Tax Loopholes and the Federal Budget

Matt Yglesias points to a chart from his CAP colleagues showing a dramatic increase in tax credits and deductions since 1982 and comments, “It’s not a good trend. Simpler taxes and efforts to do a more straightforward consideration of what is and isn’t worth spending money on are a much better idea.” Here’s the chart:

I’m not here to defend tax complification, and I’d like to see some of these tax expenditures cut back too. Still, I call foul. The usual way to measure this stuff is as a percent of GDP, and real GDP has increased from roughly $6.5 trillion in 1982 to $14.7 trillion in 2010. This means that as a percentage of GDP, tax expenditures have fallen from 8.1% to 7.0%. It would be nice for them to fall even further, but not because there’s been an explosion in tax expenditure revenue over the past three decades. There hasn’t been.1

However, CAP’s presentation has ten charts in it, and charts 1-9 are pretty good. It’s worth a click.

1Actually, this is kind of odd. The three biggest tax expenditures are the exclusion of employer contributions to employee healthcare plans, the mortgage interest deduction, and the exclusion of pension contributions. These are all pretty fast growing areas, and in addition lots of smaller tax expenditures have been added to the tax code since 1982. Given all this, I’m surprised tax expenditure revenue hasn’t grown faster.

UPDATE: I’ve revised the GDP numbers in the text. I used the real GDP series from the BEA, but forgot that it’s in 2005 dollars. I’ve adjusted it to 2010 dollars so it’s in the same units CAP uses for tax expenditures.

You could also do this as a percentage of federal revenue rather than a percentage of GDP. If you do it this way the relative size of tax expenditures has indeed gone up (from about 40% to 48%), though some of that is an artifact of the plunge in tax revenue following the 2008 recession.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.