home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990s
/
Time_Almanac_1990s_SoftKey_1994.iso
/
time
/
011392
/
0113203.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
5KB
|
139 lines
<text id=92TT0066>
<title>
Jan. 13, 1992: Choose Your Remedies
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1992
Jan. 13, 1992 The Recession:How Bad Is It?
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
BUSINESS, Page 40
COVER STORIES
Choose Your Remedies
</hdr><body>
<p>WHAT'S NOW ON THE TABLE
</p>
<p>Help for the Middle Class
</p>
<p> One plan would cut at least 2% from the FICA payroll
taxes, which take 15.3% (employers pay half) of all earnings up
to $53,400 a year. The tax is highly regressive, and its
surpluses are used to pay for everything from food stamps to
nuclear missiles.
</p>
<p> Outlook:
</p>
<p> Pushed hard by Democrats on grounds of fairness; a modest
version may wind up in Bush's package as well.
</p>
<p>A Break for Capital Gains
</p>
<p> Taxed as regular income at rates up to 31%, most types of
capital gains would get a substantial break if the
Administration has its way. Republicans tout the measure as a
stimulant to investment; Democrats attack it as a handout to the
wealthy.
</p>
<p> Outlook:
</p>
<p> As part of a compromise package, Democrats may be willing
to accept a limited cut, especially if it applies only to new
investment.
</p>
<p>Expansion of the IRA
</p>
<p> As a boon to the upper middle class, several plans would
restore tax breaks for Individual Retirement Accounts to the
higher-income taxpayers from whom they were taken in 1986.
Another version would allow withdrawal of earnings from accounts
funded with after-tax dollars.
</p>
<p> Outlook:
</p>
<p> Popular with both parties, but the multibillion-dollar
cost could be a barrier.
</p>
<p>A Revived Investment Tax Credit
</p>
<p> Dropped in 1986, any tax credit would probably be limited
to investment in new plants and equipment and made temporary,
thus encouraging companies to accelerate their expansion before
the tax break expires. Moreover, to avoid giving a windfall to
any spending that was already planned, the credits would
probably apply only to "incremental" investment, meaning the
money spent above a company's historical level.
</p>
<p> Outlook:
</p>
<p> A long-standing favorite of Democrats and a probable
component of Bush's package as well.
</p>
<p>Hitting the Wealthy Harder
</p>
<p> To help finance middle-class relief, the rich would get
some form of modest increase. One way would be to boost the top
marginal tax rate a few points; another would be to add a surtax
on millionaires' income.
</p>
<p> Outlook:
</p>
<p> In an election year, the Democrats will demand this
populist move, and Bush is likely to go along in exchange for
a capital-gains cut and other measures.
</p>
<p>WHAT SHOULD BE DONE FOR THE LONG TERM
</p>
<p>Invest in Mass Transit
</p>
<p> Create federal, state and local partnerships to build
light-rail lines for urban areas lacking mass transit; support
high-speed rail for passengers and freight. To help pay for it,
boost taxes on parking and fuel. Such programs would reduce
pollution, gridlock and dependence on oil imports.
</p>
<p>Invest in Education and Job Training
</p>
<p> Guarantee access to college or vocational training for all
who qualify, regardless of ability to pay. As Arkansas Governor
Bill Clinton suggests, let needy students pay for their
education with public service after graduation or through small
paycheck deductions.
</p>
<p>Boost Research and Development
</p>
<p> Increase spending, as Bush has begun to do, to support
private research into new technologies. Provide special funding
for research into alternative energy sources including solar
electricity.
</p>
<p>Make Smart Defense Cuts
</p>
<p> In the short run, reductions in the Pentagon budget will
provide few savings. Because of the recession, for example,
cutbacks in military payrolls would put more people on the
unemployment line. But over the long haul, carefully planned
reductions could amount to savings of $50 billion a year.
</p>
<p>Phase Out Subsidies for Borrowing
</p>
<p> Americans for decades have bought far larger and more
expensive houses than they could otherwise afford, thanks to the
deduction for mortgage interest. The result for the U.S. is high
household debt and low savings. Lawmakers should consider
sharply lowering the cap on mortgage deductions, which currently
allows full deductibility for interest payments on debt of up
to $1.1 million on two homes.
</p>
<p> Similarly, the Treasury Department should release its
long-awaited study on ways to equalize the treatment of
corporate debt and equities. The best way is simply to cut tax
deductions for corporate borrowing while simultaneously cutting
the double taxation of stock dividends.
</p>
</body></article>
</text>