June 23, 2018
Other Voices Latest News | Poll Questions | Border Patrol | Energy Scam | Toxic Moths

Sensible steps on tax reform

Senator Max Baucus, D-Mont. (left), the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Senator Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the co-chair, confer during testimony in Washington May 21, 2013.


In 1986, Congress overhauled the federal tax code, purging it of various exemptions, deductions and credits and using the savings to reduce marginal rates on both individuals and firms. It was a major victory for governmental simplicity, fairness and efficiency — which Congresses and presidents of both parties then proceeded to undo by tweaking the tax code 15,000 times over the last quarter-century. Special breaks, large and small, have crept back into the code, like crabgrass invading a freshly weeded lawn.

Individual and corporate “tax expenditures” cost about $1 trillion in fiscal 2011, according to the Treasury Department. In the individual code, most of the benefits accrued to people who are already relatively well-off; the top fifth of income earners reap more than half of the proceeds from the 10 largest tax expenditures, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

For the past three years, however, the Senate Finance Committee, under Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., has been burrowing away at this issue, poring over the code in hearings and private meetings, with the goal of writing the first major tax-reform bill since 1986 before the 113th Congress ends — and Baucus retires — next year.

The smart money is betting that this effort will founder amid the usual polarization, like so many other grand plans in today’s Washington. But Baucus is a crafty legislator, and the ranking Republican on his committee, Orrin Hatch of Utah, is on board with the effort.

The two of them have just come up with a device that could force their fellow senators to get with the program. In a letter to their colleagues on Thursday, Messrs. Baucus and Hatch asked each for a list of the tax breaks he or she would keep , as if the current code were a blank slate and not the jungle of wasteful and inequitable law that it is.

In other words, they’re shifting the burden of proof to those who would justify continuing tax expenditures, rather than those who would repeal them. Baucus and Hatch even included a handy chart showing how much individual marginal rates would have to be increased to pay for $2 trillion worth of tax expenditures over 10 years. The Post’s Lori Montgomery reports that this clever maneuver triggered a “frenzy” among “anxious” lobbyists. Good.

The Washington Post (June 30)

Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

You may also like