Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password
Reason logo

Reason's Annual Webathon is underway! Donate today to see your name here.

Reason is supported by:
A. Tuchman

Donate

Policy

The tax cut cometh

It's not of matter of if, but of how much.

Mike Lynch | 2.1.2001 12:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Put on your party hats. A tax cut is coming.

At least that's the consensus of inside-the-beltway fortunetellers, who peer into the C-SPAN crystal ball and see tax-cutter Bush in the White House, the economy in a holding pattern, Fed chairman and D.C. courtier Alan Greenspan revising his views on taxes and debt reduction, and the Congressional Budget Office predicting record budget surpluses.

"Virtually 100 percent," are the tax-cut odds given by Brookings Institution economist and anti-tax cut crusader William Gale during a live chat on Washingtonpost.com after Greenspan's testimony last week. On Crossfire earlier this week, Bob "God put Republicans on this earth to cut taxes" Novak was as bubbly as 15-year old in love as he grilled Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.), the Senate's newest limousine liberal, on the matter.

Across partisan lines, the fight over taxes isn't whether to cut them. It's over which taxes to cut and how deeply to slash them. Economic conservatives will try to get a Reaganesque across-the-board marginal-rate reduction, with a kid credit thrown in to humor the social conservatives. "Marginal rate reduction are the first and second most important priorities," says Cato Institute Chairman William Niskanen, a former economic advisor to President Reagan. Adds Niskanen: "I would hope that Bush would pair his marginal rate cuts with some cut in the payroll tax that would get him on the road to Social Security reform. If you want to help people at the bottom of the income distribution with tax cuts, you have to cut the payroll tax."

Having lost the battle over whether to have a tax cut, liberals such as House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) and Senate Minority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.) will push for tax rebates for people who don't even pay federal income taxes; think refundable child credits and an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit. Claiming they don't want to risk a return to budget deficits, they will also work to keep any cut as small as possible.

But in economic terms, all tax cuts are not created equal. Economists distinguish between tax cuts that change the incentives facing individuals and those that simply put more money in their pockets. A cut in marginal income tax rates, for example, makes work and investment more rewarding by allowing people to keep more of what they earn. As a result, the story goes, people work and invest more, with positive long-term effects on economic growth. This is the effect economic conservatives invoke when they claim, as Bush and others have in recent weeks, that tax cuts stimulate the economy.

In contrast, a lump-sum tax rebate, such as the child tax credit, has little, if any effect on long-term economic growth, since it doesn't alter the incentives facing individuals to work or invest. Liberals, however, are much more likely than conservative to view short-term stimulus as a solution to any short-term economic slowdown. Seeing the problem as slack consumer spending, they will advocate for policies that put money in the pockets of low- and moderate-income consumers, who tend to spend most, if not all of any windfall from government.

Thus, while Cato's Niskanen calls for a cut in marginal rates as good medicine for the economy, Brookings' Gale thinks targeted payments are in order. "Bush's tax cut would be a great way to fight a recession among high income people ten years from now, but it's not a useful way to fight a recession that would affect all Americans this year," writes Gale in his Washingtonpost.com chat. "A tax cut designed to fight a recession now [needs to] take effect immediately, be small enough not to spook financial markets, and be targeted more heavily than the Bush plan is on low and middle income households."

This dichotomy, of course, is not all encompassing. There are tax policies, such as the marriage penalty, the death tax, and the Earned Income Tax Credit, that don't fit neatly into either category. Still, these two competing worldviews will frame this year's debate over tax cuts and ultimately affect what you get out of it come April 15, 2002.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Right-wing Technological Dread

Mike Lynch is a contributing editor at Reason.

PolicyEconomicsSocial SecurityTaxes
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Show Comments (0)

Webathon 2025: Dec. 2 - Dec. 9 Thanks to 813 donors, we've reached $542,194 of our $400,000 $600,000 goal!

Reason Webathon 2023

Donate Now

Latest

Why I Support Reason with a Tax-Deductible Donation (and You Should Too!)

Nick Gillespie | 12.7.2025 8:00 AM

Trump Thinks a $100,000 Visa Fee Would Make Companies Hire More Americans. It Could Do the Opposite.

Fiona Harrigan | From the January 2026 issue

Virginia's New Blue Trifecta Puts Right-To-Work on the Line

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 12.6.2025 7:00 AM

Ayn Rand Denounced the FCC's 'Public Interest' Censorship More Than 60 Years Ago

Robby Soave | From the January 2026 issue

Review: Progressive Myths Rebuts the Left's Histrionic Takes

Jack Nicastro | From the January 2025 issue

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

HELP EXPAND REASON’S JOURNALISM

Reason is an independent, audience-supported media organization. Your investment helps us reach millions of people every month.

Yes, I’ll invest in Reason’s growth! No thanks
r

I WANT TO FUND FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS

Every dollar I give helps to fund more journalists, more videos, and more amazing stories that celebrate liberty.

Yes! I want to put my money where your mouth is! Not interested
r

SUPPORT HONEST JOURNALISM

So much of the media tries telling you what to think. Support journalism that helps you to think for yourself.

I’ll donate to Reason right now! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK

Push back against misleading media lies and bad ideas. Support Reason’s journalism today.

My donation today will help Reason push back! Not today
r

HELP KEEP MEDIA FREE & FEARLESS

Back journalism committed to transparency, independence, and intellectual honesty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREE MINDS

Support journalism that challenges central planning, big government overreach, and creeping socialism.

Yes, I’ll support Reason today! No thanks
r

PUSH BACK AGAINST SOCIALIST IDEAS

Support journalism that exposes bad economics, failed policies, and threats to open markets.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BAD IDEAS WITH FACTS

Back independent media that examines the real-world consequences of socialist policies.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BAD ECONOMIC IDEAS ARE EVERYWHERE. LET’S FIGHT BACK.

Support journalism that challenges government overreach with rational analysis and clear reasoning.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

JOIN THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM

Support journalism that challenges centralized power and defends individual liberty.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

BACK JOURNALISM THAT PUSHES BACK AGAINST SOCIALISM

Your support helps expose the real-world costs of socialist policy proposals—and highlight better alternatives.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

STAND FOR FREEDOM

Your donation supports the journalism that questions big-government promises and exposes failed ideas.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks
r

FIGHT BACK AGAINST BAD ECONOMICS.

Donate today to fuel reporting that exposes the real costs of heavy-handed government.

Yes, I’ll donate to Reason today! No thanks