Ignores growth potential
A number of critics of the TPC study claim it ignores the potential for major tax reform to increase economic growth through its effect on labor supply and capital formation. They argue such 'macro dynamic' effects make the Romney plan viable without burdening low to middle income earners.
An important aspect of these criticisms is the nature of the model used by the TPC to model tax changes, which assumes away any major impact on labor supply, capital formation or economic growth from reform. The critics argue such 'static' models (including those used by the US Treasury Department and Joint Committee on Taxation) are only suitable for modelling minor incremental changes to the system (see citations below).

The excerpt from a paper by Harvey Rosen of Princeton University cited below provides the most detailed statement of this objection of the studies that have been mentioned in the debate.

For the objection to hold water the posited macro-dynamic effects would need to be significant. Several attempts have been made to put some numbers on this and to show they make the Romney plan viable. These, along with objections to them, are mapped in the sub-structure to this node. The TPC's defenses against this criticism are also included.
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate »Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate
Romney's plan stated »Romney's plan stated
But does it compute? »But does it compute?
No - it does not compute »No - it does not compute
The TPC case »The TPC case
Growth effect claim »Growth effect claim
Ignores growth potential
Growth-supportive studies »Growth-supportive studies
The TPC defends »The TPC defends
+Commentaires (0)
+Citations (1)
+About