Federal Budgets and Fiscal Policy

The exclusion of employer-sponsored health insurance premiums and medical benefits reduced federal tax revenues by $268 billion in 2011 alone-by far the largest federal tax expenditure. Moreover, the exclusion disproportionately subsidizes those with higher incomes. In this brief, we provide estimates of the revenue potential and distributional consequences of limiting the exclusion from income and payroll taxes at the 75th percentile of 2013 premiums, indexing by GDP. The policy would produce $264.0 billion in new tax revenues over the coming decade while preserving 93 percent of the tax subsidies available under the current policy.

This document reviews several notable tax proposals in President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2014 Budget. These include a 28 percent limit on certain tax expenditures, a cap on tax preferences for retirement savers with high balances, a minimum tax ("Buffett Rule") on high-income taxpayers, alternative incentives for infrastructure investment, and a new measure of inflation ("chained CPI") for indexing tax parameters.

The ongoing political standoff over the budget continues to have implications for all sectors of the economy, including the nonprofit sector. Most notably, proposed changes to personal itemized deductions have implications for the charitable deduction and giving to the sector as a whole.

The conference “The Charitable Deduction: A View from the Other Side of the Cliff,” hosted by the Urban Institute on February 28, 2013 examined how the recent debate over tax changes has affected nonprofits and charitable giving. Throughout the conference, a reoccurring theme was the gap between economic analysis and political feasibility.

Opponents of MID reform warn that reducing the deduction would undermine the value of owner-occupied homes and impede the recovery of the depressed housing market. The best available evidence predicts far less dire effects and suggests that some reforms could actually bolster the housing market recovery. However, the results are far from definitive. As debate continues, the Urban Institute plans to further explore behavioral and market changes, strengthening the evidence upon which policymakers can rely.

Taxpayers can currently deduct interest on up to $1 million in acquisition debt used to buy, build, or improve their personal residences and interest on up to another $100,000 of home equity loans. This brief estimates the effects on revenue and the distribution of the tax burden of proposals that would replace the current mortgage interest deduction with a non-refundable interest credit of either 15 or 20 percent of interest and reduce the ceiling on the amount of all eligible mortgage debt to $500,000. We also estimate the revenue effect of phasing in the proposals over five years.

Extending the charitable deduction deadline is a move with precedent: the government has used it to encourage giving following a natural disaster. However, temporary laws have limited effect. Consider instead allowing charitable deductions made by April 15, aka tax day, to be applied to the previous year's tax returns. As in other facets of life, people are prone to making their decisions concerning giving at the last minute. If tax software companies such as TurboTax could show taxpayers how donating an extra $100 or $1,000 would lower their taxable income, this would be a powerful marketing tool for charities.

The American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA) made estate tax law permanent following more than a decade of constant change. Following ATRA, the estate tax remains one of the most progressive parts of the tax code. In 2013, estates with gross assets exceeding $20 million will account for nearly three-fourths of the total estate tax revenue. About one-fifth of the burden will fall on estates valued between $10 million and $20 million, while just 7 percent will come from estates worth less than $10 million.

Gene Steuerle testifies before the Committee on Ways and Means on tax reform and charitable contributions. This testimony centers on the point that a tax subsidy like that for charitable contributions should be treated like any other program of government, examined regularly, and reformed to make it more effective. Moreover, the charitable deduction can be designed to strengthen the charitable sector at the same or even lower revenue cost. This is possible by taking the revenues that are spent with little effect on charitable giving and reallocating toward measures that would be more effective in encouraging giving.