LyrArc Article Gist
The mortgage interest deduction mostly benefits wealthier people with larger mortgages who need it least, and who are likely to buy homes regardless of the deduction, say experts. Both the Brookings Institution and other experts such as Moody's chief economist, Mark Zandi, see the deduction as part of the negotiations for deficit reduction. The Brooking Institution's Ted Gayer, says the deduction subsidizes acitvity such as borrowing large amounts of money to buy larger homes which the U.S. should not want to subsidize in the current state of the country's finances. The Simpson-Bowles plan and the Feldstein-Romney plan sought to put unnecessary tax expenditures and deductions on the table for negotiation. The deduction was not part of the last tax reform in 1986 under president Reagan. Zandi says any changes should be phased in over a number of years so that housing sales ar not affected in the current recovery. David Stephens, CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association says any changes should be implemented gradually. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former U.S. president Geroge W. Bush in retirement years spends time in Dallas, with time spent on his passions for painting, golf, and mountain biking. He stays out of the discussion of current issues even though many of these issues relating to fairness in economic policy, immigration, security surveillance and the Middle East go back to the time when he was president. Friends say he has simply left behind concern about legacy and moved on focussing on living. Privately he has expressed concern about the Tea Party and America's isolationist tendencies in world affairs. He is also skeptical about the new Iranian government's offer of negotiations on nuclear policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Rep. Dave Camp, House Ways and Means Committee chairman, representing northern Michigan, says every deduction in the tax code is there because of a reason, and powerful lobbies will oppose any changes. The best he can do is work himself out of this job as he will have to tackle the Democrats on entitlements, the business lobbies on tax loopholes, and other lobbies protecting their preferences in the tax code. He plans to achieve a simpler tax code with lowered rates of 25% for business and earners above six figures, and 10% for everyone else. The approach he is taking is to be revenue neutral when tackling tax reform, in the belief that the economic growth generated from a simpler tax code and lower rates would generate revenues of 18 to 19% of GDP, up from about 16% today. He says the economc cost of not getting this done to get the economy rolling again is so high that he is upbeat that both sides can come together after the election no matter who wins. He is also looking at a repatriation tax of 5% on profits kept by American companies overseas, which would boost revenues for business which could be reinvested in stead of sitting idle. Today the much steeper tax rate on repatriation makes businesses reluctant to bring it back....

LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder points out that the political partisanship that has emerged in 2010 has not served America well, as it has deprived the government of the fiscal policy tools, which would be more effective than the Fed's only mildly effective tool of buying $100 billion a month of medium and long term Treasury debt. The country he says is tied up in partisan knots that prevents the use of the fiscal policy tools, and leaves the Fed with the choice of doing something only nudging the rates on government and private securites a bit (by 30 basis points for Treasury debt and 15 basis points for private securities as an example, not enough for more than a mild impact on corporate spending). The fiscal policy tools are he says of a wide variety and pack a lot more power, and he cites three as examples: offering significant lasting tax breaks for job creation, large enough to produce results (larger and long term than the HIRE program), government hiring directly onto public payrolls and government paying local and state governments for hiring at the local levels, the government offering to compensate states for a cut in the sales tax for a year to stimulate consumer spending. Would'nt this raise the deficit though? Blinder points out that the deficit problem lies in the future. Right now there is so much slack in the economy, that public spending will not crowd out private spending. And with Treasury rates at an all time low, Treasury can finance the larger deficit in the short term. A depreciation of the dollar or inflation, he says, is not a worry, because now there is worry about deflation, and the USA needs a lower dollar to push exports up and rebalance its economy. This does not slight the deficit issue and the culture of poor budgeting among both parties, as Reagan Budget Director David Stockman pointed out in an op-ed piece, but accomodates the real dangers and opportunities of difficult policy choices. This is why he laments the advertising campaign and public relations campaign against the 2009 stimulus bill, and the expected paralysis of fiscal policy from the extremely partisan 2010 midterm elections, and public opinion consumed by fear of deficits. Leaving the Fed with the unenviable choice of using only mildly effective tools. Other experts and columnists mention the risks associated with the Fed's large scale purchase of securities, if this leads to another asset bubble and subsequent collapse, and another bailout needed for financial institutions. Peter Eavis in one column in the WSJ points to the lack of effectiveness of the first round of quantitative easing of $1.7 trillion. And Kelly Evans, in the WSJ, points to the risks of "bad" inflation, if another round of quantitative easing by the Fed leads to increases in the price of commodities such as oil and food (such inflation falling heaviest on lower income households).The US Financial Regulatory Reform bill has received low grades, and recent standards for reserve capital in worldwide banking reforms are stretched out over a long period, leaving fragility in the economic system, if something were to go wrong....

LyrArc Article Gist
Posturing and negotiating between Republicans and Democrats on deficit reduction before the "fiscal cliff" of automatic spending cuts and tax increases on Jan. 1, 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
The skills to navigate different personalities and work patiently on the issues surrounding changes to the U.S. tax system of Rep. Dave Camp (MI), chairman of the U.S House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, will be immensely useful in the effort to make changes to the U.S. tax system. Camp works well with fellow House Republican leaders Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, and his Democratic counterpart in the U.S. Senate Max Baucus. Camp is a good listener, refuses to engage in partisan criticism, and has the patience to work through difficult issues of achieving savings and keeping fairness in the the tax changes. Earlier efforts to achieve consensus in late 2011 failed, making it even more important to have leadership which can create productive debate and bridge the differences. The tax changes are part of the overall effort for U.S. economic recovery by reducing the deficit.

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt says that there is little reason to think that the flatter rates are better always. With the need to finance Medicare and health care for all, the government can use the extra dollars from taxing the very wealthy, the very rich in different tax brackets. The top bracket in 2008 started at 357,000, and you paid 35% whether you made 400,000, or $4 million, or $40 million. So basically the upper middle class was lumped in with the extremely wealthy. And considering the cost of college tutions for 2 or 3 kids, the upper middle class is only middle class. It makes sense not to lump the two together. Considering that there has been a lot of wealth accumulated at the the very high end, it would also reduce inequality, generate tax revenues for health care, and not have much effect in the incentives for generating economic growth. It is something he says the Obama adminisstration may and should consider.

LyrArc Article Gist
What Krugman makes of the $1.089 trillion dollar U.S. deficit for fiscal year ending in Sept. 2012. He points out that the U.S. can have a stable to declining debt to GDP ratio with $400 billion debt. He cites the Clinton years (1992-2000) when the debt to GDP ratio declined from 49% to 33% with steady growth. What about the remaining $600 billion. He attributes this mostly to temporary factors which are reversible as growth picks up. Of this remaining excess deficit he says $400 billion is from lower tax payments to Treasury because of the 2008 economic crisis and the recession that followed. This includes the payroll tax cut which is also temporary to keep up consumer spending in the recession. The $150 billion is from unemployment insurance, food stamps, and other aid which is also reversed once growth picks up. He places emphasis on restoring economic growth as early as possible and reducing unemployment and using the recession for business to continue to invest in R&D, productivity, and government to preserve the social fabric, invest in education, and provide incentives for growth. S&P Nov. 8 report says the net government debt to GDP ratio is estimated to be over 80% in 2013. It will have to stabilize at current levels for S&P to preserve the U.S. credit rating, says S&P executive Chambers. The higher debt to GDP ratio in 2013 and lower growth rates expected makes the situation different from the lower debt to GDP ratios during the Clinton period. Britain, France and other major industrialized nations with political parties at either end of the political specrum have also chosen to stabilize or reduce debt to GDP ratios rather than take on the risks of them going much higher. The U.S. has the added problem of health care costs out of control with an aging population and about 17.9% of GDP going to healthcare costs in 2010 expected to increase significantly, as Medicare actuaries estimate enrollee numbers jump to 80 million in 2030 from 50 million in 2012. Democrats and Republicans have largely sidestepped this underlying problem in fiscal cliff negotiations....

LyrArc Article Gist
GDP per capita levels in the U.S. expected to return to pre recession levels in 2007 by the end of 2013. Gradual recovery in housing and consumer spending expected in 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
As the federal revenues rise to about 18.1% of GDP (close to historical rates after return to growth) and outlays to offset the effects of the 2008 recession diminishing, the deficit is forecast to drop to 3% of GDP in 2014, and 2.6% in 2015, close to the average for the last 40 years. The deficit is estimated to be total $514 billion for fiscal year 2014, declining from $1.4 trillion in 2009. Real GDP growth (adjusting for inflation) of 3% is forecast for 2014-2017. In 2018 and the years to 2024 the deficit will increase because the pace of growth slows, and spending will increase- slower growth of the labor force as the population ages, increasing health care costs, subsidies for health care, and increasing cost to service debt. Outlays other than for health care, Social Security and interest payments on debt for year 2016-2024, are set to be the lowest percentage of GDP since 1940, according to the CBO report in 2014. Debt will increase to 79% of GDP by 2024 from an estimate of 74% for 2014. CBO projects unemployment only slowly decreasing, remaining above 6% till late 2016, with the rate of participation in the labor force- lower now because many people have opted to not look for work discouraged by the job prospects- slow to recover....

LyrArc Article Gist
CEO's of more than 80 large U.S. companies have come together behind a plan that would reduce the U.S. federal deficit with tax revenue increases and reduced spending. The CEO statement was organized by the Fix the Debt campaign, a bipartisan effort inspired by Republican Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles of the 2010 Simpson-Bowles Deficit Commission. The CEO statement calls for an overhaul of the U.S. tax code to eliminate or reduce deductions, credits and loopholes (reduction of tax expenditures also referred to as "broadening the base"). The CEO statement says any fiscal plan to succeed has to control increases in health care spending, make Social Security solvent, and include "comprehensive and pro-growth tax reform, which broadens the base, lowers rates, raises revenues and reduces the deficit." This is the first time a large group of business leaders have supported raising taxes as part of an overall solution. This puts together elements of the Bowles-Simpson plan, reduces deductions and loopholes, lowers rates as part of overall tax reform and cutting spending. The CEO statement says the Simpson Bowles recommendations for $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases was an "effective framework" for tackling a problem that affects the economic well being and security of the U.S....

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ tells readers not to confuse the spirit of a pro-growth initiative in the CEO statement of Oct. 2012 with a simple tax increase. The CEO's are doing this as a part of a larger effort for a strong recovery in the U.S. economy and not simply to increase taxes. For the first time CEO's are backing tax increases to break the influence of what the Journal calls Republican deadenders who flatly oppose any tax increases period leading to unacceptable deadlock and uncertainty that prevents business from investing and hiring. This is part of a broader set of tax reforms to lower rates overall, reduce tax expenditures and support the Simpson-Bowles commission recommendations framework to reduce the deficit.