A New April 15: Make It a Day of Giving (Efficiently)
President Barack Obama on January 22 signed into law a provision allowing charitable gifts made for Haiti relief during February and most of January 2010 to be deducted on 2009 federal tax returns. This noble sentiment would work a lot better if deductions were allowed for all giving made to qualified charities by April 15.
A New April 15 Make It a Day of Giving (Efficiently)
President Barack Obama on January 22 signed into law a provision allowing charitable gifts made for Haiti relief during February and most of January 2010 to be deducted on 2009 federal tax returns. This noble sentiment would work a lot better if deductions were allowed for all giving made to qualified charities by April 15.
Tax Issues Related to Small Business Job Creation
Eric Toder testified before the Senate Committee on Finance on how recently proposed incentives for small business may help economic recovery. These incentives are only a small component of broader policies to accelerate recovery from the deep recession we have experienced in the past two years and reduce unemployment.
Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future : Hearing before the Senate Budget Committee U.S. Congress
Today’s federal budget policies are unsustainable. Three programs - Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid - constitute more than 40 percent of spending other than interest in a normal year and all are growing faster than the economy and tax revenues. At the same time, Congress has kept the overall tax burden remarkably constant as a share of gross domestic product for most of the past 50 years. The combination of these factors leads to a growing deficit. This testimony, by a former Congressional Budget Office director, discusses four policy packages that would return the United States to a sustainable budget.
Budgeting in the Ideal and in the United States
Institute Fellow Rudy Penner describes how the U.S. budget is prepared by the executive branch and Congress, and how it then is implemented by the executive branch. The budget preparation process could be improved, Penner asserts, but budget implementation works smoothly and efficiently. The severe long-run budget problem the country faces is caused by only three spending programs: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. All are growing faster than the economy, and there is strong opposition against raising tax burdens. Changes are suggested for the budget process so that it is better suited for dealing with this long-run problem.
Nevada GOP Gubernatorial Candidate: Scrap the Caps
GOP gubernatorial candidate Mike Montandon is making his views on Nevada property tax reform known– and so far they all seem quite sensible.
As reported by the North Lake Tahoe Bonanza, Montandon thinks:
(1) it’s absurd that Nevada remains the only state that values real property for tax purposes based on depreciated value (which depends primarily on how old your house is) rather than market value;
(2) the “tax caps” enacted a few years ago, which restrict the amount by which a property’s tax liability can increase each year to 3 percent for residential properties, were (and remain) a bad idea;
(3) property needs to be valued in a systematic and professional manner. (Right now, as is becoming increasingly clear, different localities are using different standards of valuation.)
Caveats: I’m paraphrasing, and things #1 and things #3 shouldn’t be that controversial anyway.
But saying thing #1 amounts to repudiating the big property tax cuts Nevada enacted in 1981 to head off a Proposition 13-style tax revolt, and that takes some guts– even if it’s obviously correct.
It’s to be expected, maybe, that a guy coming from a local government background (he was mayor of North Las Vegas) will have a critical stance toward state-imposed constraints on local taxing authority, but still. Bottom line is that Montandon is saying precisely the things that ought to be said about Nevada’s past, and hopeful future, property tax changes.
An Analysis of Potential Tax Incentives to Increase Charitable Giving in Puerto Rico : In Brief
This policy brief summarizes the findings of a larger report on potential tax incentives to increase charitable giving in Puerto Rico. Improved incentives for private charitable giving would strengthen nonprofit organizations in Puerto Rico. Taxpayers may choose between a 100 percent deduction for contributions over 3 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) or a 33 percent deduction for contributions with no floor. Deductions may not exceed 15 percent of AGI. Removing the 15 percent ceiling would be a relatively cost effective way of encouraging more giving.
An Analysis of Potential Tax Incentives to Increase Charitable Giving in Puerto Rico : Final Report
Improved incentives for private charitable giving would strengthen nonprofit organizations in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico’s income tax allows itemizers to deduct charitable contributions, but with limits. Taxpayers may choose between a 100 percent deduction for contributions over 3 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI) or a 33 percent deduction for contributions with no floor. Deductions may not exceed 15 percent of AGI. Removing the 15 percent ceiling would be a relatively cost effective way of encouraging more giving. Reducing the 3 percent floor, though generating less additional giving per dollar of revenue loss, would encourage broader participation.
The U.S. Is Broke. Here’s Why.
In his State of the Union address, President Obama no doubt will promise to attack the deficit. Trouble is, the deficit is only a symptom of a chronic disease that strikes at the very heart of democratic government. The disease? Fiscal sclerosis setting future national priorities in stone long before the future has arrived. Our fiscal arteries are so clogged and hardened that to do anything new, meet any emergency, or engage any new opportunity, the president must renege on past legislators’ promises. If he doesn’t address unsustainable promises head on, government will be tied up with yesterday’s problems and the demands of yesterday’s voters.
Lessons Unlearned? Who Pays for the Next Financial Collapse?
It’s an old story. Come a financial collapse, somebody’s got to pay to get the nation’s financial house back in order. While many on Wall Street made millions losing money for their companies, every young American is now saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of additional government debt. While buyers walked away from homes when they went underwater, others who had mustered large down payments simply absorbed their lossesin some cases, wiping out years of saving. While speculators who borrowed to buy stock or real estate shrugged off debt by declaring personal or corporate bankruptcy, those who invested in their 401(k)s helplessly watched their retirement savings erode.