Jump to content

Hauser's law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gnomatic (talk | contribs) at 08:35, 28 April 2011 (Undid revision 426330778 by Lawrencekhoo (talk)you are are right. it's the office of management and budget. the numbers past numbers are clearly observed.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In economics, Hauser's Law is the observation that, in the United States, federal tax revenues since World War II have always been approximately equal to 19.5% of GDP, regardless of wide fluctuations in the marginal tax rate.[1]

Background

From fiscal year 1946 to fiscal year 2007, federal tax receipts as a percentage of gross domestic product averaged 17.9%, with a range of 14.4% to 20.9%.[2]

History of Hauser's Law

Total tax revenues as a percentage of GDP for the U.S. in comparison to the OECD and the EU 15.
U.S. federal government tax receipts as a percentage of GDP from 1945 to 2015 (note that 2010 to 2015 data are estimated)

The proposition was first put forward in 1993 by William Kurt Hauser, a San Francisco investment economist, who wrote, "No matter what the tax rates have been, in postwar America tax revenues have remained at about 19.5% of GDP."[3]

Hauser cited Arthur Laffer's concept of the Laffer curve in his original article. While the two concepts are similar, Hauser's Law was put forward as an empirical observation whereas the Laffer curve was thought of theoretically.[4]

In a May 20, 2008 editorial by David Ranson, the Wall St. Journal published a graph showing that even though the top marginal tax rate of federal income tax had varied between a low of 28% to a high of 91%, between 1950 and 2007, federal tax revenues had indeed constantly remained at about 19.5% of GDP.[5] The editorial went on to say, "The economics of taxation will be moribund until economists accept and explain Hauser's Law. For progress to be made, they will have to face up to it, reconcile it with other facts, and incorporate it within the body of accepted knowledge."[4]

However, 2009 tax collections, at 15% of GDP, were the lowest level of the past 50 years and 4.5 percentage points lower than Hauser's Law suggests.[6] The Heritage Foundation has stated that the recent world economic recession pushed receipts to a level significantly below the historical average.[7]

Commentary

Zubin Jelveh, writing for Portfolio.com, criticized the Wall Street Journal editorial for failing to adequately separate tax revenues from individuals from other types of tax revenues, such as corporate tax revenues and revenues from social insurance programs like Social Security. Jelveh argued that when these are separated, the percentage of GDP from tax revenues on individuals has been relatively stable but has increased somewhat, the percentage from corporate tax revenues has declined dramatically, and the percentage from tax revenues of social insurance programs has increased significantly. Jelveh's critique is not aimed at Hauser's Law itself, but at editorialist David Ranson's assertion that the Law supports supply-side assertions that selectively raising taxes on the rich will be counter-productive.[8]

Forbes.com columnist Daniel J. Mitchell has argued that Hauser's Law has proven true due to the fact that the U.S. does not have a national sales tax and instead collects taxes in a federalist system, in contrast to many other Western nations. He also stated that the U.S. has an inherently more progressive system as well. Thus, he concluded that the Law represents a socio-political policy trend rather than a true economic law and that the trend could change rapidly if value-added taxes are imposed at the federal level.[9]

Journalist Jonathan Chait has written in The New Republic that "swings are fairly dramatic" through U.S. history for tax receipts as a percent of GDP. He stated that the George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations received "massive" extra revenues as the result of tax increases while the George W. Bush administration tax cuts lead to a "massive" drop in revenues. He labeled the idea of static, flat revenues as a "scam".[10]

See also

References

  1. ^ Taxation and Economic Performance by W Kurt Hauser
  2. ^ 2009 U.S. Government Budget documents 2009 US Budget Documents.
  3. ^ W. Kurt Hauser, "The Tax and Revenue Equation," The Wall Street Journal, March 25, 1993. Reprinted in: W. Kurt Hauser, Taxation and Economic Performance (Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1996), pages 13-16.
  4. ^ a b You Can't Soak the Rich, Wall St. Journal, May 20, 2008.
  5. ^ See also: David Ranson, "The Revenue Limits of Tax and Spend", The Wall Street Journal, May 17, 2010.
  6. ^ CBO-Monthly Budget Review
  7. ^ http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/current-tax-receipts
  8. ^ "Lying With Charts Wsj Edition - Odd Numbers - Portfolio.com". portfolio.com. Retrieved 7 September 2010.
  9. ^ Forbes http://blogs.forbes.com/beltway/2010/05/21/will-hausers-law-protect-us-from-revenue-hungry-politicians/. {{cite news}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  10. ^ Jonathan Chait (November 29, 2010). "Lying Chart Of The Day, Classic Edition". The New Republic. Retrieved December 3, 2010. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

See also

References