FT社評(píng)：只“濟(jì)富”的美國(guó)稅改法案
美國(guó)共和黨的稅改計(jì)劃很快將成為法律。上周六凌晨，該法案在參議院獲得通過，現(xiàn)在將與大同小異的眾議院版本進(jìn)行協(xié)調(diào)，隨后遞交給總統(tǒng)簽署。投票嚴(yán)格按照黨派站隊(duì)，在最后一秒匆匆加入了很多修正(瘋狂的“馬拉松連續(xù)投票”程序)。甚至連參議員們自己都并非準(zhǔn)確知道自己在為怎樣的法案投票。因此現(xiàn)在有必要退一步，大致考慮一下，這項(xiàng)稅改計(jì)劃將帶來哪些變化。
These fall into three categories: big tax cuts for business, which will significantly increase the budget deficit; a reshuffling of individual tax rates, which will have a much more limited net effect; and several halfhearted efforts at genuine reform.
變化主要有三類：對(duì)企業(yè)大幅減稅，這將大幅增加預(yù)算赤字;重新調(diào)整個(gè)人稅率，這對(duì)預(yù)算平衡的最終影響要有限得多;以及朝著真正的改革方向做出的多項(xiàng)不溫不火的努力。
Economically, the most important question is the effect on growth and investment of cutting the headline corporate tax rate from 35 per cent to 20 per cent. There are few certainties here. One is that the cut will increase the deficit by a large amount — at least $1tn — over a decade. The idea that the cut would pay for itself has modest support in theory and none in history. It is also certain that the cut will produce some growth: it is if nothing else an injection of cash into the economy. The question is whether the growth will be worth the cost. The battle lines on this issue are drawn. Only experience will resolve the debate conclusively.
在經(jīng)濟(jì)方面，最重要的問題是把企業(yè)稅從35%削減至20%的舉措對(duì)于經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)和投資的影響。關(guān)于這個(gè)問題，一切幾乎都不確定。一種影響是，削減企業(yè)稅將使未來10年赤字大幅增加——至少增加1萬億美元。認(rèn)為削減企業(yè)稅可以“自己為自己買單”的想法在理論上的依據(jù)有限，在歷史上沒有先例可循。此外，可以肯定削減企業(yè)稅將帶來一定的增長(zhǎng)：至少相當(dāng)于向經(jīng)濟(jì)注入資金。問題在于，它帶來的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)是否足以補(bǔ)償它的的成本。在該問題上，已經(jīng)形成了對(duì)立的兩派。只有經(jīng)驗(yàn)才能最終為這場(chǎng)辯論敲定勝負(fù)。
It must be noted, however, that the additional money will land in corporate coffers at a time when profits are already near all-time highs and many companies are flush with cash. Fixed investment is low despite this. Still higher profits may not change this pattern. It does not help that executive pay packages have changed in the recent decades, encouraging distribution rather than investment of profit.
然而，需要注意的是，減稅帶來的額外資金將在如下情況下進(jìn)入企業(yè)的金庫：企業(yè)利潤(rùn)已經(jīng)接近歷史高點(diǎn)、很多企業(yè)現(xiàn)金充裕。盡管如此，固定投資仍然低迷。利潤(rùn)進(jìn)一步增加可能無法改變這種模式。另一個(gè)無助于模式改變的因素是，最近幾十年高管薪酬制度已經(jīng)改變，鼓勵(lì)把利潤(rùn)拿出來分配、而不是投資。
On the individual side, average rates on wages will fall one percentage point, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Marginal rates — the amount paid on an additional dollar of wages — will fall by 2.4 points. The plusses and minuses are complex. The child tax credit increases, for example, but some important deductions disappear. In any case the long-term impact will be muted: all the changes to individual rates disappear after a decade. Because of the massive expense of the corporate rate cuts, the sunset of the individual changes was necessary to satisfy Senate deficit rules.
對(duì)個(gè)人而言，據(jù)美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)稅收聯(lián)合委員會(huì)(Joint Committee on Taxation)表示，工資的平均稅率將降低1個(gè)百分點(diǎn)。邊際稅率(工資每額外增加1美元需要支付的稅款)將減少2.4個(gè)百分點(diǎn)。具體稅率增減項(xiàng)情況非常復(fù)雜。比如，兒童稅收抵免提高，但一些重要的應(yīng)稅收益額抵免被取消了。無論如何，從長(zhǎng)期來看影響都會(huì)消失：個(gè)人所得稅的所有變化都會(huì)在十年后消失。由于削減企業(yè)稅的巨大支出，個(gè)人所得稅的稅率變化設(shè)置廢止時(shí)間對(duì)于滿足參議院的赤字規(guī)定來說必不可少。
It is dispiriting but not surprising that the bill does as much as it does for the most fortunate. The carried-interest tax break remains, the estate tax falls, and the top marginal rates will apply to less taxpayers (and will probably fall). More beneficial to the rich than any of these, most likely, is the reduction in taxes on income from “pass-through” business structures, which pay no corporate taxes. The nominal justification for this is to help small business, most of which is structured in this way. In all likelihood, however, the great majority of the benefit will go to wealthy investors and professionals. Efforts to write rules to distinguish the two groups will add complexity and may prove ineffective. There is room for the lavish treatment of the rich to be restrained as the Senate and House versions are reconciled. Centrist Republicans should press hard for this.
該法案盡可能地為富人服務(wù)，這令人沮喪但并不意外。附帶權(quán)益稅收優(yōu)惠仍然保留，遺產(chǎn)稅降低，最高一檔邊際稅率的適用人數(shù)將減少(稅率也很可能降低)。對(duì)于富人來說，最有利的可能是來自“過渡法人企業(yè)”(pass-through business)結(jié)構(gòu)——此類企業(yè)不交納企業(yè)稅——的收入稅收減少。該做法名義上是幫助中小企業(yè)，因?yàn)榇蠖鄶?shù)中小企業(yè)都屬于這類結(jié)構(gòu)。然而，十有八九，絕大部分好處將流向富有的投資者和專業(yè)人士。試圖制定規(guī)則來區(qū)分這兩類群體，將增加復(fù)雜度，并且可能收效甚微。在參議院和眾議院協(xié)調(diào)各自的稅改法案版本的過程中，仍然有空間來限制對(duì)富人的稅收優(yōu)待。中間派共和黨議員應(yīng)該努力促成這一點(diǎn)的實(shí)現(xiàn)。
There are various elements in the bill that gesture towards real reform. Deductions for mortgage interest, corporate debt costs, and state and local taxes will be curtailed. There is also a partial move from a global to a territorial system. None of these go far enough. But they do serve as reminders of what a visionary tax-reform bill — as opposed to what is in effect a big tax cut for business — might have looked like.
該法案中有多處地方做出了進(jìn)行真正改革的姿態(tài)。按揭利息、企業(yè)債務(wù)成本以及州和地方稅收對(duì)應(yīng)稅收益額的抵免都將被削減。該法案中還有從全球系統(tǒng)部分邁向區(qū)域系統(tǒng)的舉措。這些都力度不夠。但它們確實(shí)提醒了人們，一項(xiàng)富有遠(yuǎn)見的稅改法案——而不是這樣一份實(shí)際上等同于大幅削減企業(yè)稅的法案——可能會(huì)是什么樣。
