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 ✓
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
🔎
Corrected figure?
Klausimas
1
#231566
If Barro is right on this point, what would correcting for this do to Dubay's estimated saving from moving to a carry-over basis?
Immediately related elements
How this works
-
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate »
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate
Visualizing the Romney Tax Debate☜Tax 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?☜F1CEB7
▲
Romney's plan stated »
Romney's plan stated
Romney's plan stated☜For 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.☜59C6EF
▲
But does it compute? »
But does it compute?
But does it compute?☜In 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?☜FFB597
▲
No - it does not compute »
No - it does not compute
No - it does not compute☜The Tax Policy Center argues in its analysis that the various elements of the Romney plan cannot all be achieved. The TPC paper has been invoked and/or defended by almost all of the critics of the Romney plan in the debate.☜59C6EF
▲
The TPC case »
The TPC case
The TPC case☜The essence of the Tax Policy Centers argument is contained in the excerpt from their paper cited below. We have parsed the argument into a set of premises that must be true for the argument to hold and mapped the debate about each.☜98CE71
▲
Available savings claim »
Available savings claim
Available savings claim☜The TPC set out a number of assumptions concerning the amount that could be raised by eliminating tax expenditures that benefit high income earners in the individual tax system (the analysis does not include corporate tax). These are enumerated in the cited section.☜FF97FF
▲
The critics challenge »
The critics challenge
The critics challenge☜Critics of the TPC analysis question the exclusion of two major tax preferences - the exclusion of interest on state and local bonds and the exclusion of inside-buildup on life insurance vehicles. According to the TPC eliminating these exclusions could raise $45 billion in tax revenue.☜EF597B
▲
Ruling out "step up" »
Ruling out "step up"
Ruling out "step up"☜The TPC analysis assumed that, in the wake of abolition of estate duties, there would be no adjustment of the current capital gains treatment that in assessing inherited assets, excludes gains made between purchase and death. However in this case moving to a carry over basis would make sense.☜98CE71
▲
OMB revenue estimate »
OMB revenue estimate
OMB revenue estimate☜Dubay relies on a revenue estimate taken from the OMB Analytical Perspectives document on the FY2013 Budget. A table on page 261 a figure of $23.86 billion for 2013 from moving to a step-up basis.☜98CE71
▲
Assumes acrrued gains taxed on death »
Assumes acrrued gains taxed on death
Assumes acrrued gains taxed on death☜Barro says Dubay gets it wrong on the revenue gain from moving to a carry-over basis. This is because the OMB estimate that Dubay relies on presumes gains would be taxed on an accruals basis immediately upon death, as stated in a footnote (see citation).☜EF597B
■
Corrected figure?
Corrected figure?☜If Barro is right on this point, what would correcting for this do to Dubays estimated saving from moving to a carry-over basis?☜FFB597
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
+Komentarai (
0
)
- Komentarai
Komentuoti
Newest first
Oldest first
Show threads
+Citavimą (
0
)
- Citavimą
Pridėti citatą
List by:
Citerank
Map
+About
- About
Redagavo:
Peter Baldwin
NodeID:
#231566
Node type:
Issue
Įvedimo data (GMT):
10/20/2012 12:23:00 AM
Paskutinės redakcijos data (GMT laikas):
10/20/2012 12:23:00 AM
Show other editors
Įeinančios sąsajos:
0
Išeinančios sąsajos:
0
Vidutinis vertinimas:
0
by
0
vartotojai
x
Select file to upload