Ihave a feeling that revenue increases will be a material (e.g., 25% or more) part of the deal. The
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releaseDocument text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
Ihave a feeling that revenue increases will be a material (e.g., 25% or more) part of the deal. The Peterson Foundation’s
sampling of 6 policy groups shown below indicate that 5 of 6 recommend revenue increases compared to where we are
today; the Heritage Foundation’s “Woody Guthrie Memorial Budget Plan” is the only exception. What kind of revenue
increases? Raising the top two brackets, which would affect joint filers with adjusted gross incomes above $212,300,
would raise $450-$700 billion over 10 years (depending on whether you use OMB or CBO numbers). If they cannot
agree to raise rates, another option (as in the Gang of Six plan) would be reductions in the deductibility of state and local
taxes, sales taxes, mortgage interest, etc. As this gets sorted out, let’s hope everyone recognizes that the US tax system is
already progressive. As shown in the chart below, effective Federal tax rates for low earners have dropped to zero over
the last decade, even after including FICA taxes. News reports that the US tax system is regressive make me want to
throw hamburgers at the screen.
Europe: Finally (!!), but now what?
For the first time since 2009, it felt last week like European policymakers were trying to get out in front of things. In
exchange for a modest amount of “private sector involvement”, Germany agreed to more generous financing terms for
Greece, Ireland and Portugal, and an expanded role for the EU-IMF lending facility (see following page). What would
the plan accomplish if implemented? While Greek debt to GDP ratios would remain well over 125% of GDP (the IMF
estimate for next year is a ridiculous 170%), Greece’s near-term financing obligations would decline, due to debt
buybacks, exchanges into long maturity bonds, and interest grace periods on new EU loans. More broadly, the plan also
allows for money to be lent to countries before they enter into an IMF program, for recapitalization of banks. All things
considered, it’s the broadest defense of the Monetary Union so far. On paper, it even looks like a free ride for
holders of Greek paper that don’t participate in the debt exchanges (they would be paid at par). So, what’s not to
like? Well, there are still questions about Greece:
** There’s a big difference between generous financing terms and generous economic terms. Greece must still meet an
enormous 5%-6% primary budget surplus target (government revenues less spending, pre-interest) during a recession
** Greece must execute on its asset sale targets, despite having little success or experience doing this in the past
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031160
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents