The tax reform plan that Congress comes up with will have to be judged on those merits, not on how it might, possibly, conceivably affect one person many years from now.
Simplifying the code in this way will also make seeing a politicians’ tax returns — Trump’s or anyone else’s — even less important, since tax liability will be a straightforward calculation and there will be far fewer ways to dodge the tax man.
The real story here isn’t Trump’s tax returns. It’s the fact that Democrats don’t want to engage on tax reform because their highly agitated liberal base doesn’t want them to lift a finger to work with Trump on any issue.
Tax reform is vital to restoring economic growth and vitality. No one denies that. If tax reform fails — and the economy suffers as a result — it won’t be Trump’s tax returns that are to blame. It will be shortsighted Democratic lawmakers kowtowing to the extremists in their party.
Using the repatriated revenue for infrastructure spending bothers me, but I can see how it would be a good move politically. Interestingly, those who favor the Republican Tax Blueprint are already arguing that the problem with not doing it all now (which is not possible anyway) is that when Democrats are in power they may undo the smaller set of reforms. That is possible — yet I find this argument interesting because these are the same people who are willing to pay for all the big reforms in the Blueprint with a border-adjustment tax (BAT). That feature, as I have argued before, puts a structure in place that could allow large tax-rate increases, a move to a VAT, and possibly a move to a VAT with a return of the corporate tax like the Europeans have when the Democrats are in power. In other words, the worst that can happen under the Kudlow-Moore-Forbes-Laffer plan is a return to our current system — which is bad but isn’t as awful as what the BAT could devolve into.
☕ Our readers will probably enjoy this from Learn Liberty:
☕ It’s a great point: