Allowing tax rates for the country’s highest earners to rise, an idea endorsed by top Democrats, would have a dire effect on the economic recovery, according to a new report prepared for business groups that was released Tuesday.
The study from Ernst & Young found that letting tax rates for the wealthiest Americans lapse would sap $200 billion and some 700,000 jobs out of the economy, reduce wages by 1.8 percent and lead to a decrease in investment.
“These results may suggest to policy makers that allowing the top tax rates to increase comes with economic consequences,” Ernst & Young’s Robert Caroll and Gerald Prante wrote in the report for the Independent Community Bankers of America, the National Federation of Independent Business, the S Corporation Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
“Long-run output can be expected to fall, and, depending on the use of the revenues, living standards, as reflected by workers‟ real after-tax wages, may also be lower.”
Top Republicans, including House GOP leaders and committee chairmen, jumped on the Tuesday report, as they continue to battle with President Obama and Democrats over how to proceed on tax issues and the broader fiscal cliff.
Obama reiterated last week his plan to only extend the Bush-era rates for annual family incomes up to $250,000 for another year, a proposal many congressional Democrats have coalesced behind. Republicans on the Hill want to extend all current rates for a year.
Output in the long-run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion in today’s economy.
Employment in the long-run would fall by 0.5 percent, meaning roughly 710,000 fewer jobs in today’s economy.
Capital stock and investment in the long-run would fall by 1.4 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively.
Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent, reflecting a decline in workers’ living standards relative to what would have occurred otherwise.
Every state in the U.S. feels the impact of tax hikes
The report, which offers a state-by-state look at the impact on economic output and employment, finds that every state is affected negatively by the tax increases contemplated by the Obama Administration.
Ernst & Young is one of the top financial firms in the world. The report is entitled “Long-run macroeconomic impact of increasing tax rates on high-income taxpayers in 2013”.
Even though Obama has increased our debt by nearly 6 trillion in less than four years, that money hasn’t created any jobs because government is not efficient at creating jobs that last. When you take money away from people who create jobs, you lose the jobs. Wasting money on green energy firms that go bankrupt is a great plan to pay back your campaign fundraisers, but it’s not a good plan to create jobs. Bailing out labor unions with billions of taxpayer dollars so that they can create electric cars that catch fire is not the right way to create jobs, either. That’s what the stimulus was – $800 billion dollars taken out of the hands of businesses and sent directly to Obama’s allies. We need to get the government out of our business if we want job creation.
How amusing to watch Democrats wring their hands over what they can do to get businesses to create jobs, when one of the biggest job killers is the minimum wage they keep hiking.
Recall that it was Democrats who raised the federal wage floor a whopping $2.10 an hour in the middle of the recession. The record 41% increase has led to record unemployment among young people, especially black teens.
Congress started ratcheting up the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour in mid-2007, arguing it would help abate poverty. But retailers looking to slash costs eliminated low-skilled, entry-level jobs rather than pay the mandated increases.
Now 1.5 million fewer teens are working. Last year’s unemployment rate for workers ages 16 to 19 shot up to 26% from 2007’s 15%.
As for black teens, their joblessness soared to a record 43% after the final raise to $7.25 took effect in mid-2009. It helped put more than half of young black men out of work — a first.
The president proposes cranking the minimum wage even higher to $9.50. Then he wants to raise it every year thereafter as a “living wage” indexed to inflation.
Yes, this is the problem that happens when you elect someone who knows nothing whatsoever about economics. And when I say nothing, I mean he is in disagreement with virtually all economists across the ideological spectrum.
Here’s Greg’s list, together with the percentage of economists who agree:
A ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of housing available. (93%)
Tariffs and import quotas usually reduce general economic welfare. (93%)
Flexible and floating exchange rates offer an effective international monetary arrangement. (90%)
Fiscal policy (e.g., tax cut and/or government expenditure increase) has a significant stimulative impact on a less than fully employed economy. (90%)
The United States should not restrict employers from outsourcing work to foreign countries. (90%)
The United States should eliminate agricultural subsidies. (85%)
Local and state governments should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises. (85%)
If the federal budget is to be balanced, it should be done over the business cycle rather than yearly. (85%)
The gap between Social Security funds and expenditures will become unsustainably large within the next fifty years if current policies remain unchanged. (85%)
Cash payments increase the welfare of recipients to a greater degree than do transfers-in-kind of equal cash value. (84%)
A large federal budget deficit has an adverse effect on the economy. (83%)
A minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers. (79%)
The government should restructure the welfare system along the lines of a “negative income tax.” (79%)
Effluent taxes and marketable pollution permits represent a better approach to pollution control than imposition of pollution ceilings. (78%)
From CNBC, we get this article showing that any increase in the minimum wage will raise the unemployment rate for young people.
Excerpt:
A quarter of teenagers were jobless in March, representing a surprising increase from February, even as the unemployment rate for the rest of the population decreased.
This figure may only get worse if budget-strapped states raise the minimum wage, and it could also be a sign of greater structural damage underlying our economy, analysts said.
The unemployment rate for 16- to 19-year olds jumped back up to 24.5 percent in March, up from 23.9 percent the prior month, according to the latest jobs data from the Labor Department.
[…]“Even when comprehending that teen employment is volatile in nature, the data that exists serves up some shock and awe,” said Brian Sozzi, a retail research analyst with Wall Street Strategies, in a note Wednesday. “If these (wage) increases do go through, the prospect for teen employment will remain grim as employers search for workers with advanced skills to fill positions.”
Twelve states, including Illinois and Pennsylvania, are considering a hike in the minimum wage. While this has been the subject of a long-running debate, many economists and analysts say raising this pay bar may cause more teen layoffs, even as it helps teens who manage to stay employed make more.
“Minimum wage increases over the past few years has definitely made it worse,” said Peter Boockvar, chief equities strategist at Miller Tabak. “In fact, there should be zero minimum wage for teenagers, or at most, something much less than the current rate.”
Teens typically are the first to be fired and the last to be hired back in a normal economic cycle, so this rate can be considered a kind of leading indicator of employment.
* The minimum wage encourages employers to hire illegal aliens.
Beranek (1982).
* Few workers are permanently stuck at the minimum wage.
Brozen (1969), Smith and Vavrichek (1992).
* The minimum wage has reduced employment in foreign countries.Canada: Forrest (1982); Chile: Corbo (1981); Costa Rica: Gregory (1981); France: Rosa (1981).
This is why it is important for voters to understand economics. When you raise the price of labor, fewer employers will purchase labor. Supply and demand.
. . .There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.
The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires. . .
See, that’s why Obama is so confident about talking the money earned by businesses owners and their employees. You don’t really run your own business, Obama does. He is the one who puts in the 70 hour weeks and takes the risks and borrows money from family. When I was working 70 hour weeks in IT start-ups, that wasn’t me working those hours, that was Obama. That’s why he’s entitled to tax me so much. He was actually working weekends to earn my salary. He has a right to my salary, because I didn’t really earn it.