Stay informed with quick and accessible analysis of today's top tax policy topics. Read Tax Foundation's Tax Policy Blog for insight from our experts on tax policies across the U.S. and abroad.
To find our most recent research papers and data, click the links below.
Federal lawmakers re-introduced the MORE Act, the most significant federal legislative development on marijuana policy in 50 years. The MORE Act would impose a federal excise tax on marijuana at a rate from 5 to 8 percent.
The income tax changes in HB 2900 as introduced would improve Arizona’s individual income tax structure and economic competitiveness, making the state more attractive to individuals and pass-through businesses .
Last Friday, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt (R) signed House Bills 2960, 2962, and 2963 into law as part of a budget agreement, bringing the legislature’s tax plans across the finish line. These bills will reduce the state’s corporate and individual income tax rates beginning in tax year 2022.
During the pandemic, economic relief administered through the tax code exploded as Congress passed nearly $6 trillion of legislation into law. That left the 2021 tax filing season, which ended May 17, with complications that still linger.
In a new report, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analyzes federal policies that influence R&D spending in the pharmaceutical industry. The report highlights how taxes affect R&D investment incentives, underscoring the importance of structuring the tax code so that it is not biased against investment.
If the U.S. is suggesting a 15 percent effective rate as the minimum acceptable rate for a global agreement, then the tax bases of the various minimum taxes adopted as part of the agreement should be aligned to minimize complexities and unintended consequences.
With the Biden administration proposing a variety of new taxes, it is worth revisiting the literature on how taxes, particularly on corporate and individual income, can impact economic growth.
While much of the tax policy now under debate aims to increase the tax burden on businesses, several policies in the newly released Republican Study Committee (RSC) budget for Fiscal Year 2022 focus on reducing the tax code’s barriers to investment and saving.
If policymakers want a recipe to dramatically expand the complexity of U.S. international tax rules and the burden on U.S. multinational businesses, then a tax on foreign earnings calculated at the country level would be the way to do it. Alternatively, policymakers could focus on mitigating the unintended consequences of GILTI and other recent international tax rules.
If Biden wants to reduce tax evasion, raising the corporate rate, increasing the incentives to engage in tax evasion, and creating a larger tax advantage to becoming a pass-through business is counterproductive.
The Biden administration’s American Jobs Plan proposal to fund infrastructure spending relies on a bet that the benefits outweigh the costs of a higher corporate tax burden. Using the Tax Foundation model, we find that this trade-off is a bad one for the U.S. economy, resulting in reduced GDP, less capital investment, fewer jobs, and lower wages.
This week the Australian government released its latest budget proposal and two policies that stand out in its fiscal response to the pandemic should be helpful as the economic engine of the country turns back on. The first is full expensing for some investments and the second is the introduction of a loss carryback provision. The new budget takes both these temporary policies and extends them into 2023.
As part of the tax proposals in President Biden’s American Families Plan, unrealized capital gains over $1 million would be taxed at death. However, this policy would likely raise less revenue than advocates expect after considering the proposal’s impact on taxpayer behavior, including capital gains realizations, and historical capital gains and estate tax revenue collections.
Policymakers should recognize that corporate tax hikes will not only impact large firms, but many smaller and younger firms as well. Considering that many of these smaller firms are significant contributors to net job growth, raising corporate taxes at this time would not be conducive for a speedy economic recovery.
Today, the U.S. Treasury issued an interim final rule on the $350 billion in State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds provided under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The proposed rule resolves several important questions but continues to involve the federal government in state finances at an extraordinary level.
As countries move closer to agreement on how the OECD Pillar 1 Amount A will work and which companies will be impacted by it, it is incredibly important for policymakers to continue to evaluate not just the intended effects but also the potential unintended consequences.
After three years of deliberations, more than two-thirds of members in both the Senate and the House enacted tax reform and relief legislation Monday over the veto of Gov. Laura Kelly (D).
Some lawmakers have expressed concerns about President Biden’s proposal to raise the federal corporate income tax rate from 21 percent to 28 percent, and instead suggest raising the rate to 25 percent.
While strong economic growth—fueled by higher levels of investment, productivity, and jobs—will lift after-tax incomes over time, policies that provide relief by immediately boosting after-tax incomes of lower-income households are also available. As lawmakers consider such policies, they should keep in mind the trade-offs among them.
As President Biden’s tax plans are considered in Congress, the future of the $10,000 cap for state and local tax deductions (SALT) is becoming an important part of the tax debate.