IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/23675.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Simulating Business Cash Flow Taxation

Author

Listed:
  • Seth G. Benzell
  • Laurence J. Kotlikoff
  • Guillermo LaGarda
  • Victor Yifan Ye

Abstract

This paper uses the Global Gaidar Model (GGM) to simulate replacing a territorial corporate income tax with a wealth tax imposed in the form of a destination-based Business Cash Flow Tax (BCFT). The specific BCFT reform considered is the “BetterWay” Tax, a proposed but never enacted corporate-income tax reform. The GGM model is a 90-period OLG model, featuring 17 regions that collectively encompass the global economy. It is carefully calibrated to IMF fiscal data and the UN's region-specific fertility and mortality estimates and projections. According to the model, the BW plan produces, over a decade, increases in the capital stock, GDP, and pre-tax wages for high- and low- skilled workers of 20.5 percent, 6.8 percent, 6.3 and 7.5 percent, respectively. Over time, the capital stock and wage rates remain significantly above their baseline values. There is a smaller long-run increase in GDP as workers spend some of their higher wages on additional leisure. Despite this, the initially revenue neutral tax reform raises enough additional revenue over time to permit a reduction in personal income tax rates. This result is not predicated on unrealistic labor supply behavior. Rather it is caused by the reform's significant decrease in the marginal effective tax on U.S. investment, which induces a large influx of capital to the U.S. The main beneficiaries of the reform are today's and tomorrow's workers. We also simulate retaliatory cuts in foreign effective marginal corporate tax rates. This changes our results, but not by much. The reasons are two. First, the relative incentive to invest in the U.S. still rises dramatically. Second, Americans, who own a disproportionate amount of oversees assets, benefit disproportionately from the reduced global taxation of asset income.

Suggested Citation

  • Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo LaGarda & Victor Yifan Ye, 2017. "Simulating Business Cash Flow Taxation," NBER Working Papers 23675, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:23675
    Note: CF EFG
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23675.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Altig, 2001. "Simulating Fundamental Tax Reform in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 574-595, June.
    2. Congressional Budget Office, 2017. "International Comparisons of Corporate Income Tax Rates," Reports 52419, Congressional Budget Office.
    3. Kotlikoff, Laurence J. & Smetters, Kent & Walliser, Jan, 2007. "Mitigating America's demographic dilemma by pre-funding social security," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 247-266, March.
    4. Arnold C. Harberger, 1962. "The Incidence of the Corporation Income Tax," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70, pages 215-215.
    5. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Larry Kotlikoff, 2003. "The Developed World's Demographic Transition - the Roles of Capital Flows, Immigration, and Policy," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-133, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    6. Eric Toder & Alan D. Viard, 2016. "Replacing Corporate Tax Revenues With a Mark-to-Market Tax on Shareholder Income," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 69(3), pages 701-732, September.
    7. Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1983. "National Savings, Economic Welfare, and the Structure of Taxation," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral Simulation Methods in Tax Policy Analysis, pages 459-498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Seidman, Laurence S, 1984. "Conversion to a Consumption Tax: The Transition in a Life-Cycle Growth Model," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(2), pages 247-267, April.
    9. Shoven, John B. & Whalley, John, 1972. "A general equilibrium calculation of the effects of differential taxation of income from capital in the U.S," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(3-4), pages 281-321, November.
    10. R. Glenn Hubbard & Kenneth L. Judd, 1986. "Liquidity Constraints, Fiscal Policy, and Consumption," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 17(1), pages 1-60.
    11. Robert E. Hall & Alvin Rabushka, 1985. "The Route to a Progressive Flat Tax," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 5(2), pages 465-480, Fall.
    12. Harry Grubert & Rosanne Altshuler, 2016. "Shifting the Burden of Taxation From the Corporate to the Personal Level and Getting the Corporate Tax Rate Down to 15 Percent," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 69(3), pages 643-676, September.
    13. Fullerton, Don, et al, 1981. "Corporate Tax Integration in the United States: A General Equilibrium Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(4), pages 677-691, September.
    14. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Ashwin Kambhampati & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2013. "Simulating the Elimination of the U.S. Corporate Income Tax," NBER Working Papers 19757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Jesse Bricker & Lisa J. Dettling & Alice Henriques Volz & Joanne W. Hsu & Kevin B. Moore & John Edward Sabelhaus & Jeffrey P. Thompson & Richard Windle, 2014. "Changes in U.S. Family Finances from 2010 to 2013: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances," Federal Reserve Bulletin, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.), vol. 100(4), September.
    16. World Bank, 2014. "World Development Indicators 2014," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 18237, December.
    17. Jane Gravelle & Kent Smetters, 2001. "Who Bears the Burden of the Corporate Tax in The Open Economy?," NBER Working Papers 8280, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Laurence S. Seidman, 1997. "A Progressive Consumption Tax," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(6), pages 63-84, November.
    19. Christian Hagist & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2009. "Who’s going broke? Comparing growth in Public healthcare expenditure in Ten OECD Countries," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 188(1), pages 55-72, March.
    20. repec:cbo:report:524190 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laurence Kotlikoff & Felix Kubler & Andrey Polbin & Jeffrey Sachs & Simon Scheidegger, 2021. "Making Carbon Taxation A Generational Win Win," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(1), pages 3-46, February.
    2. Benjamin Carton & Emilio Fernández Corugedo & Mr. Benjamin L Hunt, 2017. "Identical Twins? Destination-Based Cash-Flow Taxes Versus Consumption Taxes with Payroll Subsidies," IMF Working Papers 2017/276, International Monetary Fund.
    3. Eric W. Bond & Thomas A. Gresik, 2023. "On the incentive compatibility of universal adoption of destination-based cash flow taxation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(6), pages 1576-1600, December.
    4. David Altig & Alan Auerbach & Patrick Higgins & Darryl Koehler & Laurence Kotlikoff & Ellyn Terry & Victor Ye, 2020. "Did the 2017 Tax Reform Discriminate against Blue-State Voters?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 73(4), pages 1087-1108, December.
    5. Benjamin Carton & Emilio Fernández Corugedo & Mr. Benjamin L Hunt, 2019. "Corporate Tax Reform: From Income to Cash Flow Taxes," IMF Working Papers 2019/013, International Monetary Fund.
    6. Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Felix Kubler & Andrey Polbin & Simon Scheidegger, 2021. "Can Today's and Tomorrow's World Uniformly Gain from Carbon Taxation?," NBER Working Papers 29224, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Danuše Nerudová & Veronika Solilová & Lucie Formanová & Marek Litzman, 2021. "Návrh progresivního zdanění právnických osob v České republice a jeho zhodnocení [Proposal for Progressive Taxation of Corporate Entities in the Czech Republic and Its Evaluation]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2021(2), pages 145-169.
    8. Christian Keuschnigg & Julian Johs & Jacob Stevens, 2021. "Consolidating the Covid Debt," CESifo Working Paper Series 9497, CESifo.
    9. Bond, Eric W. & Gresik, Thomas A., 2020. "Unilateral tax reform: Border adjusted taxes, cash flow taxes, and transfer pricing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    10. Will Martin, 2018. "Trade and economic impacts of destination‐based business cash‐flow taxes," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 2631-2649, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo Lagarda & Yifan Ye, 2018. "Simulating U.S. Business Cash Flow Taxation in a 17-Region Global Model," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-312, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    2. Laurence Kotlikoff & Felix Kubler & Andrey Polbin & Jeffrey Sachs & Simon Scheidegger, 2021. "Making Carbon Taxation A Generational Win Win," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(1), pages 3-46, February.
    3. Seth G. Benzell & Eugene Goryunov & Maria Kazakova & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo LaGarda & Kristina Nesterova & Andrey Zubarev, 2015. "Simulating Russia’s and Other Large Economies’ Challenging and Interconnected Transitions," NBER Working Papers 21269, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Fehr, Hans, 1999. "Welfare Effects of Dynamic Tax Reforms," Beiträge zur Finanzwissenschaft, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, edition 1, volume 5, number urn:isbn:9783161470165, September.
    5. Seth G. Benzell & Eugene Goryunov & Maria Kazakova & Guillermo Lagarda & Kristina Nesterova & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, "undated". "Simulating Russia’s and Other Large Economies’ Challenging and Interconnected Transitions," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-274, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    6. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2002. "Tax incidence," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 26, pages 1787-1872, Elsevier.
    7. L.J. Kimbell & G.W. Harrison, 1982. "General Equilibrium Analysis of Regional Fiscal Incidence," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 82-06, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    8. Louis Kaplow, 2006. "Capital Levies and Transition to a Consumption Tax," NBER Working Papers 12259, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Woodland, A., 2016. "Taxation, Pensions, and Demographic Change," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 713-780, Elsevier.
    10. George R. Zodrow, 2019. "Should Capital Income Be Subject to Consumption-Based Taxation?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: George R Zodrow (ed.), TAXATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Selected Essays of George R. Zodrow, chapter 5, pages 131-168, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Pierre-Yves Letournel & Katheline Schubert & Philippe Trainar, 1992. "L'utilisation des modèles d'équilibre général calculables dans l'évaluation de la politique fiscale," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 43(4), pages 709-724.
    12. Akira Okamoto, 2005. "Simulating fundamental tax reforms in an aging Japan," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 163-185.
    13. Bruno Théret & Didier Uri, 1988. "La courbe de Laffer dix ans après : un essai de bilan critique," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 39(4), pages 753-808.
    14. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Ashwin Kambhampati & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2013. "Simulating the Elimination of the U.S. Corporate Income Tax," NBER Working Papers 19757, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Fehr, Hans & Jokisch, Sabine & Kallweit, Manuel & Kindermann, Fabian & Kotlikoff, Laurence J., 2013. "Generational Policy and Aging in Closed and Open Dynamic General Equilibrium Models," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1719-1800, Elsevier.
    16. Fehr, Hans & Jokisch, Sabine & Kotlikoff, Laurence J., 2008. "Fertility, mortality and the developed world's demographic transition," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 455-473.
    17. Axel Börsch‐Supan & Alexander Ludwig & Joachim Winter, 2006. "Ageing, Pension Reform and Capital Flows: A Multi‐Country Simulation Model," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(292), pages 625-658, November.
    18. Daphne Chen & Shi Qi & Don Schlagenhauf, 2018. "Corporate Income Tax, Legal Form of Organization, and Employment," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 270-304, October.
    19. Juan Carlos Conesa & Sagiri Kitao & Dirk Krueger, 2009. "Taxing Capital? Not a Bad Idea after All!," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 25-48, March.
    20. Holmoy, Erling & Vennemo, Haakon, 1995. "A general equilibrium assessment of a suggested reform in capital income taxation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 531-556, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E02 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General - - - Institutions and the Macroeconomy
    • F43 - International Economics - - Macroeconomic Aspects of International Trade and Finance - - - Economic Growth of Open Economies
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H6 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:23675. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.