444 research outputs found
Introduction to the State of Federal Income Taxation: Rates, Progressivity, and Budget Processes
Many fundamental changes have occurred in our tax system in the past four years. These changes raise several important issues: Is it appropriate to decrease tax revenues in order to decrease the size of the government? What is the appropriate role of progressivity? What are the efficiency effects of recent tax cuts? How important is it to have a transparent budget process? Professor James Repetti introduces the speakers and commentators who address these and other issues in a Symposium on The State of Federal Income Taxation held at Boston College Law School on Friday April 16, 2004
The Use of Tax Law to Stabilize the Stock Market: The Efficacy of Holding Period Requirements
Should We Tax the Gratuitous Transfer of Wealth?: An Introduction
The estate tax was enacted because of concerns about the impact of large concentrations of dynastic wealth on the political process. As discussed in this commentary, which reviews the Symposium articles by Paul Caron, David Joulfaian, and Jennifer Bird-Pollan, recent research by political scientists supports the legitimacy of these concerns. In addition, a significant body of studies suggests that inequality has a long-term negative impact on growth. Paul Caron observes in his article that progressivity in our tax system has been decreasing and that the estate tax was 60% or higher for fifty years (1934–1983), a rate much higher than the current 40%. David Joulfaian notes that the estate tax clearly contributes to the progressivity of our tax system. He finds that estate tax liability of a decedent is on average equivalent to doubling the income tax liability of decedents during the prior ten years. Jennifer Bird-Pollan explores the views on estate tax from a liberal, utilitarian, and libertarian philosophical perspective. This commentary notes some additional aspects of the estate tax that strengthen the utilitarian and liberal arguments in favor of the estate tax
The Appropriate Roles for Equity and Efficiency in a Progressive Individual Income Tax
Increased focus on economic efficiency in formulating tax policy, at the expense of achieving equity, has resulted in decreased rate progressivity in our individual income tax. This decrease has exacerbated inequality. There are several explanations for the intense focus on efficiency and reduced emphasis on equity. Predictions of efficiency gains from low individual income tax rates appear more certain than equity gains from progressive tax rates. Efficiency gains seem measurable, while equity gains appear intangible and unquantifiable. In addition, distributive justice, which underlies and shapes tax equity, exists in many abstract forms, some of which may not require progressive tax rates. This Article argues, however, that the emphasis on efficiency is misplaced. Inequality imposes measurable costs on the health, social well-being, and intergenerational mobility of our citizens, as well as on our democratic process. This is corroborated by significant empirical analysis. In contrast, empirical analysis shows that anticipated efficiency gains from low individual tax rates are speculative. A consensus exists among economists that taxes within the historical range of rates in the United States have little or no impact on labor supply. Moreover, economists cannot agree whether the myriad empirical studies on savings indicate that progressive tax rates decrease, increase, or have no impact on savings in the United States. The clear harms arising from inequality and the uncertain harms arising from progressive tax rates, strongly support always giving equity at least equal weight with efficiency in formulating tax policy. But given the high level of inequality in the United States and the currently low and flat tax rate structure, equity should be given more weight than efficiency at this time. Emphasizing equity in a progressive individual income tax will contribute to the health and economic mobility of our citizens, as well as the stability of our democracy
\u3cem\u3eTaft v. Bowers\u3c/em\u3e: The Foundation for Non-Recognition Provisions in the Income Tax
Taft v. Bowers is a Supreme Court decision that is rarely studied in law schools or discussed by scholars. Yet, it is a case of vast significance. In the Taft decision, the Supreme Court confirmed that Congress may create non-recognition exceptions to the income tax that merely defer the recognition of income, rather than permanently exclude it. If the Taft case had been decided differently, it is likely that the number of non-recognition provisions in the Internal Revenue Code ( Code ) would be significantly reduced
Identifying Class Members in Stockholder Class Actions: \u3ci\u3eOppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders\u3c/i\u3e
Management Buyouts, Efficient Markets, Fair Value and Soft Information
Leveraged buyouts, particularly by a corporation\u27s management, provide unique opportunities for investors to realize extraordinary profits. In his Article, Professor Repetti examines the potential harm to shareholder interests when management effects a corporate buyout or bailout, and analyzes the effectiveness of current regulatory and common-law protection against that harm Professor Repetti concludes that the existing regulatory and common law schemes do not adequately protect shareholder interests and proposes as a solution that the Securities and Exchange Commission promulgate rules requiring enhanced disclosure in management buyouts
Will U.S. Investment Go Abroad in a Territorial Tax: A Critique of the President\u27s Advisory Panel on Tax Reform
- …