Maurice B Foley 360x1000
Susie King Taylor2 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 2 360x1000
1paradide
LillianFaderman
AlexRosenberg
Thomas Piketty3 360x1000
Office of Chief Counsel 360x1000
13albion
1lookingforthegoodwar
1lafayette
storyparadox2
2trap
James Gould Cozzens 360x1000
lifeinmiddlemarch2
Adam Gopnik 360x1000
2gucci
lifeinmiddlemarch1
1albion
3confidencegames
3albion
1defense
Anthony McCann2 360x1000
11632
1confidencegames
Lafayette and Jefferson 360x1000
7confidencegames
Learned Hand 360x1000
1empireofpain
Maria Popova 360x1000
Margaret Fuller1 360x1000
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 360x1000
3paradise
2albion
Margaret Fuller5 360x1000
Thomas Piketty1 360x1000
1falsewitness
Margaret Fuller3 360x1000
Mary Ann Evans 360x1000
5albion
Margaret Fuller4 360x1000
499
2confidencegames
3theleastofus
199
Brendan Beehan 360x1000
George F Wil...360x1000
Spottswood William Robinson 360x1000
4albion
Edmund Burke 360x1000
399
1gucci
1theleasofus
Mark V Holmes 360x1000
Storyparadox1
2defense
7albion
Richard Posner 360x1000
Margaret Fuller 360x1000
Samuel Johnson 360x1000
10abion
4confidencegames
1transcendentalist
George M Cohan and Lerarned Hand 360x1000
Susie King Taylor 360x1000
storyparadox3
3defense
8albion'
Tad Friend 360x1000
9albion
11albion
2lookingforthegoodwar
2transadentilist
5confidencegames
Margaret Fuller2 360x1000
Anthony McCann1 360x1000
1lauber
2lafayette
1trap
299
2falsewitness
Thomas Piketty2 360x1000
1madoff
Gilgamesh 360x1000
2paradise
6confidencegames
1jesusandjohnwayne
6albion
14albion
2theleastofus
12albion
2jesusandjohnwayne
Betty Friedan 360x1000
Stormy Daniels 360x1000

This post was originally published on Forbes Sep 29, 2015

When I wrote about Donald Trump’s tax plan yesterday, I wrote that I would leave the scoring to the people who did that sort of thing, but that I would be surprised if the plan turned out to be revenue neutral. Well the Tax Foundation, which bills itself as “the nation’s leading independent tax policy research organization” has scored the plan and I am surprised.  I am  surprised at how far from revenue neutral the proposal is.  According to the Tax Foundation, on a static basis the plan would cut revenue over the next decade by $11.98 trillion.

 For perspective, according to this site projected federal revenue for fiscal year 2015 is $3.2 trillion.  So on a lazy math basis, we could call it a third. You know the old joke about a billion here a billion there, pretty soon you are talking about real money.  Doesn’t work that way with a trillion. A trillion is real money all by its lonesome.

But There Will Be Growth

They are onto the growth thing.

However, it also would improve incentives to work and invest, which could increase gross domestic product (GDP) by 11 percent over the long term. This increase in GDP would translate into 6.5 percent higher wages and 5.3 million new full-time equivalent jobs. After accounting for increased incomes due to these factors, the plan would only reduce tax revenues by $10.14 trillion. (Emphasis added)

Early in my parenting days, I adopted a rule with my children, which I have not changed even as they are now in their twenties.  I will scold them if they use the word “only” in conjunction with any sum of money greater than four dollars. The report’s author Alan Cole has perhaps perpetrated an epic oxymoron with his “only … $10.14 trillion”.

It Gets Worse

The report notes that its estimate does not include increases in the deficit due to additional spending on interest on the national debt.  It also does not consider the macroeconomic effects of any spending cuts that might be required in light of the much lower federal revenue.

The Benefits

It is hardly shocking that the across the board benefits of the massive tax cut are concentrated in the upper income range.

Taxpayers in the bottom deciles (the 0-10 and 10-20 percent deciles), would see increases in after-tax adjusted gross income (AGI) of 1.4 and 0.6 percent, respectively. Middle-income taxpayers with incomes that fall within the 30th to 80th percentiles would see larger increases in their after-tax AGI, of between 3.0 and 8.3 percent. Taxpayers with incomes that fall in the highest income class (the 90-100 percent decile) would see an increase in after-tax income of 14.6 percent. The top 1 percent of all taxpayers would see a 21.6 percent increase in after-tax income.

Randall Lane has just written a story about the way Donald Trump tends to challenge Forbes on its estimates of his net worth.  It will be interesting to see what Trump has to say about the Tax Foundation.