CRS Reviews Proposals for Tax Reform

The President and leading Members of Congress have stated that tax reform is a major policy objective for the 113^th Congress. Some Members have said that tax reform is needed in order to raise a large amount of additional revenue, which is necessary to reduce high forecast budget deficits and the sharply rising national debt. Congressional interest has been expressed in both a major overhaul of the U.S. tax system and the feasibility of levying a consumption tax. Some proponents of reform argue that the tax base should be broadened by reducing or eliminating many tax expenditures. An alternative to increasing tax revenues was cutting spending. Thus, Members are faced with considering the best mix of tax increases and spending cuts in order to reduce deficits and slow the growth of the national debt.

Proposals for tax reform have been made in reports by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and the Debt Reduction Task Force of the Bipartisan Policy Center. In the 112^th Congress, fundamental tax reforms were proposed in H.R. 25 and S. 13, Fair Tax Act of 2011; H.R. 99, Fair and Simple Tax Act of 2011; H.R. 8, the Job Protection and Recession Prevention Act of 2012; H.R. 1125, the Debt Free America Act; S. 727, the Bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2011; H.R. 1040, the Freedom Flat Tax Act; H.R. 6169, the Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012; and S. 820, the Simplified, Manageable, and Responsible Tax Act. H.R. 25 has been introduced in the 113^th Congress. On April 13, 2011, President Obama presented his Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility, which includes fundamental tax reform. On April 14, 2011, Representative Paul Ryan introduced H.Con.Res. 34, the FY2012 budget resolution, which includes fundamental changes in the U.S. tax system. On March 20, 2012, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan released the committee's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution, The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal. An evaluation of these proposals would consider the effects on equity, efficiency, and simplicity. In February 2012, the President presented his outline for corporate reform, The President's Framework for Business Tax Reform.

Tax reforms often include broadening the tax base by eliminating or trimming tax expenditures. While individual tax expenditures are large relative to individual income tax revenues -- potentially gaining around $1 trillion per year, or permitting reductions of over 40% in tax rates -- many of these provisions may prove difficult to change because they are widely used and popular, are difficult to address administratively, or may be desirable provisions. Corporate tax reform is generally directed at a revenue-neutral change, but tax expenditures are considerably smaller in absolute terms and relative to the base, permitting tax rate reductions of less than 20%. As with individual tax expenditures, many of these provisions would be difficult to eliminate or reduce. There is special interest in revising the tax treatment of foreign source income of corporations.

This report will be updated in the event of significant legislative activity or policy proposals.

                            Contents

The President and leading Members of Congress have stated that tax reform is a major policy objective. Some Members have said that tax reform is needed in order to raise a large amount of additional revenue, which is necessary to reduce high forecast budget deficits and the sharply rising national debt. Other Members maintain that a revenue increase is unnecessary because spending reductions can be sufficient to reduce the deficit.¹ Congressional interest has been expressed in a major overhaul of the U.S. income tax system, but some proposals have also been introduced to substitute a consumption tax for the income tax or provide an add on tax that might prevent increases in rates if additional revenue is needed.² Some proponents of reform argue that the tax base should be broadened by reducing or eliminating many tax expenditures. "Tax expenditures are revenue losses resulting from federal tax provisions that grant special tax relief designed to encourage certain kinds of behavior by taxpayers or to aid taxpayers in special circumstances."³ If tax expenditures are reduced substantially or a consumption tax is levied or both, then the marginal income tax rates could be reduced. An alternative to increasing tax revenues is cutting spending. Thus, Members are faced with considering the best mix of tax increases and spending cuts in order to reduce deficits and slow the growth of the national debt.

In December 2010, The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (the "Commission") issued a report titled The Moment of Truth, which proposed extensive broadening of both the individual income tax base and the corporate income tax base by eliminating all business tax expenditures and almost all individual tax expenditures.⁴ Marginal individual and corporate income tax rates would be reduced, and the individual alternative minimum tax would be abolished. The taxation of foreign-source income would be changed by moving to a territorial system.⁵ On November 17, 2010, the Debt Reduction Task Force of the Bipartisan Policy Center issued a report titled Restoring America's Future.⁶ This report also recommended that individual and corporate income tax bases be broadened by reducing or eliminating most tax expenditures. Marginal individual and corporate income tax rates would be lowered, and the individual alternative minimum tax would be eliminated. In addition, this report recommended that a 6.5% value-added tax (a consumption tax) be levied. The recommendations of these two reports may influence the tax reform debate.

In the 112^th Congress, Members of Congress introduced numerous bills containing incremental or marginal adjustments in the tax code in an attempt to redistribute income, reallocate resources, change individual behavior, etc. Proposed incremental or small tax adjustments are considered tax changes.⁷ In contrast, fundamental tax reform concerns a major proposed overhaul of the U.S. tax system, which affects the entire tax system or a major component of the system.

In the 112^th Congress, several bills proposing major tax reform were introduced.

Some of these proposals were in the form of traditional income tax reform. S. 727, the Bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2011, cosponsored by Senator Ron Wyden and Senator Dan Coats, was a traditional tax reform bill that broadened the base, simplified the individual income tax rates, and significantly reduced the corporate tax rate. It was introduced on April 5, 2011, and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. Representative David Dreier introduced H.R. 99, Fair and Simple Tax Act of 2011, which would establish an alternative determination of tax liability for individuals. Representative Dreier also introduced H.R. 6169, the Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012. This bill would reduce the individual income tax brackets to two (one of 10% and another not higher than 25%), reduce the corporate income tax rate to not more than 25%, repeal the alternative minimum tax, broaden the tax base so that tax revenues comprise between 18% and 19% of gross domestic product, and reform the current system of foreign taxation.

Other bills proposed to change the fundamental nature of the current U.S. tax system, usually by shifting to some form of consumption tax. Two companion bills, H.R. 25 (introduced by Representative Rob Woodall) and S. 13 (introduced by Senator Saxby Chambliss), Fair Tax Act of 2011, would have replaced the individual income tax, the corporate income tax, all payroll taxes, the self-employment tax, and the estate and gift taxes with a 23% (tax-inclusive) national retail sales tax. Representative Woodall's bill was also introduced as H.R. 25 in the 113^th Congress. Representative Michael Burgess introduced H.R. 1040, Freedom Flat Tax Act, which would authorize an individual or a person engaged in business activity to make an irrevocable election to be subject to a flat tax (in lieu of the existing tax provisions). Representative Chaka Fattah introduced H.R. 1125, Debt Free America Act, which would impose a transaction fee of 1% on the entire amount of specified intermediate and final transactions. Revenue raised from this fee would be sufficient to eliminate the national debt during a 10-year period and phase out the income tax on individuals. Senator Richard C. Shelby introduced S. 820, the Simplified, Manageable, and Responsible Tax Act, which was modeled after the flat tax proposal formulated in 1981 by Hall and Rabushka and would levy a consumption tax as a replacement for individual and corporate income taxes and estate and gift taxes.⁸ This proposal would have two components: a wage tax and a cash-flow tax on businesses.

Representative Dave Camp introduced H.R. 8, the Job Protection and Recessional Prevention Act of 2012. Part of this bill extended tax cuts that were subsequently dealt with through a later version of H.R. 8 that became P.L. 112-240. This bill also proposed fundamental tax reform with lower rates. The Ways and Means Committee has produced a draft proposal for moving to a territorial tax, which is a component of corporate tax reform.⁹

On April 14, 2011, House Budget Committee Chairman Representative Paul Ryan introduced H.Con.Res. 34, which includes major tax reforms. On April 15, 2011, the House passed this FY2012 budget resolution, which includes fundamental changes in the U.S. tax system.¹⁰ On March 20, 2012, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan released the committee's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution, The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal. This resolution includes fundamental tax reform.

Three major fiscal reform proposals containing major tax reforms have been introduced or updated during 2011 and 2012. On April 13, 2011, President Obama presented his Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility, which proposes to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years or less. The President's plan included comprehensive tax reform. On June 29, 2011, the President's Fiscal Commission published updated estimates of its proposal.¹¹ On February 13, 2012, President Obama released his FY2013 budget that included major changes in taxes. The President also proposed a separate outline for business tax reform.¹²

Tax Reform Options

Two broad fundamental tax reform categories for addressing the severe deficit problem are base-broadening and levying a new tax. Some of the revenue from base-broadening and a new tax could be used to reduce marginal tax rates.

Base-Broadening

Some Members of Congress have expressed concern about the large number and high cost of tax expenditures.¹³ Examples of tax expenditures are the deduction for mortgage interest on owner-occupied residences and the deduction for property taxes on owner-occupied residences. Many of these tax expenditures are seen as targets to be reduced or eliminated. Congress may want to consider whether the benefits of a particular tax expenditure exceed the costs of that tax expenditure.¹⁴ The current tax reform debate generally deals with the issue of broadening the individual and corporate income tax bases and lowering marginal tax rates, reducing the deficit, or some combination. This type of base broadening reform is reflected in the Fiscal Commission and other commission proposals, in the Wyden and Coats and Drier proposals, and in the general proposals by Chairmen Camp and Ryan.

The tax expenditures associated with the individual and the corporate tax differ in their size relative to the existing revenues, and thus in their scope for expansion. The potential revenue gain from individual tax expenditures is very large, in excess of $1 trillion and about three-fourths of the existing revenue. If all were eliminated, tax rates would be reduced by over 40%. While these large amounts suggest a significant scope for base broadening, most of these tax expenditures arise from a limited number of provisions, many of which are very popular and broadly used, difficult to eliminate in a technical sense, and/or considered desirable provisions.¹⁵

In the case of the corporate tax, tax expenditures are relatively small compared to revenues, and would permit, in a revenue-neutral reform, a reduction of rates of about 19%, or to slightly over 29%. These base-broadening provisions are also concentrated in a few provisions, which may be difficult to change, such as accelerated depreciation.¹⁶ There are, however, some significant potential base-broadening provisions outside of tax expenditures. There has been a particular focus, as well, on the tax treatment of foreign source income of multinationals, with some proposals to largely eliminate that taxation through a territorial tax, but others to significantly increase it. The latter approach would broaden the base more, while the former could actually decrease it, depending on the details of the revision. International issues have also been an impetus for lowering the corporate tax rate.¹⁷

Corporate tax reform or individual tax reform in isolation would be difficult because many of the corporate preferences also benefit unincorporated business.

New Tax or Revised Tax Base

Proposals have been made for an add-on consumption or environmental tax or replacement of the current U.S. income tax by a consumption-based tax. Revenue from an add-on tax would allow the retention of more tax expenditures and lower reductions in other tax expenditures, and larger rate reductions. However, replacement of the current tax system with a consumption tax would be a much more significant shift from current rules. In recent Congresses, three major types of broad-based consumption taxes have been included in congressional tax proposals: the value-added tax (VAT), the retail sales tax, and the flat tax. These possible broad-based consumption taxes have the potential of a robust revenue yield.

A value-added tax is a tax on the value that a firm adds to a product at each stage of production.¹⁸ The value the firm adds is the difference between a firm's sales and a firm's purchases of inputs from other firms. The VAT is collected by each firm at every stage of production. The most common method is a credit method, where the firm calculates the VAT to be remitted to the government by a two-step process. First, the firm multiplies its taxable sales by the tax rate to calculate VAT collected on sales. Second, the firm credits VAT paid on inputs against VAT collected on sales and remits this difference to the government. Under the credit-invoice method, a type of credit method, the firm is required to show VAT separately on all sales invoices and to calculate the VAT credit on inputs by adding all VAT shown on purchase invoices. All developed nations, except Japan, use the credit-invoice method. Japan uses the subtraction method, where the VAT base is determined by subtracting inputs from sales.

A retail sales-tax is a consumption tax levied only at a single stage of production, the retail stage. The retailer collects a specific percentage markup in the retail price of a good or service, which is then remitted to the government.¹⁹ As of February 1, 2010, the Tax Foundation reports that 45 states had retail sales taxes.²⁰

A flat tax could be levied based on the proposal formulated by Robert E. Hall and Alvin Rabushka of the Hoover Institution.²¹ Their proposal would have two components: a wage tax and a cash-flow tax on businesses. (A wage tax is a tax only on salaries and wages: a cash-flow tax is generally a tax on gross receipts minus all outlays.) It is essentially a modified VAT, with wages and pensions subtracted from the VAT base and taxed at the individual level. Under a standard VAT, a firm would not subtract its wage and pension contributions when calculating its tax base. Under the flat tax, some wage income would not be included in the tax base because of exemptions. Under a standard VAT, all wage income would be included in the tax base.

Environmental taxes have been proposed to reduce pollution and raise revenue. The most frequently discussed energy tax is a carbon tax that would be levied on the volume of carbon emitted.²² This tax is frequently recommended by economists, but the Obama Administration has proposed a cap and trade system. Another alternative energy tax would be higher gasoline taxes.²³

Framework of Evaluation

In evaluating any change in tax policy, the prevailing framework is to analyze the tax policy for equity, efficiency, and simplicity. Tradeoffs may exist between these three objectives. For example, if greater income equality is desired, this may conflict with the goal of economic efficiency.

Equity

Economic theory maintains that it is not possible to make interpersonal comparisons of utility. Hence, whether a change in the distribution of income, with gainers and losers, is an improvement in the national welfare is a value judgment. The effects on different groups, however, can be measured and debated. Thus, the following questions can be examined.

How will different income groups be affected annually and over their lifetimes? Will taxpayers in similar circumstances pay approximately the same amount of taxes? What will be the effect on taxpayers in different age groups? Will there be distributional effects by region of the country? How will minority groups be affected? What will be the tax incidence on families versus single taxpayers?

Efficiency

Tax policy should promote economic efficiency; that is, a tax change should be as neutral as possible by minimizing economic distortions.²⁴ Low marginal tax rates tend to lessen distortions.

Many efficiency questions concern household decisions. What will be the effect of a tax change on households' decisions to save versus consume? Will households' choices of leisure versus work be affected? Will household decisions about the composition of goods and services consumed be affected?

Other efficiency questions concern firms' decisions. What will be the effect on firms' decisions concerning the method of financing (debt or equity), choice among inputs, type of business organization (corporation, partnership, of sole proprietorship), and composition of output?

Simplicity

The greater the simplicity of the tax system, the lower will be the administrative and compliance costs. Thus, tax policy should eliminate any unnecessary complexity and promote transparency. Numerous questions concerning simplicity arise; among them are the following: How will a tax change affect federal administrative costs? Will the administrative costs of state and local governments change? How will compliance costs of households be affected? Will business compliance costs change?

Fundamental Tax Reform Legislation in the 112^th and 113^th Congress

In the 112^th Congress, several bills for fundamental tax reform were introduced. This section also includes 113^th Congress bills as they are introduced.

Representative David Dreier's Proposals

In the 112^th Congress, Representative Dreier introduced two bills for fundamental tax reform: H.R. 99 and H.R. 6169.

H.R. 99. TheFair and Simple Tax Act of 2011 was introduced on January 5, 2011, and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee. This bill would establish an alternative determination of tax liability for individuals. A "simplified taxable income" would be taxed at the rates of 10% on the first $40,000, 15% on the income over $40,000 but under $150,000, and 30% on the income over $150,000. Simplified taxable income would equal gross income less the sum of deductions for personal exemptions, the deduction allowed for the acquisition of indebtedness with respect to the principal residence, the deduction allowed for state and local income taxes, the deduction allowed for charitable giving, and the deduction allowed for medical expenses. The estate and gift taxes would be repealed. The alternative minimum tax exemption amounts would be indexed for inflation. The maximum corporate income tax rate would be reduced to 25%. The 15% rate on dividends and capital gains of individuals would be reduced to 10%. The basis for assets for purposes of determining capital gain or loss would be indexed for inflation. This bill would create tax-free accounts for retirement savings, lifetime savings, and lifetime skills. Examples of qualified life skills include assessments of skill levels, development of an individual employment plan, career planning, occupational skills training, on-the-job training, and entrepreneurial training. This bill would repeal the adjusted gross income threshold in the medical care deduction for individuals under age 65 who have no employer health coverage. This bill would make the research credit permanent. This bill would repeal Title IX of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) relating to sunset of provisions. This bill would repeal Section 107 of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 relating to application of EGTRRA sunset to this title.

H.R. 6169. The Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012 was introduced on July 24, 2012, and referred to the House Rules Committee. On August 2, 2012, this bill passed in the House by a recorded vote of 232 to 189. The stated purpose of this act was to provide for the enactment of comprehensive tax reform in 2013 that (1) protects taxpayers by creating a fairer, simpler, flatter tax code; (2) is comprehensive; (3) results in tax revenue consistent with historical norms; (4) spurs greater investment, innovation, and job creation; and (5) makes American workers and businesses more competitive. The bill defined a "tax reform bill" for purposes of this act as a bill to be introduced by the chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means not later than April 30, 2013, that is certified by the chair of the Joint Committee on Taxation as containing proposals to (1) consolidate the six current individual income tax brackets into a maximum of two brackets (one of 10% and another not higher than 25%), (2) reduce the corporate income tax rate to not more than 25%, (3) repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT), (4) broaden the tax base so that tax revenues comprise between 18% and 19% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and (5) reform the current system of foreign taxation. The bill also provided for its expedited consideration in the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Representative Rob Woodall/Senator Saxby Chambliss Proposal

H.R. 25. The Fair Tax Act of 2011 was introduced in the 112^th Congress on January 5, 2011, by Representative Rob Woodall and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. This bill was also introduced (with the same bill number) in the 113^th Congress, on January 3, 2013. A companion bill, S. 13, the Fair Tax Act of 2011, was introduced in the 112^th Congress on January 25, 2011, by Senator Saxby Chambliss and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. This proposal would repeal the individual income tax, the corporate income tax, all payroll taxes, the self-employment tax, and the estate and gift taxes and levy a 23% (tax-inclusive) national retail sales tax as a replacement. The tax-inclusive retail sales tax would equal 23% of the sum of the sales price of an item and the amount of the retail sales tax. Every family would receive a rebate of the sales tax on spending amounts up to the federal poverty level (plus an extra amount to prevent any marriage penalty). The Social Security Administration would provide a monthly sales tax rebate to registered qualified families. The 23% national retail sales would not be levied on exports. The sales tax would be separately stated and charged. Social Security and Medicare benefits would remain the same with payroll tax revenue replaced by some of the revenue from the retail sales tax. States could elect to collect the national retail sales tax on behalf of the federal government in exchange for a fee. Taxpayer rights provisions are incorporated into the act. The sales tax would sunset at the end of a seven-year period beginning on the enactment of this act if the Sixteenth Amendment is not repealed. This amendment provided Congress with the "power to lay and collect taxes on incomes."

Representative Chaka Fattah's Proposal

H.R. 1125. The Debt Free America Act was introduced in the 112^th Congress on March 16, 2011, and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and three other committees. This act states that its purposes are to raise sufficient revenue from a fee on transactions to (1) eliminate the national debt within 10 years and phase out the individual income tax, and (2) provide incentives for private sector investment in capital goods, clean energy generation, and infrastructure development. This act would amend the Internal Revenue Code to impose a transaction fee of 1%, offset by a corresponding nonrefundable income tax credit, on every specialized transaction that uses a payment instrument, including any check, cash, credit card, transfer of stock, bonds, or other financial instrument. This act defines "specified transaction" to (1) exclude any deposit into a personal account of an individual and any transfer between accounts, and (2) include retail and wholesale sales, purchases of intermediate goods, and financial and intangible transactions. The fees would be collected by the seller or financial institution servicing the transaction and would be paid to the U.S. Treasury. This act would establish in the legislative branch the Bipartisan Task Force for Responsible Fiscal Action, which would review the fiscal imbalance of the federal government, identify factors affecting the long-term fiscal imbalance, analyze potential courses of action, and provide recommendations and legislative language to improve the long-term fiscal imbalance. This act would repeal after 2021 the individual income tax, refundable and nonrefundable personal tax credits, and the alternative minimum tax (AMT) on individuals. This act would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to (1) prioritize the repayment of the national debt to protect the fiscal stability of the United States; and (2) study and report to Congress on the implementation of this act.

Senator Ron Wyden's Proposal

S. 727. The Bipartisan Tax Fairness and Simplification Act of 2011 was introduced in the 112^th Congress on April 5, 2011, and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. This act was also sponsored by Senator Dan Coats and is often referred to as the Wyden-Coats proposal. This proposal would reform the current income tax base rather than changing to a consumption base. This bill has three stated purposes: (1) to make the federal individual income tax system simpler, fairer, and more transparent; (2) to make the federal corporate income tax rate a flat 24%, repeal the corporate alternative minimum tax, and eliminate special tax preferences that favor particular types of businesses or activities; and (3) to partially offset the federal budget deficit through the increased fiscal responsibility resulting from these reforms.

The progressive individual income tax would have three rates: 15%, 25%, and 35%. The individual alternative minimum tax would be eliminated. The standard deduction would almost triple. While most deductions would be eliminated, the bill would include deductions for mortgage interest and charitable contributions. The bill would permanently extend the enhancements of the child tax credit, the earned income tax credit, and the dependent care credit. The bill would consolidate the three existing types of IRAs into a new retirement savings account, and a new lifetime savings account. A married couple would be able to contribute up to $14,000 per year to tax-favored retirement and savings accounts. The corporate tax rate would be 24% of taxable income. The corporate tax base would be broadened by the elimination of numerous tax credits, deductions, and exclusions from income. The growth of small businesses would be encouraged by allowing businesses with gross annual receipts of up to $1 million to permanently expense all equipment and inventory costs in a single year. The bill includes numerous provisions to improve tax compliance.

Representative Michael C. Burgess's Proposal

H.R. 1040. The Freedom Flat Tax Act was introduced in the 112^th Congress on March 11, 2011, by Representative Burgess and referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the House Committee on Rules.

This proposal would authorize an individual or a person engaged in business activity to make an irrevocable election to be subject to a flat tax (in lieu of the existing tax provisions). The flat tax was based on the concepts of the Hall-Rabushka flat tax proposal. This act would also repeal estate and gift taxes.

For individuals not engaged in business activity who select the flat tax, their initial tax rate would be 19%, but after two years this rate would decline to 17%. The individual flat tax would be levied on all wages, retirement distributions, and unemployment compensation. An individual's taxable income would also include the taxable income of each dependent child who has not attained age 14 as of the close of such taxable year.

The flat tax would have "standard deductions" that would equal the sum of the "basic standard deduction" and the "additional standard deduction."

The "basic standard deduction" would depend on filing status:

• $30,320 for a married couple filing jointly or a surviving spouse

• $19,350 for a single head of household

• $15,160 for a single person or a married person filing a separate return

For individuals engaged in business activity who select the flat tax, their initial tax rate would be 19% (declining to 17% when the tax was fully phased in two years after enactment) on the difference between the gross revenue of the business and the sum of its purchases from other firms, wage payments, and pension contributions.

For those employees electing the flat tax, government employers and employers of nonprofit organizations would pay a flat tax on their employees' fringe benefits, except retirement contributions, because activities of government entities and tax-exempt organizations would be exempt from the business tax.

Any congressional action that raises the flat tax rate or reduces the amount of the standard deduction would require a three-fifths (supermajority) vote in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. The effective date of the flat tax would be calendar year 2012.

Senator Richard C. Shelby's Proposal

S. 820. The Simplified, Manageable, and Responsible Tax Act was introduced in the 112^th Congress on April 14, 2011, and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. This act is modeled after the flat tax proposal formulated in 1981 by Hall and Rabushka and would levy a consumption tax as a replacement for individual and corporate income taxes and estate and gift taxes. This proposal has two components: a wage tax and a cash-flow tax on businesses.

The individual wage tax would be levied at a 17% rate. The individual wage tax would be levied on all wages, salaries, pension distributions, and unemployment compensation. An individual's taxable income would include taxable income of each dependent child who has not attained age 14 as of the close of the taxable year. The individual wage tax would not be levied on Social Security receipts. Thus, the current partial taxation of Social Security payments to high-income households would be repealed. Social Security contributions would continue to be taxed; that is, they would not be deductible and would be made from after-tax income. Firms would pay the business tax on their Social Security contributions. Individuals would pay the wage tax on their Social Security contributions. The individual wage tax would have "standard deductions" that would equal the sum of the "basic standard deduction" and the "additional standard deduction."

The "basic standard deduction" would depend on filing status. For tax year 2012, the basic standard deduction would have been the following:

• $26,810 for a married couple filing jointly or a surviving spouse

• $17,120 for a single head of household

• $13,410 for a single person

• $13,410 for a married person filing a separate return

Businesses would pay a tax of 17% on the difference (if positive) between gross revenue and the sum of purchases from other firms, wage payments, and pension contributions. This business tax would cover corporations, partnerships, and sole proprietorships. Pension contributions would be deductible but there would be no deductions for fringe benefits. State and local taxes (including income taxes) and payroll taxes would not be deductible.

If the business's aggregate deductions exceed gross revenue, then the excess of aggregate deductions can be carried forward to the next year and increased by a percentage equal to the three-month Treasury rate for the last month of the taxable year.

Government employers and employers of nonprofit organizations would pay a 17% tax on their employees' fringe benefits, except retirement contributions, because activities of government entities and tax-exempt organizations would be exempt from the business tax.

This bill would be effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2011. A supermajority of three-fifths of the Members of the House or Senate would be required to (1) increase any federal income tax rate; (2) create any additional federal income tax rate; (3) reduce the standard deduction; or (4) provide any exclusion, deduction, credit, or other benefit which results in a reduction in federal revenues.

Representative Dave Camp's Original Proposal

H.R. 8. The Job Protection and Recession Prevention Act of 2012 was introduced in the 112^th Congress on July 24, 2012, by Representative Dave Camp and referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and the House Budget Committee. On August 8, 2012, this bill was passed in the House by a vote of 256 to 171 and placed on the Senate legislative calendar.

This bill had two titles. The first one involved extending expiring tax cuts, and these issues were ultimately addressed in a subsequent version of H.R. 8, adopted as The American Taxpayer Relief Act (P.L. 112-240).

Title II of the bill, Pathway to Job Creation Through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act states that the purpose of this act is to provide for the enactment of comprehensive tax reform in 2013 that (1) protects taxpayers by creating a fairer, simpler, flatter tax code; (2) is comprehensive; (3) results in tax revenue consistent with historical norms; (4) spurs greater investment, innovation, and job creation; and (5) makes American workers and businesses more competitive. This title defines a "tax reform bill" for purposes of this act as a bill to be introduced by the chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means not later than April 30, 2013, that is certified by the chair of the Joint Committee on Taxation as containing proposals to (1) consolidate the six current individual income tax brackets into a maximum of two brackets (one of 10% and another not higher than 25%), (2) reduce the corporate income tax rate to not more than 25%, (3) repeal the alternative minimum tax (AMT), (4) broaden the tax base so that tax revenues comprise between 18% and 19% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and (5) reform the current system of foreign taxation.

Subsequent to the introduction of the original proposal, the Ways and Means Committee provided for detailed drafts of a territorial tax proposal, which would be an important component of corporate tax reform. This proposal would provide for a 95% exemption for dividends from foreign subsidiaries accompanied by provisions to limit profit shifting and other changes.²⁵

Other Legislation in the 112^th Congress Relevant to Fundamental Tax Reform

H.R. 462. (Sponsor: Representative Bob Goodlatte).

The Tax Code Termination Act was introduced in the 112^th Congress on January 26, 2011, and referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. After December 31, 2015, this bill proposes to terminate the tax code except for self-employment taxes, Federal Insurance Contributions Act taxes, and Railroad Retirement taxes. This proposal declares that any new federal tax system should be a simple and fair system that (1) applies a low rate to all Americans, (2) provides tax relief for working Americans, (3) protects the rights of taxpayers and reduces tax collection abuses, (4) eliminates the bias against savings and investment, (5) promotes economic growth and job creation, and (6) does not penalize marriage or families. This bill would require that the new federal tax system be approved by Congress not later than July 4, 2015.

H.Con.Res. 34. (Sponsor: Representative Paul Ryan).

House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan introduced this continuing resolution in the 112^th Congress on April 14, 2011, "establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2012 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2013 through 2021." On April 15, 2011, this bill was passed by the House. This FY2012 budget resolution proposes to reduce future deficits and slow the growth of the national debt. Major reforms in the tax system are proposed. The summary regarding taxes states that the budget resolution

• keeps taxes low so the economy can grow, eliminates roughly $800 billion in tax increases imposed by the President's health care law, and prevents the $1.5 trillion tax increase called for in the President's budget; and

• calls for a simpler, less burdensome tax code for households and small businesses, lowers tax rates for individuals, businesses, and families, sets top rates for individuals and businesses at 25%, and improves incentives for growth, savings, and investment.²⁶

On March 20, 2012, the House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan released the committee's Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution, The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal.²⁷ In contrasting the vision of this budget resolution with the President's budget, the House Budget Committee states that their "Path to Prosperity" has the following budgetary effects:²⁸

• Spending: Cuts spending by $5 trillion relative to President's budget.

• Taxes: Prevents President's tax increases; reforms broken tax code to make it simple, fair, and competitive; clears out special interest loopholes and lowers everybody's tax rates to promote growth.

• Deficits: Brings deficits below 3% of GDP by 2015; reduces deficits by over $3 trillion relative to President's budget; puts budget on path to balance.

• Debt: Reduces debt as a share of the economy over the next decade; charts a sustainable trajectory by reforming the drivers of the debt; pays off the debt over time.

• Size of Government: Brings size of government to 20% of economy by 2015, allowing the private sector to grow and create jobs.

• National Security: Prioritizes national security be preventing deep, indiscriminate cuts to defense; identifies strategy-driven savings, while funding defense at levels that keep America safe by providing $554 billion for the next fiscal year for national defense spending.

• Health Security: Repeals President's health care law; advances bipartisan solutions that take power away from government bureaucrats and puts patients in control; no disruption for those in or near retirement; Ensures a strengthened Medicare program for future generations, and with less support given to the wealthy and more assistance for the poor and the sick.

• The tax code has become a broken maze of complexity and political favoritism, overgrown with special-interest loopholes and high marginal rates that stifle economic growth and job creation.

• This budget reforms the broken tax code to spur job creation and economic opportunity by lowering rates, closing loopholes, and putting hardworking taxpayers ahead of special interests. The pro-growth reforms ensure the tax code is fair, simple, and competitive.

• This budget consolidates the current six individual income tax brackets into just two low brackets of 10% and 25% and repeals the Alternative Minimum Tax.

• This budget reduces the corporate rate to 25% and shifts from a "worldwide" system of taxation to a "territorial" tax system that puts American companies and their workers on a level playing field with foreign competitors.

• This budget rejects the President's call to raise taxes. Instead, it broadens the tax base to maintain revenue growth at a level consistent with current tax policy and at a share of the economy consistent with historical norms of 18% to 19% in the following decades.

Three major fiscal reform proposals containing broad tax reforms were introduced or updated during the second session of the 112^th Congress. On April 13, 2011, President Obama presented his Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility, which proposes to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years or less. The President's plan includes comprehensive tax reform. On June 29, 2011, the President's Fiscal Commission published updated estimates of its proposal. On February 13, 2012, President Obama released his budget for FY2013, which included proposals for major tax changes.

President Obama's April 2011 Fiscal Reform Proposal

On April 13, 2011, President Obama gave a speech in which he presented his Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility. The President set a goal of reducing the deficit by $4 trillion in 12 years or less.³⁰ Under tax reform, the fact sheet for his proposal states:

On June 29, 2011, the President's Fiscal Commission published updated estimates of its proposal.³² Under the Fiscal Commission's plan, deficits were projected to decline as follows: 8.1% of GDP in 2011, 6.4% of GDP in 2012, 2.3% of GDP in 2015, and 1.2% of GDP in 2020.³³ Under the Fiscal Commission's updated estimates, deficits are projected to fall from 9.3% of GDP in 2011, 6.8% of GDP in 2012, 2.6% of GDP in 2015, and 1.8% of GDP in 2020.³⁴ The Fiscal Commission's explanation is:

President Obama's FY2013 Budget Proposals

On February 13, 2012, President Obama released his FY2013 budget, which proposed numerous changes in tax law. "If enacted, those changes would reduce revenues by $61 billion in 2012 and by $2.4 trillion . . . during the 2013-2022 period relative to the amounts in CBO's baseline."³⁶ The first, second, and fourth bullet points have been made irrelevant by the American Taxpayer Relief Act (P.L. 112-240) which enacted permanent provisions for recent sunset tax cuts, while some provisions such as the R&E credit have been extended through 2013.³⁷

The Congressional Budget Office describes these proposed revenue changes as³⁸

• Extending and Modifying the 2001 and 2003 Tax Reductions

• Various income tax provisions that were originally enacted in EGTRRA [ Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2011 ] and JGTRRA [ Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 ], modified by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5) and extended by the 2010 tax act are scheduled to expire at the end of December 2012.

  . . . the President has called for permanently extending, at 2012 levels, the tax rates on income, capital gains, and dividends for couples with income below $250,000 who file joint tax returns and for single filers with income below $200,000. (Both of those income thresholds would be adjusted for inflation since 2009.) For taxpayers with income above the thresholds, the President proposes to maintain the income tax rates, the phaseout of the personal exemption, and the limit on itemized deductions that are scheduled to take effect in January 2013 under current law and to tax capital gains at a rate of 20 percent. In addition, the President proposes to continue the $1,000 child tax credit (which was raised by $500 in EGTRRA) and the reduced earnings threshold at which families can qualify for at least some of that credit (which was enacted in ARRA).

• Providing Relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax

• . . . the President proposes to reduce the number of taxpayers who would be subject to the AMT by permanently setting various parameters of the tax at the levels that were in effect in calendar year 2011 and indexing those amounts for inflation in later years.

• Limiting Deductions and Exclusions

• The president proposes to limit the extent to which higher-income taxpayers can reduce their tax liability through certain deductions and exclusions to 28 percent of those deductions and exclusions.

• Modifying Estate and Gift Taxes

• The President's budget calls for setting the parameters of the estate, gift, and generation-skipping transfer taxes at the levels that were in effect during calendar year 2009, starting in January 2013. Under that proposal, the amount of an estate that would effectively be exempt from the estate tax would be set permanently at $3.5 million (and at $7 million per couple in most cases); any amount above that effective exemption level would be taxed at a rate of 45 percent.

• Other Revenue Proposals

• [Other] proposals include a set of changes to the U.S. system of taxing international income. . . . The changes include targeting specific sources of tax avoidance associated with intangible assets (such as patents and trademarks) and modifying tax rules for calculating foreign tax credits and expenses related to foreign operations. The tax credit for research and experimentation expired at the end of calendar year 2011. The President proposes to permanently reinstate it, in modified form, and make it retroactive to January 1, 2012. The American Opportunity Tax Credit, which was created by ARRA and extended through December 2012 by the 2010 tax act, provides an annual tax credit of up to $2,500 per student for qualifying postsecondary education expenses. The President also proposes to make that credit permanent and to index the amount of qualifying expenses and the phaseout limits for inflation. The Build America Bonds program, which was also created by ARRA, provides subsidy payments to state and local governments that equal 35 percent of their interest costs on taxable bonds issued through December 31, 2010, to finance capital expenditures. The program has expired for bonds issued after that date; the President proposes to permanently reinstate and expand it but to lower the subsidy rate to 30 percent through 2013 and to 28 percent thereafter. The President also proposes to extend through 2012 a provision that allows all firms that invest in equipment to deduct the full costs of that equipment from their taxable income immediately, instead of spreading the costs out over time. Other proposals that CBO and JCT estimate would increase revenues include repealing the "last-in, first-out" method of accounting for inventories; imposing a "financial crisis responsibility fee"; providing short-term tax relief to employers and expanding the base for the payroll tax for unemployment compensation; and boosting spending for enforcement activities of the Internal Revenue Service.

The Administration also presented a framework for corporate and international tax reform. This tax plan would lower the rate and broaden the base by eliminating tax expenditures and other provisions. It would have a special lower rate for manufacturing. In the international area, the plan discussed five elements: the allocation of interest for deferred income, a tax on excess intangibles, a minimum tax on foreign source income in low tax countries, disallowing a deduction for the cost of moving abroad, and providing a 20% credit for costs of moving an operation from abroad to the United States.³⁹

Tax Reform in the Recent Presidential Election

Taxes were a major issue in the 2012 presidential election.⁴⁰ President Obama emphasized the equity considerations of tax reform. He supported increasing the progressivity of the tax system while raising additional revenue to reduce budget deficits. He advocated ending the "Bush" tax cuts for individuals with incomes over $200,000 and joint filers with incomes over $250,000.⁴¹ He states that households with these higher-income filers should be limited in the value of their tax deductions to 28 cents on the dollar. Legislation enacted in early January, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act (P.L. 112-240) ended various "Bush-era" tax cuts for higher-income individuals, but at higher income levels than proposed by President Obama.⁴²

Former Governor Romney opposed raising additional tax revenue and advocated reducing marginal tax rates and expanding the tax base. Recently, Mr. Romney discussed the possibility of lowering marginal income tax rates and setting a cap on the total amount of deductions for taxpayers who itemize.⁴³

Author Contact Information

This report is a revision of an original report prepared by James M. Bickley.

² For more information see CRS Report R41641, Reducing the Budget Deficit: Tax Policy Options, by Molly F. Sherlock and CRS Report R41970, Addressing the Long-Run Budget Deficit: A Comparison of Approaches, by Jane G. Gravelle.

³ Senate Committee on the Budget, Tax Expenditures: Compendium of Background Material on Individual Provisions, Washington: GPO, December 2008, p. 2.

⁴ The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, The Moment of Truth, December 2010, 65 p.

⁵ Ibid., p. 33.

⁶ The Debt Reduction Task Force, Bipartisan Policy Center, Restoring America's Future, November 17, 2010, 138 p.

⁷ Some of these proposed tax changes are examined in CRS reports.

⁸ Robert E. Hall and Alvin Rabushka, The Flat Tax, Second Edition, Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1995,

⁹ See CRS Report R42624, Moving to a Territorial Income Tax: Options and Challenges, by Jane G. Gravelle for a discussion.

¹⁰ House Committee on the Budget, Chairman Paul Ryan, The Path to Prosperity, Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Resolution, 63 p.

¹¹ National Commission on Fiscal Responsible and Reform, Updated Estimates of the Fiscal Commission Proposal, June 29, 2011, 14 p.

¹² The President's Framework for Business Tax Reform: A Joint Report by the White House and the Department of the Treasury, February 2012, http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/The-Presidents-Framework-for-Business-Tax-Reform-02-22-2012.pdf.

¹³ For an analysis of tax expenditures, see CRS Report RL34622, Tax Expenditures and the Federal Budget, by Thomas L. Hungerford.

¹⁴ For background material on tax expenditures, see Senate Committee on the Budget, Tax Expenditures: Compendium of Background Material on Individual Provisions, S. Prt. 111-58, 111^th Congress, 2^nd Sess., December 2010, 983 p.

¹⁵ See CRS Report R42435, The Challenge of Individual Income Tax Reform: An Economic Analysis of Tax Base Broadening, by Jane G. Gravelle and Thomas L. Hungerford.

¹⁶ See CRS Report RL34229, Corporate Tax Reform: Issues for Congress, by Jane G. Gravelle and Thomas L. Hungerford

¹⁷ CRS Report RL34115, Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives, by Jane G. Gravelle and CRS Report R42624, Moving to a Territorial Income Tax: Options and Challenges, by Jane G. Gravelle. For a discussion of the international effects of lowering the corporate tax rate, see CRS Report R41743, International Corporate Tax Rate Comparisons and Policy Implications, by Jane G. Gravelle. For a primer on international corporate taxation, see CRS Report R41852, U.S. International Corporate Taxation: Basic Concepts and Policy Issues, by Mark P. Keightley.

¹⁸ For a comprehensive overview of the concept of a U.S. VAT, see CRS Report R41602, Should the United States Levy a Value-Added Tax for Deficit Reduction?, by James M. Bickley. For a primer on the VAT, see CRS Report R41708, Value-Added Tax (VAT) as a Revenue Option: A Primer, by James M. Bickley.

¹⁹ For a contrast between the VAT and the national sales tax, see CRS Report RL33438, A Value-Added Tax Contrasted With a National Sales Tax, by James M. Bickley.

²⁰State Sales, Gasoline, Cigarette, and Alcohol Tax Rates by State, 2000-2010, Tax Foundation. Available at http://www.taxfoundation.org, April 18, 2011.

²¹ For a comprehensive analysis of the flat tax, see CRS Report 98-529, Flat Tax: An Overview of the Hall-Rabushka Proposal, by James M. Bickley.

²² For an analysis of the carbon tax, see CRS Report R40242, Carbon Tax and Greenhouse Gas Control: Options and Considerations for Congress, by Jonathan L. Ramseur and Larry Parker.

²³ For an analysis of the gasoline tax, see CRS Report R40808, The Role of Federal Gasoline Excise Taxes in Public Policy, by Robert Pirog.

²⁴ The loss in economic efficiency due to a tax is referred to by economists as the deadweight loss or excess burden of the tax.

²⁵ This proposal, as well as a bill submitted by Senator Enzi (S. 2091) and an alternative territorial reform that had been circulating for some time, are reviewed in CRS Report R42624, Moving to a Territorial Income Tax: Options and Challenges, by Jane G. Gravelle.

²⁶ House Committee on the Budget, Chairman Paul Ryan, The Path to Prosperity, April 5, 2011, p. 5.

²⁷ House Budget Committee, Chairman Paul Ryan, The Path to Prosperity: A Blueprint for American Renewal, Fiscal Year 2013 Budget Resolution, March 20, 2012, 98 p.

²⁸ Ibid., p. 5.

²⁹ Ibid., p. 57.

³⁰ The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Fact Sheet: The President's Framework for Shared Prosperity and Shared Fiscal Responsibility, April 13, 2011, p. 1.

³¹ Ibid., p. 5.

³² National Commission on Fiscal Responsible and Reform, Updated Estimates of the Fiscal Commission Proposal, June 29, 2011, 14 p.

³³ Ibid., p. 4.

³⁴ Ibid.

³⁵ Ibid.

³⁶ Congressional Budget Office, An Analysis of the President's 2013 Budget, March 2012, p. 6.

³⁷ See CRS Report R42884, The "Fiscal Cliff" and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, coordinated by Mindy R. Levit.

³⁸ Ibid., pp. 7, 10.

³⁹The President's Framework for Business Tax Reform: A Joint Report by the White House and the Department of the Treasury, February 2012, http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/The-Presidents-Framework-for-Business-Tax-Reform-02-22-2012.pdf.

⁴⁰ The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, Remarks by the President and Governor Romney in the First Presidential Debate, October 3, 2012.

⁴¹ CRS Report R42020, The 2001 and 2003 Bush Tax Cuts and Deficit Reduction, by Thomas L. Hungerford.

⁴² CRS Report R42884, The "Fiscal Cliff" and the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, coordinated by Mindy R. Levit.

⁴³ Brett Ferguson, "Romney, Obama Have Plans to Limit Deductions, but Neither Simplifies Tax Code," Daily Tax Report, October 23, 2012, p. G5.