► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Laffer Curve’

Prof Laffer Returns!

by coldwarrior ( 98 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, taxation at October 16th, 2013 - 4:58 pm

Professor Laffer returns, and the Taxed Enough Already Party cheers!

 

 

‘Laffer Curve’ Creator Back in the Tax Game

Image: 'Laffer Curve' Creator Back in the Tax Game

Dr. Arthur Laffer, Economist and professor at University of Southern California, with “Laffer Curve” on blackboard, Feb. 23, 1981.

Tuesday, 15 Oct 2013 03:14 PM

By Lisa Barron

Four decades after economist Arthur Laffer drew his now-famous “Laffer curve” on the back of a napkin to show how tax cuts would create an economic boom, he is back in the limelight.

In the past couple of years, Laffer, whose curve inspired Reaganomics, has advised about a dozen GOP governors looking for ways to cut tax rates in their states, Politico reports.

“Laffer is certainly experiencing a renaissance in his popularity,” Jonathan Williams of the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council told the publication. “He’s just as effective today as he was 30 years ago.”

Texas Governor Rick Perry is one of Laffer’s biggest fans attributing his state’s economic success to Laffer’s formula. Speaking at the launch of the Laffer Center for Supply-Side Economics in Austin in 2011, Perry said, “By sticking to the principles Dr. Laffer has advocated, like low taxes. Texas has become a beacon for employers fleeing the job-crushing atmosphere that has taken hold in other states.”

Laffer also helped Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback push through his tax reform plans, joining the governor in several public appearances touting the positive impact of lower taxes.

Other Laffer devotees reportedly include Gov. Bill Haslam of Tennessee, Gov. Matt Mead of Wyoming, and Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina.

Laffer explained his theories to Politico in Nashville recently, saying, “If you raise taxes … some people may actually leave your state. Some people … leave the labor force and stay home. Others may choose to not employ people, so unemployment rates go higher.”

Critics still decry his theories, though, on websites such as Economist’s View, saying they don’t hold up in practice.

But Laffer continues to have the ear of leading GOP politicians. “Art Laffer is one of the most influential economists in the business,” Jared Bernstein, Vice President Joe Biden’s former chief economist, told Politico.

“If you ask a lot of people how relevant he is today, they’d say: ‘He’s an ’80s story.’ They’re wrong,” he said.

Raising the tax rate lowers the revenue.

by coldwarrior ( 4 Comments › )
Filed under Academia, Economy, saturday lecture series, Special Report, taxation, UK at February 23rd, 2012 - 8:43 am

It’s called the Laffer Curve, non policy wonks/economists can read here as background. Yet again Professor Laffer has been proven right. There is an optimal level of taxation. Raise taxes too much and you get less of that activity, lower them too much and you wont collect enough money. This is the basis of Reaganomics and Supply Side policy. It works every time it is tried becasue when an activity is taxed, that activity is reduced because people will avoid it to avoid the tax if the tax is too high. What is too high? Well, that is up to the econometricians to work out and is well beyond the scope of this Special Report. Raising taxes results in less of the activity being done that is now taxed. It warps the economy and makes people move their money away from paying the tax.

 

From Wiki, it is accurate: In economics, the Laffer curve is a theoretical representation of the relationship between government revenue raised by taxation and all possible rates of taxation. It is used to illustrate the concept of taxable income elasticity – that taxable income will change in response to changes in the rate of taxation. The Laffer curve postulates that no tax revenue will be raised at the extreme tax rates of 0% and 100%. If both a 0% and 100% rate of taxation generate no revenue, but some intermediate tax rate generates some tax revenue, it follows from the extreme value theorem that there must exist at least one rate where tax revenue would be a non-zero maximum. The Laffer curve is typically represented as a graph which starts at 0% tax with zero revenue, rises to a maximum rate of revenue at an intermediate rate of taxation, and then falls again to zero revenue at a 100% tax rate.[citation needed]

One potential result of the Laffer curve is that increasing tax rates beyond a certain point will be counterproductive for raising further tax revenue. A hypothetical Laffer curve for any given economy can only be estimated and such estimates are controversial. The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics reports that estimates of revenue-maximizing tax rates have varied widely, with a mid-range of around 70%.[3]

The Laffer curve is associated with supply-side economics, where its use in debates over rates of taxation has also been controversial. The Laffer curve was coined by journalist Jude Wanniski in the 1970s, with Wanniski naming the curve after an idea sketched on a napkin in a restaurant by Arthur Laffer. Laffer later pointed out that the concept was not original, noting similar ideas in the writings of both 14th century Muslim philosopherIbn Khaldun (who discussed the idea in his 1377 Muqaddimah) and John Maynard Keynes.[1] Numerous other historical precedents also exist.

Ok, now that I have bored you to tears with Economic jargon while getting my daily dose of Wonkism, let’s proceed. In England, the Crown raised the tax to 50% on the wealthy. Well, guess what happened? The government assumed they would collect billions more in tax, Nope…the tax revenue has fallen. The treasury insisted that this tax would bring in £2.5billion additional pounds, it actually has caused the treasury to take in £500million less than last year:

 

The controversial 50p (%) tax band is ‘not working’ and revenues have fallen since it was introduced, new figures suggest.

They appear to show the wealthy are finding ways to dodge the tax band levied on incomes of more than £150,000.

In January, the tax take from those who do self-assessment tax returns collapsed by more than £500million, compared with the same month in 2011. They fell from £10.86billion to £10.35billion.

The figures have been eagerly awaited by George Osborne as they provide the first evidence of the usefulness of the tax rate.

This is because January 31 was the deadline for all self-assessment forms to be filed for 2010-2011, the first full tax year since it was introduced.

The Centre for Economics and Business Reseach said it provided evidence that the 50p tax rate may be starting to hit receipts.

The figures will add to pressure on the Coalition to drop the levy amid fears it is forcing entrepreneurs to relocate abroad.

Separate figures, also published yesterday, provided more evidence that wealthy people are taking steps to avoid paying the tax.

In April 2010, it warned the next tax rate would raise ‘little or no tax’ despite the Treasury’s insisted it would be worth up to £2.5billion a year.
As the latest figures show, it warned there would be many ‘obvious tax planning opportunities’ with accountants also devising loopholes to avoid it.

Yesterday a Treasury source said the Chancellor has always made clear the 50p tax rate is ‘temporary’. HMRC is currently doing an assessment of how much revenue it actually raises.

Art Laffer endorses Newt Gingrich

by Phantom Ace ( 107 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Elections 2012, Energy, Progressives, Republican Party at December 29th, 2011 - 8:30 am

One of the architects of the 1980’s Reagan boom has made an endorsement. Art Laffer, who invented the Laffer curve (which explains how tax rates increase or decrease revenue), has come out in support of Newt Gingrich. This gives Newt a huge boost among Economic Conservatives at a time he’s under assault from the Rockefeller Progressive Wing of the GOP and the Ron Paul cult. He praises Newt’s economic and fiscal stewardship during hos Speaker-ship. The truth is that the Newt Gingrich Congress was the most economically and fiscally Conservative congress since the 1920’s. Laffer gives Newt his blessing.

Arthur Laffer, the architect of Ronald Reagan’s economic plan, announced today that he is endorsing Newt Gingrich for president.

“Newt has the best plan for jobs and economic growth of any candidate in the field,” said Laffer, the renowned economist who is the father of The Laffer Curve and supply-side economics.

“Like Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts and pro-growth policies, Newt’s low individual and corporate tax rates, deregulation. and strong dollar monetary policies will create a boom of new investment and economic growth leading to the creation of tens of millions of new jobs over the next decade,” Laffer declared. “Plus, Newt’s record of helping Ronald Reagan pass the Kemp Roth tax cuts and enacting the largest capital gains tax cut in history as speaker of the House shows he can get this plan passed and put it into action.”

Read the rest: Economist Laffer Endorses Gingrich

What amzes me is that except for Ronald Reagan, the GOP has not nominated an Economic/Fiscal Conservative. Every GOP candidate has been been an economic and fiscal Progressive. For Economic/Fiscal Conservatives Art Laffer is practically a Saint. He help engineer one of the greatest booms in American history. The Reagan boom help laid the foundation for the great economic growth and prosperity that lasted until 2000. We really need something approaching that today.

Another notable Economist endorsing Newt Gingrich is Thomas Sowell.

There are no guarantees, no matter whom the Republicans vote for in the primaries. Why not vote for the candidate who has shown the best track record of accomplishments, both in office and in the debates? That is Newt Gingrich. With all his shortcomings, his record shows that he knows how to get the job done in Washington.

Mitt Romney, who the Establishment is pushing at costs, is a Progressive. He supports Occupy Wall Street and a Euro-Socialist VAT tax. If he is the nominee, 2012 will be the 7th Presidential election in which Economic and Fiscal Conservatives are not represented. We need to stop that, for the sake of our country.