Views
Graph
Explorer
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 levels
Load all levels
All
Dagre
Focus
Down
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Load 4 level
Load all levels
All
Tree
SpaceTree
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Radial
Focus
Expanding
Load 1 level
Load 2 levels
Load 3 levels
Down
All
Down
Box
Focus
Expanding
Down
Up
All
Down
Page â
Article
Outline
Document
Down
All
Canvas
Time
Timeline
Calendar
Request email digest
Past 24 hours
Past 2 days
Past 3 days
Past week
Add
Add page
Add comment
Add citation
Edit
Edit page
Delete page
Share
Link
Bookmark
Embed
Social media
Login
Member login
Register now for a free account
đ
Feldstein revision
UnterstĂŒtzendes Argument
1
#232794
A reply from Martin Feldstein
Immediately related elements
How this works
-
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate »
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate
Visualizing the Romney Tax DebateâTax reform has emerged as a major bone of contention in the 2012 Presidential election campaign. While President Obama has identified some tax changes, Governor Romney proposes major systemic reform. But is his plan - especially the proposals for individual taxation - viable?âF1CEB7
▲
Romney's plan stated »
Romney's plan stated
Romney's plan statedâFor individual taxation, Romney proposes rate cuts for all taxpayers to be funded by reducing or eliminating various tax preferences. His plan aims to do this without raising the tax burden on low and middle income taxpayers, defined as $200,000 or less. It also abolishes several other taxes.â59C6EF
▲
But does it compute? »
But does it compute?
But does it compute?âIn early August the Tax Policy Center produced an analysis showing that achieving all the goals of the Romney plan is mathematically impossible. Romney cited six studies in reply. Economists, journalists, bloggers and others then joined in on both sides. So is the plan mathematically possible?âFFB597
▲
Yes - it does compute »
Yes - it does compute
Yes - it does computeâIn the Presidential debates Obama referred to the TPC finding that Romneys individual tax plan did not add up. Romney responded by citing six studies that, he claims, refute the TPC. As discussed in the parent But does it compute? node, we have decided to make the No case the main locus.â59C6EF
▲
The cited studies »
The cited studies
The cited studiesâEach study cited by the Romney camp is added here, with each identified simply by author surname and item type (article, paper, simulation etc). No attempt is made here to parse their argumentation - that is done in the map of the No case - to relevant locations in which each item is linked.â98CE71
■
Feldstein revision
Feldstein revisionâA reply from Martin Feldsteinâ98CE71
►
Figure is arbitrary »
Figure is arbitrary
Figure is arbitraryâSome have suggested the benchmark definition of high income set by the TPC (and in the general political debate) is too high and have called for analysis where it is set at lower levels. For example Martin Feldstein has defended a $100,000 since this only subjects the top 21% to base broadening.âFFFACD
►
Elasticity too high »
Elasticity too high
Elasticity too highâIn his original paper Feldstein assumes that raising the after-tax share of earnings an individual keeps by 10% increases taxable income by 5% - the elasticity of the tax base is 0.5 - reducing the cost of rate reduction by $33 billion. Critics claim this elasticity is too high.âFFFACD
►
Revised Feldstein »
Revised Feldstein
Revised FeldsteinâIn response to objections, Feldstein produced a revised version of his analysis with assumptions closer to those of his critics. He stands by the core claim of his first paper - that the Romney scheme of cutting rates funded by base broadening without burdening the middle class - is viable.âFFFACD
Heading
Summary
Click the button to enter task scheduling information
Open
Details
Enter task details
Message text
Select assignee(s)
Due date (click calendar)
RadDatePicker
RadDatePicker
Open the calendar popup.
Calendar
Title and navigation
Title and navigation
<<
<
November 2024
>
<<
November 2024
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
44
27
28
29
30
31
1
2
45
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
46
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
47
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
48
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Reminder
No reminder
1 day before due
2 days before due
3 days before due
1 week before due
Ready to post
Copy to text
Enter
Cancel
Task assignment(s) have been emailed and cannot now be altered
Lock
Cancel
Save
Comment graphing options
Choose comments:
Comment only
Whole thread
All comments
Choose location:
To a new map
To this map
New map options
Select map ontology
Options
Standard (default) ontology
College debate ontology
Hypothesis ontology
Influence diagram ontology
Story ontology
Graph to private map
Cancel
Proceed
+Kommentare (
0
)
- Kommentare
Kommentar hinzufĂŒgen
Newest first
Oldest first
Show threads
+Verweise (
1
)
- Verweise
HinzufĂŒgen
List by:
Citerank
Map
Link
[1]
A reply from Martin Feldstein
Zitieren:
Martin Feldstein
Publication info:
2 September 2012 - posted in Greg Mankiw's blog
Zitiert von:
Peter Baldwin
5:10 AM 31 October 2012 GMT
Citerank:
(3)
231239
Figure is arbitrary
Some have suggested the benchmark definition of 'high income' set by the TPC (and in the general political debate) is too high and have called for analysis where it is set at lower levels. For example Martin Feldstein has defended a $100,000 since this only subjects the top 21% to base broadening.
13
EF597B
,
232170
Elasticity too high
In his original paper Feldstein assumes that raising the after-tax share of earnings an individual keeps by 10% increases taxable income by 5% - the elasticity of the tax base is 0.5 - reducing the cost of rate reduction by $33 billion. Critics claim this elasticity is too high.
11
98CE71
,
232171
Revised Feldstein
In response to objections, Feldstein produced a revised version of his analysis with assumptions closer to those of his critics. He stands by the core claim of his first paper - that the Romney scheme of cutting rates funded by base broadening without burdening the middle class - is viable.
13
EF597B
URL:
http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/a-reply-from-martin-feldstein.html
Auszug -
2) The behavioral response (reducing the cost of rate reduction by $33 billion) is too large because the elasticity of the tax base would be lower than the 0.5 I assumed.
+About
- About
Eingabe von:
Peter Baldwin
NodeID:
#232794
Node type:
SupportiveArgument
Eingabedatum (GMT):
10/31/2012 4:53:00 AM
Zuletzt geÀndert am (GMT):
10/31/2012 7:17:00 PM
Show other editors
Eingehende Kreuzverbindungen
0
Abgehende Kreuzverbindungen
3
Durchschnittsbewertung
0
by
0
Nutzer
x
Select file to upload