That is because the growth costs of capital taxes are overestimated. The old models contendthat capital supply is highly sensitive to changes in tax policy, and that a zero tax rate isneeded to prevent capital from drying up over the long run. This looks unrealistic, theauthors reckon. Most capital-income taxes are paid by working-age adults saving forretirement, who will continue to save despite taxes. Stubborn savers make for a stablesupply of investment capital, limiting the impact of taxes on growth. In the authors estimation, a 36% capital-income tax rate is justified.
之所以发生这种情况,是因为资本税收的增长成本被高估了。旧模型坚持认为资本供给对税收政策的变化极其敏感,因此需要实行零税收以防止长期里资本陷入枯竭。作者们认为,这种说法是不切实际的。大多数资本收入税收是由在职成年人支付,用以积蓄养老,即便收税他们仍然会维持这种储蓄。坚定不移的储蓄者保证了投资性资本的稳定供给,这样就限制了税收对于经济增长带来的影响。在作者的预计中,36%的资本收入税率是公正的。
In a new NBER working paper, Thomas Piketty of the Paris School of Economics andEmmanuel Saez of the University of California at Berkeley poke different holes in theconventional view. The old models, they point out, ignore inheritances. In the real worldinheritances strongly influence income levels, particularly among the very rich. Mr Romneyrecently reinforced this very point by exhorting students to borrow from parents if necessary.Taxes on wages and salaries are inadequate to the task of limiting inequality because theypunish those who owe high incomes to greater ability and effort, rather than to inheritances.Messrs Piketty and Saez also question the scale of the threat to growth. They point to ratiosof capital to output, which are surprisingly stable over time despite tax swings. Their modelfinds that the optimal tax rate on inheritance could be 50-60% or more.
【2015考研英语阅读零和争论】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30