Morgan Housel writes that enforcing current tax law would bring the budget into balance practically as much as any of the competing deficit reduction plans put forward:
Tax evasion added $3 trillion to the deficit over the past decade alone, an average of $300 billion a year, according to IRS data. This isn’t revenue lost from legal tax write-offs, like the mortgage interest deduction. It’s not even, as the IRS notes, “taxes that should have been paid on income from the illegal sector of the economy.” That $300 billion represents the amount of revenue lost from people deliberately cheating on their taxes every year. This includes underreporting income, hidden offshore bank accounts, sham trusts, and other ways to illegally stiff the IRS [...]
Now extrapolate last decade’s tax fraud into the next, and adjust it for inflation and economic growth. We’re probably looking at $4 trillion in tax fraud over the next 10 years.
And there it is. Without raising tax rates or reducing spending, we could eliminate more than half of our projected deficit over the next 10 years by simply eliminating tax cheats.
You can update this with a Government Accountability Office study showing that, in fiscal year 2010, $330 billion in taxes were uncollected. So adjusting for inflation as the years go by, the $4 trillion number looks about right.
Let’s put this another way. The CBO and other analysts estimate that allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would add $4 trillion to revenue over the next 10 years. That’s roughly in line with the amount of money you could gain simply by ending all tax evasion.
But of these two solutions, only one is actually credible. Because you’re not likely to stop all tax evasion. That’s especially true when you take into account the fact that the budget deal this month cut funding for the IRS, and added no new agents whose job it is to root out tax evasion. It doesn’t matter that every dollar spent on IRS enforcement brings back up to $10 in revenue, we’re in austerity mode, and the last thing the party in control of the House of Representatives want is for people to actually pay their taxes. I’m all for reducing tax evasion, but I don’t see how we get from point A to point B right now.
So, that brings us back to the second option, which is letting the Bush tax cuts expire. And in essence, what you would be doing is bringing the level of revenue up to where it would be right now without all the deceit and cheating by the citizenry. If everyone paid the taxes they owed, maybe this wouldn’t be necessary. But as it is, we have a culture of cheating, and so the rates need to go back to where they were in the prosperous Clinton era. But you wouldn’t actually be collecting any more revenue, theoretically, than you should have been collecting all along in the Bush era.
Housel was bringing this up intentionally as a theory, and I agree that any serious deficit reduction plan should include an increase to the IRS budget. But there’s a way to get to this level of revenue without hoping that every tax cheat gets caught, and it’s pretty simple: let the Bush tax cuts expire.




58 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Stopping Obummer’s bosses from evading taxes?!
Surely you jest!
Sure he’s jesting.
They underfund the IRS and while we have mediocre lawyers working for the Government, they have some of the best lawyers in the country if not the world to prevent them from paying taxes at all a-al GE and BofA.
Is FDL here to unite and put pressure on the Government or just to inform us?
Many people evade taxes by simply not filing.
One way to address this problem would be to institute a national sales tax explicitly to address this problem.
There is no way to avoid a national sales tax, if you spend money you would pay the tax.
We could refund the national sales tax to everyone who legally files their return, since the reason for the tax is to catch the cheats and non-filers.
Of course the Republicans could never support something that would collect more taxes.
Why raise taxes? There are not enough taxes to pay for all of the programs that you want to institute. Our spending is out of control at every level of government and it is only a matter of time before it all collapses. At the same time, the Fed picks your pocket everyday.
I thought the tax cuts were Obama’s now. Just sayin.
{ gasp } Enforcing the law?! What a stellar concept! /s
Given that the most prosperous time in US history is when the highest tax rates were at 90% (Eisenhower years), seems like tax increases could do quite well.
Increases would close the gap between the top and bottom of the income world rather than widening it as we have today.
For me, I’d be somewhat pleased to see the tax rate for all income, earned, unearned, and capital gains rise to 50%. Especially since the entire justification for the Bush (now Obama) tax cuts, indeed for most all tax cuts from the Reagan era on, has been “they create jobs” and we have definite evidence at least from ’01 on that this is nothing but BS.
So yes, indeed we should increase taxes.
Oh you just love regressive taxes.
Please explain how a progressive national sales tax would work.
The Progressive Budget Caucus plan balances the budget in a reasonable time, much shorter than the Rs budget plan.
1) Correlation does not imply causation.
2) How much do you pay in taxes that you can say all taxes should be raised to 50%?
Maybe corporations like AT&T that collect taxes of every kind you can think of monthly should pay those taxes to the government. Heck, that one company could bring down the deficit by at least half! Then there is GE and the bankstas and voila! No Deficit!
Seriously, until we have something even close to full employment in this country we will always have a deficit.
Yes, it does. Plus it doesn’t take the cuts out of social security, medicare and medicaid. Those safety nets and social insurance programs are left alone.
Right, so it’s just a coincidence that we had a better economy in the ’90s when the rates were higher and a much better economy in the ’50s into the ’70s when the rates were much higher.
Unfortunately, I’ve been a victim of the wonderful “job creating” economy of the Bush/Obama years and am one of the long term underemployed so my tax burden has not been real high. But I would have no problem going back to the Clinton era tax rates if I could have the earnings I had during the Clinton years.
And if I had an income that would throw me into a tax bracket of 50% (which in fact would be graduated, just as it is today so only the top portion of my income would be taxed at a 50% bracket, then so be it. It would mean that I’m allowed to earn a reasonable living.
You see, I recognize the need for all to pay a price, and not just the middle class.
As it is, Warren Buffett tends to recognize the idiocy that says he pays a lower percentage of his income in taxes than his secretary does.
We even have to pay income tax on our unemployment benefits! That is a real kick in the pants if you ask me. Besides, employers get tax deductions for employee costs and will only pay you according to the facts they have to pay FUTA and SUTA!
Yeah, that’s one of St Ronnie of RayGunz “reforms” from the early ’80s. Another one of those was blocking GIs from collecting unemployment if they left the service after serving their complete enlistment but had been accepted for re-enlistment and chose not to do so while allowing those blocked from re-enlisting or kicked out before their enlistment was completed to collect a full 26 weeks.
They did finally change that one to allow those who chose not to reenlist to collect 13 weeks
It is causal. If the tax rates are low there is massive accumulation among the wealthy, which is not invested in jobs, but bubbles.
If the tax rates are high the government spends the money on people, be it welfare or infrastructure or wars.
Infrastructure and education are investments. Welfare and wars are expense. However, I do believe in spending money to enable mother to be at-home mother if they so choose. In my mind the is not better investment in the next generation, and if this take mothers at home, then that’s a good investment. I’m certainly willing to pay for it, as I expect result in the form of better educated populace, and a reduction in crime (Except Wall St which appears to be MBA driven crime)..
One of the correlations is declining schools results and the increase in two parents working, which is inevitable on reflection.
Don’t miss Shaxson in a week on Book Salon. He was on democracynow within the last week or so & he’s terrific. It’s on the offshore tax haven issue and the numbers will blow you away.
Wonderful info., but why not do both? Oh yeah, I’m sorry, for a minute I gorgot – OBAMA DOESN’T WANT TO DO EITHER!
Yeah, well he also took away deductions for car payment interest and credit card interest payments. He cut taxes alright, but not for the majority of Americans. Just like the Bush’s and now Obama, give it all to the corps and wealthy.
I plan to attend and am looking forward to this evenings as well! Watched the episodes on The Real News of his 23 things. Can’t wait to talk to him.
Until I get a better choice, I’m contributing & supporting GARY JOHNSON, he’s a LOT more progressive AND a whole lot more fiscally responsible than “Clarence Thomas” Obama! And, get this, he actually tries to implement what he campaigns on. Wow.
I plan to write in my candidate. It will probably be Margaret. Heck, I might even write in Cindy Sheehan. I know she will stop the wars.
Buffett isn’t at all who he has represented himself to be. More revealed recently:
“Buffettgate: Berkshire Hathaway’s Problem at the Top” (by Janet Tavakoli, Apr. 2, 2011)
Video interview of Tavakoli re Buffett on Apr. 19, 2011
Twooph!
Oh I know. I took a bit of a hack at him yesterday based on a Reuters article.
But I do give him credit for recognizing the idiocy of the current tax system
Book Salon up with Nadia Idle and Alex Nunns’s Tweets From Tahrir: Egypt’s Revolution As It Unfolded, In the Words of the People Who Made It hosted by Siun
Even 3 Trillion would be great but Obama is scared the stock market would collapse the money has to come from somewhere.
A delayed payment plan spread out over years would be needed your idea is doable then but politically well Obama lacks the Stones to stand up for America against the rich.
I know someone who turned sombody in for for years of non-payment of taxes.
The IRS told her they didn’t bother with little fish and then informed the tax cheat who the informer was.
Does this evasion problem have anything to do with the drift to lawlessness generally? The law enforcement and criminal justice systems in this country are seriously askew and it hasn’t escaped anyone’s attention. We’re in the third administration of the L’État, c’est moi presidency. I mean, what the hell do you expect? It’s every man, woman, and child for him/herself here and that’s exactly how this country is being governed. We’re even worse overseas, if that’s imaginable: this country lurches around like a blind drunk with a pathological mean streak. Tax evasion is just a symptom, altho it’s a serious problem and I don’t mean to minimize it’s consequences; but it’s difficult to see how enforcing tax law squares with the law breaking and lobbyist driven law bending that’s at manic levels now.
It’s interesting how many people don’t understand marginal tax rates. When someone says that tax rates need to return to the 90% marginal rate of the Eisenhower years, the assumption is that everyone will be taxed at 90%. In fact although I don’t have the studies handy to verify this, the effective theoretical tax rate (before the real loopholes) on the highest incomes was only 45%. But the effective tax rate on most middle class incomes was well under 10%. And because there was less incentive for the upper middle class to evade because of the highly progressive nature of the taxes, it was easier to enforce against evasion because there were a smaller number of cases.
The other policy change would be to lower sales taxes as you increase the progressivity of income taxes.
North Carolina used to have a 3% sales tax, but it used to also have a 5% inventory tax on business inventories at the end of the calendar year. Now the sales tax is up to 7.5% in some localities because the gas tax does not pay for the roads anymore being artificially constrained to a set number of cents; when oil prices (asphalt prices) rise tax revenues can’t rise as well. In NC, that is where a lot of the deferred maintenance of infrastructure is coming from. If gas taxes were the same proportion of gas prices as they were in the 1950s, the gas tax would be 40 cents to 50 cents a gallon. At the moment, NC is using the gas tax to balance the budget and has set it a 32.5 cents a gallon and indexed it to wholesale gasoline prices. But that was before Republicans dominated the legislature.
The d00d’s a cheat who enabled Calvinists and hypocrites in Mayfair such as Government Saks’ Lloyd Blankfein who also walked across a bunch of bodies to get where they are. They are only ‘doing “God’s work”‘ if you believe in enacting Greek tragedy.
I understand that. Giving him credit for the occasional thing he gets correct does not mean that I blithely and without question accept everything he does.
Your statement
“And because there was less incentive for the upper middle class to evade because of the highly progressive nature of the taxes, it was easier to enforce against evasion because there were a smaller number of cases”
Makes no sense. As the marginal tax rates rise, there is more incentive to evade taxes as it lowers the taxable income and the “savings”is greater.
We should either make the tax laws simpler to understand OR institute a tax plan like the fair tax that makes gaming the system impossible.
You almost had it right.
I actually do concur with your main point.
Heh. Thank you for your improvement to the statement. Well done!
Wow — taxes were $3 trillion higher than we realized over the last decade? Thank heavens for incompetent enforcement.
Hey, I’m just here to lend a hand.
That’s one of the bigger issues. And as you opine further on in your post, the deconstructing of the progressive tax rates has hastened the increase in other regressive tax rates and fees, such as state sales taxes, gas tax, fees for various services, and even traffic and parking fines.
The “little guy” is much more seriously affected by sales taxes and fees, while the upper 1% is much less deleteriously affected by increases to the marginal, progressive tax rates.
This is one of the biggest fairy tales bambozzlements enacted by the PTB mainly via the corp-owned rightwing media, in lock-step with many (not all) Churches, esp those espousing doctrines like “Propserity Christianity” and/or those infested by Doug Coe’s C Street “Family/Fellowship” ministers. let the buyer beware.
Many conservatives simply don’t understand the marginal tax rates. They hear rates like 50% and freak out and immediately start whining (as someone earlier on this thread did) about the govt “picking your pocket.” How so? Never get much of clear and direct answer. It’s all just rightwing talking points and unattributed assertions.
This nation was much better off before Reagan when there were higher marginal tax rates at the federal level, as well as at many State levels. Citizens who whine incessantly about the evils of taxation have been hoodwinked. Where the middle & lower classes are really being screwed are by regressive taxes and fees, like sales tax & DMV fees & traffic fines. Where the upper 1% smiles with glee is having excessively low income & capital gains tax rates (which are currently set at only 15%!!)… they really win big-time there, whilst the rest of us lose out to their greed and corruption.
I quite agree with you, but I hold out little hope of this ever happening. The system is corrupt and stacked in favor of the wealthy, who actually write legislation for specific tax loopholes for themselves/their companies and buy off Congress to enact it. That’s one (not the only) reason why the tax code is so unwieldy and opaque. The wealthy like the tax code just the way it is, believe me.
There’s a difference between uncollected taxes and legal tax evasion by corporations. It’s not clear to me what’s being counted in the 4 trillion dollar number. I know that if tax loopholes were eliminated only for corporations it is estimated to bring in $200 billion per year in revenue.
I knew someone who subscribed to one of those frivilous fed income tax conspiracy theories (there’s various groups out there pushing these notions). Something about how the fed govt can’t “legally” tax citizens or that fed taxes are “voluntary.”
Anyway, this person – a small business owner – was a small fish but engaged in tax evasion. I was contacted by the IRS bc they were pursuing this person, and they wanted to know if I owed him any money for services rendered (the IRS contention was that, if I owed this person money, then I should pay it to the IRS as part of this person’s back taxes. I didn’t owe any money).
I’ve also known the IRS to go after others who I would consider to be “small fish.”
However, I can believe that the IRS has been seriously weakened these days and probably has to pick & choose the people they wish to pursue for tax evasion & fraud.
Make the budget a video game with real numbers like budget hero add in our ideas to the scenarios and we get more people interested and educated about the budget the left wins when elections are about idea, the GOP wins when elections are about hate, fear and greed.
The GOP owns the Media we need to get more people involved video games like our own version of ” budget hero ” can do that we have how many computer and economics people here the project is doable we just need FDL’s leadership to push this.
$4 T from stopping tax evasions
$4 T from ending the Bush tax cuts
$4 T from adopting the progressive caucus budget and tax changes
$4 T from true health reform to single payer with prospective budget (about $10 T for the whole economy)
Yet Ryan’s plan is “serious” and the gang of six will meet Ryan’s Plan a tiny bit left of a voucher Medicare.
Thank God we have Democrats.
Something like that, but the chances of the loopholes being closed are slim to none, imo.
I’m also a bit unclear whether the figure quoted is for tax evasion and/or uncollected taxes.
The rich always evade a sales tax – in 93 we had a special sales tax on what the rich and only the rich buy – and got near zero revenue – ending the tax in 96-97.
A sales tax is simply an easier was for the rich to drop their contribution to the cost of gov to near zero percent of their income.
Can there be effective enforcement of tax evaders when the Secretary of Treasury makes a $32K “error?”
Average tax rates by income group tell the true story – wonder when the media will start talking back to the right wing marginal rate fools.
True – back in the 90′s I was amazed at the industry that feeds the corps the paperwork to drop much of their tax liability into the ocean. And today I am told you no longer need much paperwork, and much of their tax liability has become most of their tax liability.
Since Fairtax is goofy nonsense — it wont bring in a dime. Not a penny.
Fairtax is farce, all balderdash. It sounds great — sure. But it’s goofy. Their own leaders won’t dare go to hearings under oath because they know it’s utterly a farce.
For example, did you know the fine print has a trillion dollars in hidden taxes?
New York City government — by itself — would owe 2.1 billion in “fairtaxes”
Los Angeles would owe 700 million. State governments would have to pay too — Texas state government would have to pay 10 billion.
ALl cities, all states would have to pay — massively. Fairtax for 13 years has tried to glide past this massive BS — never once telling anyone the amounts or a clear formula.
Its one thing to rant on to stupid people how great this is, it’s another to try to make 25,000 cities and townships pay massive taxes because you hid some goofy word in your fine print.
Fairtaz is GOOFY. LIterally a farce, and it’s own leaders know it. New videos are coming out soon (there are already plenty of blogs and books exposing it).
You light weight gullible souls might be in for a shock –hopefully you will learn not to be so gullible next time.
Link please
Averages in a long-tail distribution like income (or even brackets within income) have the effect of loading interpretation toward that which benefits the upper end of the bracket. And the selection of bracket boundaries can also mislead. There is a huge difference between the lower bound of the top 1% of incomes ($250K) and the lower bound of the top 400 incomes (what? maybe $100 million) that take a huge proportion of the area under the curve.
Tax revenues as a percentage of GDP, at 14%, are slightly lower than their historic range of 15-20%.
FY 2010 GDP 14.7T, receipts 2.1T (14.2%)
The federal government has collected between 15%-20% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product every year since 1960.
http://www.deptofnumbers.com/blog/2010/08/tax-revenue-as-a-fraction-of-gdp/
According to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), as of the end of fiscal year 2010, the balance of reported unpaid federal taxes was about $330 billion.
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-272
If these taxes were collected then receipts would be in range.
FY 2010 GDP 14.7T, receipts 2.4T (16.3%). Again, the normal range is 15-20%.
I just got an actual look at where some of that loot has gone. I was on a boat trip from West Palm ( another story) but we met up with the boat at a Marina that had about 20 huge yachts being worked on. All of these over 100 ft. monsters was owned I was told by an American, but they were all registered in the Cayman Islands to avoid taxes. You can bet these same people all put a good share of they’re money in Cayman banks as well. The yachts though live in Fla. along with their owners. In that Marina/boatyard was a billion dollars in yachts alone and they were just the tip of the huge iceberg of $$ these folks have.
wendydavis is upstairs!
Uncut Flashmobs: Undermining the Power Structure Through Humor and Humiliation
And, don’t call me Shirley! :)
Seriously, though, this was my suggestion a year ago when the debt/deficit hysteria began. And if your concerned about the working/poor, up the amount for each exemption to about $7500 and the standard deduction about 10-15%. Of course this makes sense and is way too simple so the Beltway dismisses idaes such as this out of hand.
why should any progressive care about the policy goal of “serious deficit reduction” other than to explain how bat-shit-crazy it is?
serious question.
That train has left the station. Obama had that option and deliberately gave it away. Why? Because he is bound and determined to have “entitlement reform.” Why? Because Robert Rubin and Pete Peterson want it, and Obama has an overwhelming desire to make a good impression on them.
This isn’t about deficits; it about shrinking government and pissing on the “lesser people,” as Alan Simpson, co-chair of Obama’s deficit (catfood) commission, calls us.