The Tax Reform Act of 1986 has been widely heralded as the most important tax legislation since the income tax was converted to a tax on the masses during the Second World War. Since his favorite proposal for a constitutional amendment—the one calling for a balanced budget—was not adopted, the 1986 Tax Reform Act clearly will be the major domestic achievement of Ronald Reagan\u27s presidency. This law even produced the new Internal Revenue Code of 1986; no more Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. It took until the very end of 1987 until we were forced to add that felicitous phrase \u22as amended\u22 to the 1986 Code. The near term future of the income tax—and, perhaps, even its long-term destiny—will be shaped by the Tax Reform Act of 1986. It is, to be sure, significant legislation, some would even say unique, massive both in its scope and in its detail—at least a 9.1 if we had a Richter scale for this sort of thing. What seems most unique to me about this legislation, however, is the character of the commentary it has inspired, commentary marked by hyperbole. Hyperbole about the 1986 Act from the politicians and the press is, of course, unexceptional; hyperbole, after all, is their stock in trade. I am surprised, however, that nobody even asked President Reagan, \u22Are you sure?\u22 when he described the 1986 Tax Act as \u27\u27the best anti-poverty measure, the best pro-family measure and the best job-creation measure ever to come out of the Congress of the United States.\u22 Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Zero for three, Mr. President
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.