Download Free Alternatives To The Current Federal Estate Tax System Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Alternatives To The Current Federal Estate Tax System and write the review.

Although estate and gift taxes raise a small fraction of federal revenues, they have become sources of increasing political controversy. This book is designed to inform the current policy debate and build a conceptual basis for future scholarship. The book contains eleven original studies of estate and gift taxes, along with discussants' comments. The essays provide background and historical information; analyze the optimal taxation of estates and gifts; examine the effects of the tax on charitable contributions, saving behavior, the distribution and level of wealth, tax avoidance and tax evasion; and explore the effects of alternatives to estate taxation.
A comprehensive and accessible account of the U.S. estate tax, examining its history and evolution, structure and inner workings, and economic consequences. Governments have been levying some form of inheritance tax since the ancient Egyptians did so in the seventh century BC. In the United States, the federal government experimented with various forms of inheritance taxes, settling on an estate tax in 1916 and a gift tax in 1932. Despite this long history, there are few empirical studies of the federal estate tax. This book offers the first comprehensive look at U.S. estate and inheritance taxes, examining their history and evolution, structure and inner workings, and economic consequences. Written by David Joulfaian, a veteran economist at the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the book provides accessible accounts of such topics as changes in tax laws, issues of equity, the fiscal contribution of the estate tax, and its behavioral effects. Joulfaian traces the evolution of U.S. inheritance taxes from 1797 to the present, noting that the estate tax rate and base expanded through 1976, then began to decline. He describes the tax itself, explaining that it currently applies to estates and gifts in excess of $11.18 million, and outlines applicable deductions and credits. He sketches a profile of taxpayers and their beneficiaries; surveys the revenues from estate and gift taxes; and discusses the effect of estate taxation on labor decisions, saving and wealth accumulation, charitable giving, life insurance ownership, and other economic activities. Finally, he addresses criticisms of the estate tax and analyzes its shortcomings. Accompanying tables present a wealth of data gathered by Joulfaian in his research and not available elsewhere.
The gift tax was first enacted in 1924, repealed in 1926, overhauled and reintroduced in 1932. At its peak in fiscal year 1999, it raised $4.6 billion in revenues, before the recent phased-in tax rate reductions ushered by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) took effect. It is noteworthy that the gift tax was first enacted as a protective measure to minimize estate and income tax avoidance, and not for its direct revenue yield. Similarly, EGTRRA, while phasing out the estate tax, retained the gift tax for the very same reasons. Unlike the estate tax which faces an uncertain future, the gift tax is little affected by recent legislative proposals and will remain part of the tax code for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, the gift tax has been the subject of little scrutiny and studies of its economic implications are rare. This paper is an attempt to fill this void. It traces the evolution of the gift tax since its inception, and sketches out the structure of the tax and its complex interactions with the income and estate taxes. The paper also provides an overview of the direct fiscal contribution of the gift tax, and traces the number of taxpayers over time as well as their attributes. It concludes with a discussion of the behavioral effects of the gift tax and a review of the scant literature. These include empirical evidence on the choice between gifts and bequests, timing of gifts, and compliance among others.
The use of property tax incentives for business by local governments throughout the United States has escalated over the last 50 years. While there is little evidence that these tax incentives are an effective instrument to promote economic development, they cost state and local governments $5 to $10 billion each year in forgone revenue. Three major obstacles can impede the success of property tax incentives as an economic development tool. First, incentives are unlikely to have a significant impact on a firm's profitability since property taxes are a small part of the total costs for most businesses--averaging much less than 1 percent of total costs for the U.S. manufacturing sector. Second, tax breaks are sometimes given to businesses that would have chosen the same location even without the incentives. When this happens, property tax incentives merely deplete the tax base without promoting economic development. Third, widespread use of incentives within a metropolitan area reduces their effectiveness, because when firms can obtain similar tax breaks in most jurisdictions, incentives are less likely to affect business location decisions. This report reviews five types of property tax incentives and examines their characteristics, costs, and effectiveness: property tax abatement programs; tax increment finance; enterprise zones; firm-specific property tax incentives; and property tax exemptions in connection with issuance of industrial development bonds. Alternatives to tax incentives should be considered by policy makers, such as customized job training, labor market intermediaries, and business support services. State and local governments also can pursue a policy of broad-based taxes with low tax rates or adopt split-rate property taxation with lower taxes on buildings than land.State policy makers are in a good position to increase the effectiveness of property tax incentives since they control how local governments use them. For example, states can restrict the use of incentives to certain geographic areas or certain types of facilities; publish information on the use of property tax incentives; conduct studies on their effectiveness; and reduce destructive local tax competition by not reimbursing local governments for revenue they forgo when they award property tax incentives.Local government officials can make wiser use of property tax incentives for business and avoid such incentives when their costs exceed their benefits. Localities should set clear criteria for the types of projects eligible for incentives; limit tax breaks to mobile facilities that export goods or services out of the region; involve tax administrators and other stakeholders in decisions to grant incentives; cooperate on economic development with other jurisdictions in the area; and be clear from the outset that not all businesses that ask for an incentive will receive one.Despite a generally poor record in promoting economic development, property tax incentives continue to be used. The goal is laudable: attracting new businesses to a jurisdiction can increase income or employment, expand the tax base, and revitalize distressed urban areas. In a best case scenario, attracting a large facility can increase worker productivity and draw related firms to the area, creating a positive feedback loop. This report offers recommendations to improve the odds of achieving these economic development goals.