By Veronique de Rugy
Americans often tout the contrast between the bloated,
tax-funded welfare states of the Old World and our leaner, cheaper government.
But the data reveal that the U.S. may be closer to Europe than we think.
Contrary to common belief, the American tax system is
more progressive than those of most industrialized democracies. A 2008 report
by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), titled
“Growing Unequal,” gave two different estimates of the progressivity of tax
systems in 24 industrialized countries. One ranking found that the U.S. has the
most progressive tax structure; in the other Ireland beat America by a nose.
France, which has a notoriously generous welfare state, ranked 10th out of 24
in both of the OECD progressivity indexes.
Other countries have higher tax rates than the U.S.
but manage to be less progressive overall. How can this be? The answer is that
the rate structure alone doesn’t necessarily tell you much about the
progressivity of a country’s tax system. The top rates kick in at much lower
income levels in Europe than in the United States, making E.U. tax codes more
regressive than ours.
In his new book The Benefit and the Burden (Simon & Schuster), economics columnist Bruce Bartlett presents a chart (reproduced here) that shows the top statutory personal income tax rate and an “all-in rate” that includes payroll taxes in selected countries as measured by the OECD. Bartlett calculated that the “average [European] worker making an annual income in the $40,000 to $50,000 range is in the top marginal tax bracket.” A comparison of France and the U.S. is revealing: The top marginal income tax rate in the U.S. is 35 percent and kicks in at $379,000. In France the top rate is 41 percent and kicks in at $96,000.
The U.S. federal government also relies much more
heavily on the income tax, rather than the regressive consumption taxes—such as
the value-added tax (VAT), retail sales taxes, and gasoline and tobacco
taxes—favored by most OECD nations. European countries generally have lighter
taxes on capital as well, another regressive feature.
Finally, the U.S. tax code allows large
deductions and personal exemptions for low-income households, distributing
social benefits in the form of policies such as the child tax credit and the
earned income tax credit. These adjustments increase progressivity.
Judging solely from government outlays, it appears to
be true that the United States has a smaller, more efficient government than
the big welfare states of Europe. Relative to the size of GDP, U.S. government
spending is about 16 percent smaller than the average for the European Union.
But the difference is largely illusory. European governments tend to channel
much less spending through their tax codes than the U.S. does. A November 2011
OECD paper titled “Is the European Welfare State Really More Expensive?”
calculates the share of tax breaks used in OECD countries, separating out those
used primarily for social purposes. The data show not only that the U.S. offers
more tax breaks for social purposes as a share of GDP than any other country
(almost 2 percent as opposed to the 0.5 percent OECD average) but that roughly
two-thirds are tax breaks toward current private benefits (such as encouraging
people to have children). These breaks, which total some $84 billion a year,
are better thought of as welfare spending via the tax code.
Only by measuring tax breaks do you begin to see the
true girth of the American welfare state. The chart at the top right shows
social spending as a share of GDP in major countries, taking into account tax
breaks for social purposes, direct taxation of benefit income, and indirect
taxation of consumption by benefit recipients, all of which consume economic
resources but do not show up in the budget or other measures of government
spending as a share of GDP. According to these OECD data, net social welfare
outlays in the U.S. consumed 27.5 percent of GDP in 2007—above the OECD average
of 23.3 percent.
These social spending figures should not be confused
with the amount a government spends to help poor people. Many tax breaks
disproportionately benefit the middle class, not the least well off. The
same is also true for spending; only 14 percent of the U.S. budget goes to
lower-income Americans.
Which raises the issue of fairness. Basic principles
of fairness tell us that people with roughly the same income should pay roughly
the same amount of taxes. Unfortunately, the amount of taxes Americans pay
today has little to do with how much money they make and more to do with how
many kids they have, whether they rent or own a house, which state they live
in, and whether they make their money in the form of wages or capital gains.
This system is not only unfair; it is also highly inefficient, as the
disparities encourage taxpayers to shift their income and investment around to
reduce their tax burden.
Unlike their European counterparts, American lawmakers
understand that low marginal rates are crucial to promoting economic growth.
But when these lower rates are considered in conjunction with the fact that the
U.S. government looks deceptively smaller on paper than those of many European
countries, it is easy to overestimate our differences with Europe.
In fact, in many respects the U.S. government’s tax
framework may be worse than Europe’s. It disproportionately relies on the top
earners to raise revenue, it exempts a large class of taxpayers from paying any
income taxes, and it conceals spending in the form of tax breaks.
No comments:
Post a Comment