Len Burman, Daniel Patrick Moynihan Professor of Public Affairs, Maxwell School of Syracuse University, and, Affiliated Scholar, Tax Policy Center
Biography provided by participant
Leonard Burman is the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Professor of Public Affairs at the Maxwell School of Syracuse University and Affiliated Scholar at the Tax Policy Center. He was a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and director of the Tax Policy Center. He is an expert in public finance and modeling the effects of government policies on individuals' and firms' decisions. He has held high-level positions in both the executive and legislative branches, serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tax Analysis at the Treasury from 1998 to 2000, and as Senior Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office. Burman is also a Visiting Professor at Georgetown University's Public Policy Institute, and had previously taught economics at George Washington University and Bates College. Burman is the author of The Labyrinth of Capital Gains Tax Policy: A Guide for the Perplexed, and numerous articles, studies, and reports. Burman's current research is focused on the changing role of taxation in social policy, pension and retirement policy, estate taxation, the alternative minimum tax, and tax policy with respect to health insurance.
With unemployment cresting 10 percent, it is natural to think of ways to boost hiring. Unfortunately, experience with incremental tax subsidies has been disappointing. Evidence from the targeted jobs tax credit of the 1970s suggests that most of the money subsidized hiring that would have happened anyway. While some economists think that a better designed subsidy could work well this time, many are skeptical. The 1970s credit was very complicated because policymakers couldn't resist putting numerous rules and restrictions on it. But politicians are certainly no less likely to do that now. (See Howard Gleckman’s excellent post on this subject… Read more
Eric Leeper’s paper makes a compelling argument for transparent and predictable fiscal policy based on the overwhelming acceptance—and success—of such standards for monetary policy. Even more importantly, given that our current political system seems utterly incapable of recognizing fiscal constraints, adult supervision from a nonpolitical body seems very appealing and may be the only option to avoid fiscal disaster. That said, there are big challenges in designing an effective mechanism to credibly commit to a course of fiscal policy (as Eric acknowledges in his article). An independent Fiscal Fed would appear to raise legal issues since the constitution vests power… Read more
Let me start with some praise for the president before I explain why the surtax is a really bad idea. First, the president deserves credit for insisting that health reform be paid for. We are on the verge of a fiscal catastrophe and this is a move in the right direction. The president is also right that there is a compelling argument for more progressivity in the tax system. As Belle noted, the income distribution has become much more skewed over the last few decades. According to the CBO, the share of after-tax income going to the top one percent… Read more
I can't figure out whether to be happy or not that the tax cuts will apparently last two years. Why? As Professor Meltzer notes, both theory and evidence tell us that temporary tax cuts are less effective than permanent ones. And, temporary tax cuts are usually extended, so we might be seriously underestimating the package’s long-term cost by counting only the first two years. On the other hand, the tax code is a mess and adding more tax credits will just add to the complexity. If we must have them, it would be best if they didn’t linger. And, especially if the… Read more
Biography provided by participant
