A Conservative Suggests We Raise the Capital Gains Tax

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


James Pethokoukis asks:

Should we eliminate corporate income taxes and raise capital gains taxes?

Hmmm. I’m guessing he thinks the answer is no. But wait! Maybe not:

I have already suggested that Mitt Romney propose axing the corporate tax. Combining that with an increase in the capital gains tax—a tax hike on Romney himself—might be a doable compromise….How about this: A top tax of 28%—back to where it was in 1986 under bipartisan tax reform and close to Obama’s Buffett Rule—on all income along with an elimination of corporate income taxes? Any takers? Any suggested modifications?

Although I’m not ready to jump on this specific bandwagon quite yet, I’d be willing to talk. There are a bunch of practical problems with eliminating the corporate income tax, but it’s possible they could be overcome. As for the 28% top rate — well, let’s just take that as an opening bid. I doubt you could lower it that much. In fact, I’m not sure you could lower it at all, since higher taxes on investment income might not make up for the loss of corporate income tax revenue. What’s more, capital gains and dividend taxes are going to be raised automatically at the end of the year if the Bush tax cuts aren’t extended, so offering to raise them now isn’t really much of a concession.

Despite all that, I continue to think this has possibilities. The corporate income tax isn’t just insanely complicated, it’s also impossible to prevent it from becoming an endless honeypot of corporate subsidies and payoffs. Getting rid of it entirely is probably the only way to put an end to this.

Politically, the biggest problem with this proposal is that once the corporate income tax is gone, it would be gone forever. It’s just too hard to bring it back to life. Conversely, reducing the capital gains tax is simplicity itself. So a likely outcome of all this is that the corporate income tax would go away, and ten years from now we’d be back to the same old low rates on capital gains and dividends because — oh, you know the drill. High investment taxes are hurting capital formation, punishing the job creators, stifling investment, crushing the economy, blah blah blah.

Still, it’s worth a conversation even if it is pie in the sky. I’d be pretty interested in seeing some neutral revenue and distributional analysis of the whole thing.

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

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

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate