View Research by Author - Eric Toder

More about Eric Toder's areas of expertise can be found on this Urban Institute expert's page.

Citation URL: http://www.urban.org/EricToder

President Obama's tax reform task force has been asked to propose ways to close the $300 billion tax gap, which is the estimated difference between taxes owed and taxes paid either voluntarily or through enforcement. But the amount of money lost to legal tax avoidance - the difference between an income tax without special tax preferences and taxes under current law - at least double that lost to outright evasion. The perpetrators of this second, "avoidance" tax gap are legislators, not taxpayers. The panel's main focus should be on finding appropriate ways to close this second tax gap.

The House leadership has proposed to finance health care reform with a surtax on adjusted gross income (AGI) of high-income individuals, while the president's budget would increase the two top marginal tax rates on taxable income. Income taxed at statutory marginal rates is 58 percent of AGI for all taxpayers but only 46 percent of AGI for taxpayers with income over $1 million. While personal exemptions and deductions account for most of the difference between the two tax bases for the population as a whole, capital gains and qualified dividends make up most of the difference for very high income taxpayers.

The largest tax preferences for housing, health care, and retirement saving reduce federal revenues by about 3 percent of GDP. They raise after-tax income proportionally more for higher income groups than lower income groups, but raise income proportionately less for those at the very top. The net distributional effects depend on how these tax preferences are financed. If paid for with higher marginal tax rates, they benefit upper-middle income taxpayers at the expense of both lower-income and the highest-income taxpayers, but if paid for by lower per-capita spending, all high-income groups gain and all low-income groups lose.

Urban Institute projections suggest the stock market collapse will have small effects on most Americans' retirement incomes. It's estimated that 37 percent of Americans born between 1941 and 1965 owned no stocks when the market crashed in 2008 and that income from assets will account for a small share of retirement income, even for those with stocks. For most retirees, Social Security provides the majority of income. Had Social Security been invested in private accounts with equities, the impact of the crash would have been much larger—positive or negative, depending on one's birth cohort and on future market performance.

The one-third drop in the S&P 500 index between year-end 2007 and 2008 raises concerns about retirement security since Americans now hold more equities through their retirement plans. Those near retirement will fare the worst because they have no time to recoup their losses. Midcareer workers will fare better because they have more time to rebuild their wealth. They may even gain income if they buy stocks at low prices and get above-average rates of return. High-income groups will be the most affected because they are most likely to have financial assets and to be invested in the stock market.

Most advanced countries exempt returns to retirement saving from income tax, but private saving rates are falling and many people are saving too little for retirement. There is a trade-off between the goals of promoting wide participation in retirement saving plans and allowing more choice to employees. In the United States, purely employer funded plans have been replaced by plans that rely more on voluntary employee contributions, while private saving has declined. Two approaches that may promote more retirement saving are refundable tax credits for low-income workers and rules that encourage or require automatic enrollment in retirement saving plans.

This report compares projections of income and assets from the Model of Income in the Near Term (MINT) with data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), the Health and Retirement Study (HRS), the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), and the Current Population Survey (CPS). The comparison reveals a fair amount of variability in population characteristics and reported income and assets among these data files. There is no "right" answer, but rather a range of possible answers. For most statistics we compare, MINT's projected values fall between the highest and lowest values among the survey data.

This report card evaluates the provisions of the Finance and Ways & Means Committees' conference tax stimulus bill (the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009"). The evaluation is preliminary and does not include all of the provisions in the bill most notably we omit provisions related to state and local debt and recovery zone credits. TPC will update the report card if significant changes occur before Congress passes the bill.

Over the last three decades there has been a steady shift from DB to DC pensions. The Pension Protection Act of 2006 may accelerate this trend. This paper examines the impact of an accelerated freeze on the retirement income of boomers. Simulations suggest that such a scenario would produce more losers than winners and reduce average retirement incomes. Income changes will be substantial among high-income workers, who have the highest DB coverage and pension incomes. Late boomers will experience the largest impacts, as they lose their high DB accrual years and have inadequate time to accumulate DC wealth before retirement.

The Tax Policy Center has graded the key tax provisions of the pending Senate stimulus bill (the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Plan of 2009"). Our grades, which rely on the bill's legislative language, focus on how well these measures would boost the economy in the short run. Accompanying write-ups describe current law, the proposed change, and the short- and long-term effects on the budget, the economy, fairness and tax complexity. We will update the report card as we learn more about the provisions and as the stimulus bill moves through Congress.

Return to list of authors