CONNECT    

Michael B. Keegan

Michael B. Keegan

GET UPDATES FROM Michael B. Keegan

Why I Support "The Ronald Reagan Tax Reform Act of 2011"

Posted: 06/ 7/11 10:00 AM ET

Ten years ago today, the wealthiest Americans caught a multi-billion dollar break from their benefactor, then-president George W. Bush. In the decade since, through two wars, natural disasters, a plummeting economy and a soaring debt, the wealthiest Americans have gotten to keep those Bush tax cuts. Happy birthday, everybody!

As the Republican Party now lines itself up behind Rep. Paul Ryan on his mission to cut the resulting deficit on the backs of working people and the elderly, I find myself surprisingly and strangely nostalgic for another GOP hero, whose legacy, at least when it comes to taxes, has become woefully misunderstood. Can it be that I find myself nostalgic for Ronald Reagan?!

Of course, I'm not alone in my nostalgia. I'm joined by the entire Republican leadership in this, but I think our reasons may be quite a bit different. In the spirit of unity, I'd like to suggest to Republicans in Congress that they look closely at the record of their favorite 20th century hero and adopt yet another policy named after the Gipper. I'm no fan of much of President Reagan's legacy, but in a new spirit of bipartisanship, and historical accuracy, I'd like to present Republicans in Congress with an idea: the Ronald Reagan Tax Reform Act of 2011.

A key element of the Reagan lore believed by today's GOP is that Reagan's embrace of "trickle-down economics" is what caused any and all economic growth since the 1980s. In fact, after Reagan implemented his initial tax-slashing plan in 1981, the federal budget deficit started to rapidly balloon. Reagan and his economic advisers were forced to scramble and raised corporate taxes to calm the deficit expansion and stop the economy from spiraling downward. Between 1982 and 1984, Reagan implemented four tax hikes. In 1986, his Tax Reform Act imposed the largest corporate tax increase in U.S. history. The GDP growth and higher tax revenues enjoyed in the later years of the Reagan presidency were in part because of his willingness to compromise on his early supply-side idolatry.

The corporate tax increases that Reagan implemented -- under the more palatable guise of "tax reform" -- bear another lesson for Republicans. The vast majority of the current Republican Congress has signed on to a pledge peddled by anti-tax purist Grover Norquist, which beholds them to not raise any income taxes by any amount under any circumstances, or to bring in new revenue by closing loopholes. This pledge, which Rep. Ryan's budget loyally adheres to, in effect freezes tax policy in time -- preserving not only Bush's massive and supposedly temporary tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, but also a vast mishmash of tax breaks and loopholes for specific industries won by well-funded lobbyists.

The problem has become so great that many giant American corporations have become so adept at exploiting loopholes in the tax code that they paid no federal income taxes at all last year -- if Republicans in Congress follow their pledge to Norquist, they won't be able to close a single one of the loopholes that are allowing corporations to avoid paying their fair share.

Even Reagan recognized the difference between just plain raising taxes and simplifying the tax code to cut out loopholes that subsidize corporations. In 1984, he arranged to bring in $50 billion over three years, mainly by closing these loopholes. His 1986 reform act not only included $120 billion in tax hikes for corporations over five years, it also closed $300 billion worth of corporate loopholes.

These kinds of tax simplification solutions are available for Congress if they want them. As I wrote in April, nixing Bush's tax cut's for the wealthiest Americans would help the country cut roughly $65 billion off the deficit in this year alone. Closing loopholes that allow corporations to shelter their income in foreign banks would bring in $6.9 billion. Eliminating the massive tax breaks now enjoyed by oil and gas companies would yield $2.6 billion to help pay the nation's bills.

But before Republicans in Congress change their math, they have to change their rhetoric -- and embrace the reality of the economic situation they face and the one that they'd like to think they're copying. In 1986, during the signing ceremony for the Tax Reform Act, Reagan explained that "vanishing loopholes and a minimum tax will mean that everybody and every corporation pay their fair share."

It's time for the GOP to take a page from their hero's playbook. If they do so, they might be able to find some allies that they never thought possible. It's time for "everybody and every corporation to pay their fair share." We can all get along. Sign me up for "The Reagan Tax Reform Act of 2011."

 

Follow Michael B. Keegan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/peoplefor

Ten years ago today, the wealthiest Americans caught a multi-billion dollar break from their benefactor, then-president George W. Bush. In the decade since, through two wars, natural disasters, a plum...
Ten years ago today, the wealthiest Americans caught a multi-billion dollar break from their benefactor, then-president George W. Bush. In the decade since, through two wars, natural disasters, a plum...
 
  • Comments
  • 251
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Login or connect with: 
More Login Options
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »   (7 total)
photo
DismayedRepub
300km/s Not just common sense, it’s the law
6 hours ago (3:17 PM)
I think it is becoming painfully clear that taxes will have to be raised for everyone including the 53% of the public that do not pay taxes. Congress must stop spending every dime it can beg, borrow or steal and use those tax receipts to pay down the debt including restoring the SS Trust Fund.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AsISaid
30 minutes ago (8:31 PM)
Obviously, you want everyone to pay taxes. I suppose that sounds fair. Except that low income earners and tax payers have less discretion­ary income to pump into the economy.

It would seem that low and moderate income taxpayers are the ones that should retain more of their earnings to spend into the economy, not less.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AsISaid
10 hours ago (10:41 AM)
David Stockman - Reagan's budget director - has debunked Reaganomic­s.

George Bush Sr. called Reaganomic­s 'voodoo economics'­.

'Trickle-d­own' economics has proven to not work.

Yet, we continue to beat the same old dead horse...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tinyrainbows
10 hours ago (11:22 AM)
It worked for JFK.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AsISaid
35 minutes ago (8:26 PM)
What worked for JFK?

A tax cut? Is that what you're talking about?

I thought you might have cited the tax increases Reagan produced a number of times.

You do realize, don't you, that tax rates in this country right now are the lowest since like 1950? Where are the jobs? All the wealth is flowing to the top 1% - so where are the jobs they are supposed to create under your 'trickle down' theory?

It doesn't work, plain and simple. Study the facts, not the fantasy...­.
3 minutes ago (8:59 PM)
Flat tax 10% across the board, no deductions for individual­s, 25% for businesses with no deductions except for new equipment.

Do away with the IRS, pay at the bank.

Problem solved
12 hours ago (8:50 AM)
The Ronald Reagan Tax Reform of 2011 continued the creation of a duel class system in America. The wealthy 5% and all rest.

Feed the wealthy and starve the rest.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Frank
Hi I'm me...and dont forget it..!!!
14 hours ago (6:51 AM)
nothing of substance will change...o­h there will be some minor tweaks here and there mostly to programs that people with little political power use and of course there will be some bones thrown in for good measure...­which of course the big shots who have to pay the bones will find some loophole to wiggle their way out of
17 hours ago (4:31 AM)
By purchasing them, I help the family that owns the dollar store, I help my family (because we have more money to spend on other things) and I help the worker in some foreign country who manufactur­­es them (I assume China). If these TOMS glasses were made in America, and helped an American family have a job, I might think of them in a better light. But since they are probably made in China as well, I think I'll http://www­.schuhembt­inde.com/ stick with my strategy and help a couple of American families (mine and the store owners' - he's Indian, but he lives and spend his income here). jojobinx, Go to the TOMS website and see the looks on the faces of children who have never had shoes and have just been given a pair of TOMS. A lot of these kids couldn't go to school because they had to wear shoes to school and had no shoes to wear. I will help a kid out any day of the week, whether they are in this country or another.
19 hours ago (2:17 AM)
Mr. Keegan:

You are right, Reagan did raise taxes, only after cutting them. However, during the cuts and raises, normalized tax revenue as a percentage of GDP stayed fairly constant, about 18%, meaning that the deficits created under Reagan and continued into today is not something caused by the tax cuts and it is not something that can be solved with tax increases. Our deficits exist because of spending: some of it on wasteful wars and other ridiculous discretion­ary spending, but most of it due to runaway entitlemen­t spending that is a ruinous autopilot trajectory­. Tax increases are not the answer, entitlemen­t reform is.

You do make a good point that 51% of Americans paid no federal income tax last year, indicating that they are not paying their fair share for government services. We need to broaden the tax base and start making these freeloader­s pay. It is time that they stop leeching off the middle class and the wealthy.

Finally, I am not sure why you are so down on Bush and his tax cuts. Clinton reduced capital gains taxes by 40%, which is the main method that the wealthy get their income, whereas Bush decreased CGT by 25%. Not to mention that Clinton, repealed Class-Stea­gall, reduced welfare, and signed NAFTA. Maybe the instead of taking a page out of the Grippers book, the GOP should take a page out of Clinton’s book. The economy was so good then, no?

Kai
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Robert Frank
Hi I'm me...and dont forget it..!!!
14 hours ago (6:57 AM)
why do some people say "entitleme­nt programs are the cause?" what about two unfunded wars, hundreds of foreign military bases, unchecked spending at the pentagon, tax cuts to people who NEVER needed them (bush's gift to rich people) prescripti­on medicine plan UNPAID for...? I could go on and on and on...what does social security have to do with anything? PEOPLE PAY INTO IT THEIR ENTIRE LIVES and they ARE entitled to get something from it back...why does poor people's health care (medicare) have to pay for our financial problems? (I understand fraud and abuse must be stopped)
11 hours ago (10:06 AM)
Hey Kai-HK... You a wrong. The current deficit does not exist mostly because of runaway entitlemen­t spending. Rather, Medicare is solvent for several years and SC is good for at least a couple of decades. The current debt is primarily because of unpaid for Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars.
19 hours ago (1:55 AM)
10 Things Conservati­ves Don’t Want You To Know About Ronald Reagan

http://thi­nkprogress­.org/polit­ics/2011/0­2/05/14228­8/reagan-c­entennial/
20 hours ago (1:09 AM)
If rich people and successful businesses want continued and even greater prosperity­, then they should be demanding the government tax them more, and the poor and middle class less. The well-being­, production and spending of the general population is the fuel that powers the engine of the economy. The healthier the citizenry, the better off everyone at the top is. Any gains made by the rich and corporatio­ns at the expense of the public are short-live­d. When there are economic correction­s in certain sectors, and depression­s in general, the self interest of particular businesses will cause them to be conservati­ve, limit expenses, reduce labor. Which is why it's essential they share a collective burden of infusing money, via training, social safety, infrastruc­ture improvemen­ts and low taxes, into the general populace using the federal government­.

Yes, government can use the tax code to create incentives for certain valued economic activity, like energy research. But most loopholes currently in the code are errors, or have lost their original purpose. The Republican­s and Democrats should agree to close the loopholes as one united public action.

Keep in mind how all economic wealth is generated, by the labor of citizens, and their spending for their needs. High unemployme­nt means losing the productive labor of millions of people, and their spending to provide for their food, housing, transporta­tion, etc. Any economic plan needs to keep this fundamenta­l in mind and fuel the engine that drives our economy, the labor and consumptio­n of citizens.
20 hours ago (12:41 AM)
364 economists signed an open letter criticisin­g Britain's 1981 Budget. The budget raised taxes and cut spending in the middle of a recession, violating all Keynesian principles­. The 364 economists­, who also including Willem Buiter, now Citigroup'­s chief economist, denounced the plan as having "no basis in economic theory". The 364 economists were wrong. The British economy rebounded; strict controls on public spending were in place for years.

http://www­.economist­.com/blogs­/buttonwoo­d/2010/02/­deficits_c­rucial_arg­ument
Viper
Retired. Degrees in Chemistry, mathematics, accoun
23 hours ago (10:24 PM)
What, Reagan passed a jobs prorgam along with Huge Miltitary jobs prorgam...

I thought the government cant create jobs... just cut taxes and regulation­s(and then have bubbles bust,stock markets crash and bailouts).

And he increased Soc Sec taxes and medicare taxes... also... then the surpluses they generated were used to offset his deficts tyhat wnet through the roof and now repugs towant to pay back those surpluses thye used up under regana and Bush with tax cust that failed.


And I did vote for him.... At least when his idealogy failed, he moved on to correcting problems, instead of proposing doing more of the same that had failed.

Regards
23 hours ago (10:24 PM)
The only books Republican­s like are colouring books.
photo
Euglena Vorticella
RUN, SARAH, RUN!
19 hours ago (2:12 AM)
becausew educated voters are much harder to trick.....­..........­.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DungBeetle
It's a family name
23 hours ago (10:11 PM)
Shamefully you really can't even call them the Bush tax cuts anymore. Now they are the Obama tax cuts.
photo
Euglena Vorticella
RUN, SARAH, RUN!
19 hours ago (2:13 AM)
no they are the repubuffon­s hostage induced tax cuts approved by a pres without the will to fight.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DungBeetle
It's a family name
6 hours ago (2:37 PM)
...like I said...
23 hours ago (10:11 PM)
There is no Reagan tax reform act of 2011. Reagan is dead! It is the Tax Reform act of Paul Ryan. Reagan's informatio­n: Ronald Reagan was a devout self-decla­red Social conservati­ve, widely seen as a symbol of American conservati­sm. In an interview, he said "I believe the very heart and soul of conservati­sm is libertaria­nism." He believed in supply side economics - that failed. Reagan promoted the proposed tax cuts as potentiall­y stimulatin­g the economy enough to expand the tax base - it didn't, another failure. During Reagan's presidency­, federal income tax rates were lowered significan­tly with the signing of the bipartisan Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 which lowered the top marginal tax bracket from 70% to 50% and the lowest bracket from 14% to 11%. Conversely­, Congress passed and Reagan signed into law tax increases of some nature in every year from 1981 to 1987. Tax bracket increase to the lower and middle class while relieving the upper 2%-ers of tax liabilitie­s. Federal Income Tax receipts increased from 1980 to 1989, rising from $308.7 Billion to $549.0 Billion mostly from the lower and middle class. Reagan's policies proposed that economic growth would occur when marginal tax rates were low enough to spur investment­. It didn't - It failed! Critics labeled this "trickle-d­own economics"­. It failed! Reagan cut the budgets of non-milita­ry programs, Medicaid, food stamps, federal education programs and the EPA. Reagan was Conservati­ve?
3 hours ago (6:26 PM)
Not one single dime of today's debt has anything to do with either SS or Medicaire. NOT ONE DIME,

If we would let the tax cuts for the wealthy expire, and get rid of two wars that are not funded the majority of the current deficit would disappear virtually overnight.

I do agree on one thing however--I believe that even if it is largely symbolic every single American should pay some kind of federal tax. All American's need to feel they are participat­ing in supporting their country.

Of course in states like mine (Texas) the taxes from the state level are incredibly regressive (49th of 50th most regressive­). People earning $11,000 and under pay nearly 13% of their income in state taxes. People earning in the top 20% pay on average 3%. This is what happens when most taxes are raised by sales tax and there is no state income tax.

When saying that 50% of he country pays no taxes you are not taking into account local and state taxes. The total tax burden in this country has become incredibly regressive­. The 15% tax rate on capital gains is one of the reasons so many rich people pay so much less in taxes than middle class and poor (less % that is).
23 hours ago (10:09 PM)
Tax the rich.
photo
Just19Percent
All Rights Reserved...
20 hours ago (12:56 AM)
Steal from your more productive neighbors!

I'm afraid that you are just reinforcin­g an already solid ste...
13 hours ago (7:59 AM)
The trick of successful propaganda is that it creates the illusion that by returning excess wealth to the common weal, you are hurting your chance to accumulate excess wealth. You have no such chance, and as Supreme Court Justice Brandeis said, you can have the accumulati­on of great wealth or you can have democracy - you cannot have both. Every society in human history that has attempted to preserve both the privilege of the rich and the rights of the people has been eventually taken over by the rich, to the impoverish­ment of all. If this be socialism, make the most of it...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AsISaid
10 hours ago (10:37 AM)
Sorry, but don't confuse wealth with productivi­ty. Wealth is just the accumulati­on of money.

Productivi­ty comes from the workers.

Where do you think the wealthy get their money? From the working class who create demand.

Many of the wealthy are so because they make money off of money. Explain how creating paper wealth is productive­, please?
2 hours ago (6:33 PM)
The wealthy have been stealing from the American neighbors en masse for three decades now.

If you think the rich have been contributi­ng to the welfare of the US you haven't been paying attention. It's been a hell of a long time since they have done anything except rape their own country and their own neigbhors.

Warren Buffett said it best: There IS class warfare. My side started it and my side is winning.

Example (of hundreds probably thousands)­: United and Continenta­l airlines were just merged by a group of these "productiv­e neighbors.­" The result? (once again) Layoffs (still more) in both companies and less competitio­n in the airline industry It's time we point out that the last time the "job creating" class actually created jobs was decades ago.

When they are actually willing to create jobs instead of destroy them I will actually be ready to support them.
photo
Euglena Vorticella
RUN, SARAH, RUN!
19 hours ago (2:14 AM)
but then they will have to resort to eating "Caviar Helper!"
Viper
Retired. Degrees in Chemistry, mathematics, accoun
23 hours ago (10:06 PM)
China has import Tarrifs of 25%, which pay for its entire military expense.. We have import tarrifs of 2%.

Regards