|
Skip to make comment
|
Skip to read comments |
Send to a friend
NZCPR
Guest Forum
Phil
Rennie
10
December 06
Do
Tax Cuts Make a Difference?
With a
budget surplus of over $11 billion the government is fast
running out of excuses not to cut tax.
Intuitively
we might think the answer is obvious: of course they do. That
is, if you believe that individuals can spend their money more
efficiently and effectively than politicians and the
bureaucracy.
However,
proving a direct relationship between the level of tax and
economic growth is not cut and dried. The problem is that the
economy is such a complicated beast, and there are so many
different influences that can overshadow the effects of tax
cuts. It is almost impossible to isolate the effect of just
one input, however important it might be, and to prove
causality, and the direction of causality.
This
is why Michael Cullen can say with a straight face that tax
cuts will do nothing for economic growth. Likewise, the New
Zealand Institute is dismissive of the impact of tax and
rarely, if ever, mentions it in their publications. This is
surprising. When total government revenue is $76 billion, or
48.8% of the entire economy, it seems like you are ignoring
the elephant in the room somewhat.
The
traditional view of government spending has been that at
certain low levels it actually helps growth by providing basic
infrastructure (such as roads, a legal system and schools).
However, if it rises too high it can become a handbrake on the
economy.
With
the size of the government in
New Zealand
at such high levels it’s clear the private sector is being
crowded out. This is why the Treasury has been urging the
government to cut taxes to boost growth.
There
are three main ways lowering the tax burden can help growth.
For a start, imposing tax changes people’s behaviour. This
is why governments tax cigarettes and fine speeding drivers
– to discourage those activities. The same holds true for
taxing work and employment. By lowering the rate of return, a
high tax rate (both personal and corporate) makes risk-taking
and entrepreneurial activity less rewarding.
What
this means is that the true cost of tax is never 1:1. Instead,
it will always have a higher cost because of the potential
wealth that money could have created had it been left in
private hands. These ‘deadweight’ losses are recognised by
the Treasury, who now recommend that every new spending
initiative should generate a return of at least $1.20 for
every $1 spent.
Tax
also discourages people from working. This is not a big issue
for people on a set wage or salary, but it is for those who
have control over their hours, such as the self-employed and
those considering a return to work.
This
is very important, because while
New Zealand
has low unemployment, there are still many groups in society
who are shut out of the labour market. In particular, moving
off a benefit into part-time work is tough. With the
combination of tax and benefit reduction many people will only
get to keep a few cents of every dollar they earn, which
hardly makes it worthwhile.
Taxes
are not the only answer to this problem, but they can help by
increasing the gap further between work and welfare.
Finally,
the effect tax has on our international competitiveness should
not be underestimated. If nothing else, it serves as a
marketing function. Lowering taxes shows that as a nation we
celebrate achievement and hard work, rather than penalising
it. This is important because average tax rates around the
world are falling, especially in
Australia
.
Governments
can’t do much to improve the weather, or to lift wages (in
the short term at least) but tax is one area they do have
direct control over. It is one important way they can make it
more attractive to work and invest in
New Zealand
.
The
massive budget surplus means the government has the chance to
kill another myth – that tax cuts mean cuts to public
spending. While there are strong arguments for tighter quality
control on spending, in the short term at least the government
has a rare opportunity to cut taxes painlessly.
Even
using the conservative cash surplus of $3 billion would allow
for significant cuts. For example, the top personal and
corporate tax rates could all be dropped to 30% and the middle
rate could be lowered to 18%, without even touching current
spending or debt repayment.
The
movement for lower taxes is not an ideological exercise, or a
way for the rich to make more money. It is a key tool in
sparking the economy and helping us compete on the world
stage.
Skip to top |
Skip to make comment |
Send to a friend
Your
Comments:
Your comments
will be published on the READERS FORUM. To view
>>>
To comment go to
letters to editor
>>>
Skip to top |
Skip to make comment |
Skip to read comments
Send to
a friend:
|