, and during 2006 the President
convened a Tax Panel which took evidence and
made proposals for root and branch change
of the Code in November, 2005.
In
September, the panel turned its attention
to taxation issues facing America’s corporate
and small business taxpayers during a meeting
in Tampa, Florida.
In
testimony from several academics and tax law
experts, the panel heard how the current state
of the US tax code has placed an unfair and
disproportionate compliance burden on small
firms, while growing global competition and
sophisticated tax planning has allowed the
corporate tax base to be eroded.
“Small
businesses and self-employed taxpayers, in
particular, are burdened by the complexity
of our tax code and bear a substantial proportion
of the estimated $125 billion in compliance
costs,” observed tax panel chairman Connie
Mack.
“These
costs create a disproportionate burden, as
studies have found that the smaller the business,
the higher the cost of complying with the
tax code per dollar of tax paid. We have heard
from small business owners from all over America
who have told us that the tax code should
be reformed and simplified so that these entrepreneurs
can spend less time doing paperwork and more
time growing their businesses,” he added.
Meanwhile,
Douglas Shackleford, professor at the University
of North Carolina's Kenan-Flagler Business
School noted that the US corporate tax base
is “under attack from many directions”.
"Despite
a decade of record profits, the corporate
income tax never recovered to the levels of
the less prosperous 1970s,” Shackleford stated
in his testimony.
However,
he observed that the decline of the corporate
tax sector has been a global phenomenon, caused
by growing international competition which
has affected “all countries' ability to extract
corporate tax dollars".
Other
factors which have contributed to falling
corporate tax revenues according to Shackleford
include: the rise of the knowledge economy
with its associated intangible assets; growth
of ‘S Corporations’ and partnerships that
“pass through” taxes; deductions from employee
stock options; and the formulation of tax
shelters.
Shackleford
told the panel that the success or failure
of future tax reforms can be measured by a
corresponding decline or growth in the country’s
tax planning industry.
"The
key to reducing the need for tax accountants
and lawyers is the elimination of differences
in tax rates. Whenever you tax the same income
differently, you provide an opportunity for
a planner to reduce taxes," he observed.
In
November the Panel
recommended two options for simplification
of the US tax code in its final report.
The
two plans differ on the taxation of businesses
and capital income. Although they use different
approaches, the nine member panel of academic,
legal and tax experts chaired by former Republican
Senator for Florida Connie Mack said that
the plans share a common goal of providing
simple and straightforward ways for Americans
to save free of tax while lowering the tax
burden on productivity-enhancing investment
by businesses.
The
first plan, known as the Simplified Income
Tax Plan proposed to:
- Reduce
the number of income tax brackets to four
at 15%, 25%, 30%, 33%.
- Exclude
100% of dividends of U.S. companies paid
out of domestic earnings.
- Exclude
75% of corporate capital gains from US
companies (the tax rate would vary from
3.75% to 8.25%)
- Tax
interest at regular income tax rates.
- Tax
small businesses at individual rates (top
rate lowered to 33%).
- Tax
large businesses at 31.5% under a territorial
system with simplified accelerated depreciation.
The
second plan, known as the Growth and Investment
Tax Plan, proposed:
- Three
tax brackets: 15%, 25%, 30%.
- Dividends,
capital gains and interest income all
taxed at 15%.
- Sole
proprietorships taxed at individual rates
(top rate lowered to 30%).
- Other
small businesses taxed at 30%.
- Large
businesses taxed at 30% on a destination
basis with expensing for all new investment.
- Interest
paid and received will be non-deductible
except for financial institutions.
Under
both plans, a number of further measures would
be applied to individual taxation. Both proposals
would allow every taxpayer to use a simple
tax form, less than half the length of the
current Form 1040.
The
Panel also developed and considered a progressive
consumption tax plan that would be administered
using the infrastructure of the current tax
system, but was unable to reach a consensus
to include it as a recommendation. In addition,
The Panel also discarded ideas for a value-added
tax and a national retail sales tax.
Then
Treasury Secretary John Snow was set to deliberate
over the panel's proposals before making recommendations
to President Bush as to which parts of the
report, if any, to adopt.
"The
recommendations that they (the tax panel)
are presenting today will begin the dialogue
that will help shape the future of tax policy,"
Snow said. "Their
advice is the starting point, and I look forward
to reading their recommendations and considering
them carefully before I make a recommendation
to the President based on the excellent work
carried out by this Panel," he added.
In
December, 2005, however, it transpired that
the Bush administration was considering delaying
the unveiling of a broad tax reform proposal
until 2007 while the Treasury continues to
deliberate on the recommendations of the tax
reform panel, in order to avoid having to
sell a controversial policy initiative during
a mid-term election year.
The
tax reform effort was also be hampered by
the fact that the assistant secretary for
tax policy post has been vacant for several
months, and one Republican source noted that
there is insufficient manpower to churn out
such an extensive and wide-ranging policy
initiative.
John Snow said that government would not be
held to an "artificial timetable" with regard
to tax reform. "We
will be looking hard at the whole question
of tax reform," Snow told reporters in Washington
D.C. "I
don't want to foreshadow what we will be recommending
to the president," added the Treasury Secretary.
In
the spring of 2006, Snow said that his department
remained "busy" working on proposals for simplification
of the US tax code, despite the fact that
the Bush administration appeared to have quietly
shelved its tax reform commitments until 2007.
"At
the Treasury Department we are quite busy
working on tax reform, carefully considering
the options provided by the Tax Panel," Mr
Snow stated in response to a question posed
in an online interactive forum known as "Ask
the White House."
However,
Mr Snow once again reiterated that the Bush
administration was in no immediate hurry to
forge ahead with tax reform. "Reform of the
code is so important and the opportunity to
really improve it only comes around every
twenty years or so, so we want to be sure
that we get it right. So at this time we must
consider all options carefully and be sure
that we are creating a more simple and fair
tax system for all," he explained.
With
mid-term elections approaching, it is now
widely believed that moves towards serious
tax reform will not begin in earnest for about
a year. Indeed, Senate Finance Committee chairman
Charles Grassley (R - Iowa) told Tax Council
members earlier this month that the Treasury
will not publish its long-awaited report on
tax reform until next year at least.
"From
what I’ve heard, this won’t happen this year,"
stated Grassley.