消费所得税:一个公平而简单的税制改革计划

Edward J. McCaffery
{"title":"消费所得税:一个公平而简单的税制改革计划","authors":"Edward J. McCaffery","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1183583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"These are slides from a presentation to the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform, given in Washington D.C. on May 11, 2005, updated, with additional slides, and sources at the end. The principal goal is to summarize the mechanics and analytics of a consumed or cash-flow income tax, a progressive spending tax, based on a rearrangement of the Haig Simons identity, Income = Consumption Savings, to generate Consumption = Income - Savings. A consistent spending tax simply features unlimited deductions for savings, along the lines of traditional Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), plus the inclusion of debt as a cash-flow input (the fatal flaw of the 1990s USA Tax Plan was its failure to include debt in the tax base). Progressive rates can be maintained, even increased. The critical point is that such a progressive postpaid consumption, cash-flow or (all equivalently) spending tax is not equivalent to a wage tax, and does not systematically exempt the yield to savings from the tax base. Instead, a consistent progressive spending tax stands between an income tax, which double taxes all savings, and a prepaid consumption, yield exempt, or (all equivalently) wage tax, which never taxes any savings. A consistent progressive spending tax taxes the yield to capital when (but only when) it is used to elevate material lifestyles, not when capital transactions (savings, investing, borrowing) are used to smooth out, in time, a taxpayer's labor market earnings. This is an attractive ideal, as argued at greater length in McCaffery 2005a. It is also noted that such a progressive spending tax is a normatively attractive \"hybrid,\" in that it taxes some but not all savings, and in a principled and appealing way, in contrast to the flawed practice of engrafting consumption tax elements (of either sort, pre or post paid) onto an income tax base. See McCaffery 2005b.","PeriodicalId":374378,"journal":{"name":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Consumed Income Tax: A Fair and Simple Plan for Tax Reform\",\"authors\":\"Edward J. McCaffery\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1183583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"These are slides from a presentation to the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform, given in Washington D.C. on May 11, 2005, updated, with additional slides, and sources at the end. The principal goal is to summarize the mechanics and analytics of a consumed or cash-flow income tax, a progressive spending tax, based on a rearrangement of the Haig Simons identity, Income = Consumption Savings, to generate Consumption = Income - Savings. A consistent spending tax simply features unlimited deductions for savings, along the lines of traditional Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), plus the inclusion of debt as a cash-flow input (the fatal flaw of the 1990s USA Tax Plan was its failure to include debt in the tax base). Progressive rates can be maintained, even increased. The critical point is that such a progressive postpaid consumption, cash-flow or (all equivalently) spending tax is not equivalent to a wage tax, and does not systematically exempt the yield to savings from the tax base. Instead, a consistent progressive spending tax stands between an income tax, which double taxes all savings, and a prepaid consumption, yield exempt, or (all equivalently) wage tax, which never taxes any savings. A consistent progressive spending tax taxes the yield to capital when (but only when) it is used to elevate material lifestyles, not when capital transactions (savings, investing, borrowing) are used to smooth out, in time, a taxpayer's labor market earnings. This is an attractive ideal, as argued at greater length in McCaffery 2005a. It is also noted that such a progressive spending tax is a normatively attractive \\\"hybrid,\\\" in that it taxes some but not all savings, and in a principled and appealing way, in contrast to the flawed practice of engrafting consumption tax elements (of either sort, pre or post paid) onto an income tax base. See McCaffery 2005b.\",\"PeriodicalId\":374378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-07-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1183583\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Economics: Public Law (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1183583","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这些幻灯片摘自2005年5月11日在华盛顿特区向总统税务改革顾问小组所作的报告,已更新,附有额外的幻灯片,最后附有资料来源。主要目标是总结消费或现金流所得税的机制和分析,这是一种累进的支出税,基于黑格西蒙斯身份的重新安排,收入=消费储蓄,以产生消费=收入-储蓄。一致的支出税的特点是,按照传统的个人退休账户(IRAs)的思路,无限制地扣除储蓄,加上将债务作为现金流输入(20世纪90年代美国税收计划的致命缺陷是未能将债务纳入税基)。累进税率可以维持,甚至提高。关键的一点是,这种累进的后付消费税、现金流税或(所有这些都是等价的)支出税,并不等同于工资税,也不会系统地从税基中免除储蓄收益。相反,一致的累进支出税介于所得税(对所有储蓄双重征税)和预付消费(免税)或(同等)工资税(从不对任何储蓄征税)之间。当(但仅当)资本收益被用来提升物质生活方式时,而不是当资本交易(储蓄、投资、借贷)被用来及时平滑纳税人的劳动力市场收入时,持续的累进支出税就会对资本收益征税。这是一个有吸引力的理想,McCaffery在2005年更详细地论证了这一点。文章还指出,这种累进式支出税在规范上是一种有吸引力的“混合税”,因为它对部分储蓄征税,但不是对全部储蓄征税,而且是以一种有原则和有吸引力的方式,与将消费税要素(无论是何种形式,支付前还是支付后)嫁接到所得税基础上的有缺陷的做法形成对比。见McCaffery 2005b。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Consumed Income Tax: A Fair and Simple Plan for Tax Reform
These are slides from a presentation to the President's Advisory Panel on Tax Reform, given in Washington D.C. on May 11, 2005, updated, with additional slides, and sources at the end. The principal goal is to summarize the mechanics and analytics of a consumed or cash-flow income tax, a progressive spending tax, based on a rearrangement of the Haig Simons identity, Income = Consumption Savings, to generate Consumption = Income - Savings. A consistent spending tax simply features unlimited deductions for savings, along the lines of traditional Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs), plus the inclusion of debt as a cash-flow input (the fatal flaw of the 1990s USA Tax Plan was its failure to include debt in the tax base). Progressive rates can be maintained, even increased. The critical point is that such a progressive postpaid consumption, cash-flow or (all equivalently) spending tax is not equivalent to a wage tax, and does not systematically exempt the yield to savings from the tax base. Instead, a consistent progressive spending tax stands between an income tax, which double taxes all savings, and a prepaid consumption, yield exempt, or (all equivalently) wage tax, which never taxes any savings. A consistent progressive spending tax taxes the yield to capital when (but only when) it is used to elevate material lifestyles, not when capital transactions (savings, investing, borrowing) are used to smooth out, in time, a taxpayer's labor market earnings. This is an attractive ideal, as argued at greater length in McCaffery 2005a. It is also noted that such a progressive spending tax is a normatively attractive "hybrid," in that it taxes some but not all savings, and in a principled and appealing way, in contrast to the flawed practice of engrafting consumption tax elements (of either sort, pre or post paid) onto an income tax base. See McCaffery 2005b.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信