Search results

"The Tax Reform Act of 1986 was a powerful pro-growth force for the American economy. Equally important, as we look back on it after 25 years, we also see that it taught us two important lessons. First, it showed that politicians with very different political philosophies on the right and on the left could agree on a major program of tax rate reduction and tax reform. Second, it showed that the amount of taxable income is very sensitive to marginal tax rates.More specifically, the evidence based on the 1986 tax rate reductions shows that the response of taxpayers to reductions in marginal tax rates offsets a substantial portion of the revenue that would otherwise be lost. This implies that combining a broadening of the tax base that raises revenue equal to 10 percent of existing personal income tax revenue with a 10 percent across the board cut in all marginal tax rates would raise revenue equal to about four percent of existing tax revenue. With personal income tax revenue in 2011 of about $1 trillion, that four percent increase in net revenue would be $40 billion at the current level of taxable income or more than $500 billion over the next ten years"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"The high level of current account imbalances continues to be a major focus of international concern. In this paper I suggest why public and private actions in the United States and China are now likely to cause the current account imbalances in those countries to shrink and perhaps even to disappear in the next few years. If that happens, it will eliminate the largest current account imbalances in the global economy. The United States now has a current account deficit of about $500 billion or 3.5 percent of US GDP. China has a current account surplus of about $300 billion or 6 percent of its GDP. Although natural market forces should resolve such imbalances without the need for specific government policies, the government actions in both countries have actually contributed to their persistence and prevented market forces from correcting the problem. That may be about to change"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"The projected path of the U.S. national debt is the major challenge facing American economic policy. Without changes in tax and spending rules, the national debt will rise from 62 percent of GDP now to more than 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade and nearly twice that level within 25 years. This paper discusses three strategies that, taken together, could reverse this trend and reduce the ratio of debt to GDP to less than 50 percent. The first strategy, which focuses on the current decade, would reduce the Administration's proposed spending increases and tax reductions that would otherwise add $3.8 trillion to the national debt in 2020. The second strategy would augment the tax-financed benefits for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid with investment based accounts would permit the higher future spending on health care and pensions with a relatively small increase in saving for such accounts. The third strategy focuses on "tax expenditures," the special features of the tax law that reduce revenue in order to achieve effects that might otherwise be done by explicit outlays. Tax expenditures now result in an annual total revenue loss of about $1 trillion; reducing them could permanently reduce future deficits without increasing marginal tax rates or reducing the rewards for saving, investment, and risk taking. The paper concludes with a discussion of how the high debt to GDP ratio after World War II was reversed and how the last four presidents ended their terms with small primary deficits or primary budget surpluses"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"This paper examines the likely growth of U.S. GDP in the decade beginning in 2010. I analyze the two components of the rise in GDP over this ten year period: (1) the recovery from the substantially depressed level of economic activity at the start of the decade; and (2) the rise in potential GDP that will result from the expansion of the labor force, the growth of the capital stock, and the increase of multifactor productivity. I calculate a likely growth rate of 2.6 percent a year.Not all of that extra output will remain in the United States. If the trade deficit is reduced by three percent of GDP, the rise in exports and decline in imports will reduce output available for U.S. consumption and investment by about 0.3 percent a year.The effect of a decline of the dollar could be equally important. If the real trade-weighted value of the dollar declines by 25 percent over the decade and the full effect of that dollar decline is reflected in the prices of imports, the increased cost of imports would reduce the the growth of our real incomes by about 0.4 percent a year.These two international effects would leave the net growth of real goods and services available for US consumption and investment -- both domestically produced and imported -- at 1.9 percent a year. That is the same as the average growth during the past decade"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"The explosion in the 21st century of terrorist activities by Islamic radicals in the United States, Europe and Asia requires reforming the institutions for domestic counterterrorism (CT) and new international relations among individual national CT organizations. This paper discusses the institutional reforms for CT in the United States, focusing particularly on the changes in the FBI. These changes are compared with the way that the British CT activities of the MI5 and MI6 have evolved in response to terrorism in Britain. The paper also discusses the reasons why there is strong cooperation among the CT activities of all the major governments and with the United States in particular, even when those governments do not agree about military cooperation or about the use of economic sanctions"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"This paper discusses how the effects of taxes on economic behavior are important for revenue estimation, for calculating efficiency effects, and for understanding short-term macroeconomoic consequences. The primary focus is on taxes on labor income but some attention is given to taxes on income from saving. Specific calculations illustrate the importance of behavioral responses for accurate calculation of the revenue effects and deadweight losses of tax changes"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"The large trade and current account deficits of the United States cannot continue indefinitely because doing so would constitute a permanent gift to the U.S. economy. The process that will cause this gift to shrink and that will eventually cause it to reverse is a fall in the dollar. The dollar will fall as private investors and governments become unwilling to accept the risk of increasing amounts of dollars in their portfolios, especially in a context in which they realize that the dollar must fall to reduce the trade imbalance. Although a more competitive dollar is the mechanism that will cause the U.S. trade deficit to decline, the fundamental requirement for a lower trade deficit is an increase in the U.S. national saving rate. So a rise will be driven by higher household savings of the coming years as the two primary forces that depressed savings in recent years are reversed: the exceptionally rapid rise in household wealth and the high level of mortgage refinancing with equity withdrawal"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

"The level of productivity doubled in the U.S. nonfarm business sector between 1970 and 2006. Wages, or more accurately total compensation per hour, increased at approximately the same annual rate during that period if nominal compensation is adjusted for inflation in the same way as the nominal output measure that is used to calculate productivity. Total employee compensation as a share of national income was 66 percent of national income in 1970 and 64 percent in 2006. This measure of the labor compensation share has been remarkably stable since the 1970s. It rose from an average of 62 percent in the decade of the 1960s to 66 percent in the decades of the 1970s and 1980s and then declined to 65 percent in the decade of the 1990s where it has again been from 2000 until the most recent quarter"--National Bureau of Economic Research web site

The level of the dollar is part of a complex general equilibrium system. Nevertheless, it is helpful to recognize that the high level of the dollar is necessary to generate the current account deficit equal to the difference between national saving and investment. Understanding the high level of the dollar therefore requires understanding the reasons for the low level of national saving in the United States. Reducing the large current account deficit will require both a higher rate of national saving and a more competitive dollar. Although the necessary decline in the real value of the dollar can in theory occur without a decline in the dollar's nominal value, the implied magnitude of the fall in the domestic price level is implausible. A decline of the real value of the dollar that is large enough to reduce the current account deficit significantly requires a significant decline in the nominal value of the dollar.