With one exception, the Democrats' first stab at tax reform is disappointing
民主党的首个税改方案令人失望
“THE mother of all tax reforms” was how Charles Rangel, the Democrats' top tax-writer in Congress, described his new plans for revamping America's tax code. “The mother of all tax hikes” was the response from many Republicans. Both the creator and the critics are wrong. Mr Rangel's proposal is “revenue-neutral”, raising taxes in some places while cutting them elsewhere. But it is not a bold reform; more a tweak than a transformation of America's absurdly complex tax code. If Mr Rangel's vision shapes the tax agenda after 2008 (not implausible, since he is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and is also close to Hillary Clinton, whom he encouraged to run for the Senate in 2000), it will represent a missed opportunity.
国会议员、民主党最高税法立法者查尔斯·兰格最近提出了美国税法改革的新方案，并自诩这一方案为“税收改革之母”。但共和党人称之为“苛捐重税之母”。兰格的计划是“财政中性”的，在某些方面加重税负而在另一些方面减轻税负。不过这一方案说不上激进，只是对美国极其复杂的税法进行小修小补而非重大改动。如果兰格的着眼点是2008年之后的税改日程（这并非不可能，因为兰格本人是众议院筹款委员会主席，正是他支持希拉里·克林顿2000年成为参议员，并与之保持着密切关系）的话，那现在的方案就是在错失良机。
That is because America's next president and Congress will have the best chance for reform since Ronald Reagan took an axe to the tax code in 1986. Two “great unavoidables” will force change. One is the expiry of Mr Bush's tax cuts in 2010. The other impetus comes from the rise of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), a levy introduced in 1969 to ensure that wealthy Americans could not escape taxation by making artful use of the code's myriad deductions. Since the AMT is not indexed for inflation, its reach has extended ever farther down the income ladder, requiring a series of temporary fixes. Without another one, a quarter of all taxpayers will pay AMT on their 2007 income. This will not only raise their dues, but will also force them to calculate their tax bill twice, since Americans must pay whichever is the higher assessment of their tax burden under either the standard code or the AMT one.
这是因为下一届总统和国会面临着1986年里根税改以来的最佳税制改革良机。两大“不可避免因素”决定了税制改革必须实施。第一是布什的减税计划将于 2010年到期。第二是选择性最小税（AMT）的税负越来越重。AMT自1969年开始征收，目的是为了防止富裕阶层利用税法中数不清的免税条款来逃避税收。但由于没有与通货膨胀挂钩，现在有许多低收入人群也纳入了AMT征收体系中。这就需要对该税进行一系列的临时性修补，否则以2007年的收入标准，四分之一的纳税人需要缴纳AMT。这不但增加了他们的税负，还将迫使他们计算两次纳税单，因为美国税法规定纳税者要按照标准算法和AMT算法中更高者缴税。
Mr Rangel's plan tries to deal with the second great unavoidable (he says nothing about what to do with the Bush tax cuts, a serious omission). He wants to eliminate the AMT, at a cost of some $800 billion over the next decade, and pay for this by levying a surcharge on rich Americans, particularly those earning over $500,000 a year. Getting rid of the AMT will indeed make the tax code simpler. But raising the top marginal rate will blunt incentives. If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire, America's top rate of income tax could rise to almost 45%, up from 35% today, with state taxes on top of that.
兰格的计划针对的是第二个不可避免因素（他没有给出任何针对布什减税计划的措施，可谓重大遗漏）。他打算废除AMT，代价是未来十年内损失8000亿美元的财政收入。补救的办法是向美国富裕阶层，尤其是年收入超过50万美元的人群增收一项附加税。废除AMT的确可以简化税法。但提高最高税收边际不利于激励。布什减税计划到期之后，美国的最高所得税（包括州级地税）将从现在的35%升至近45%。
To what end? Mr Rangel argues that his reforms will make the code fairer by raising taxes on the wealthiest while cutting them for everyone else. His plan includes some sensible proposals for America's poorest taxpayers, but it is mostly concerned with shifting the tax burden from the affluent to the very rich. That is not the kind of redistribution for which it is worth inflicting so much damage on incentives at the top end.
这一方案的最后结果会是怎样？兰格认为，他的改革方案在增加最富裕人群税负的同时减轻了普通大众的税负，因而增进了税收公平。他的方案中包括了针对美国最贫困纳税者的合理建议，但最令人关注的是这一方案将中等富裕阶层的税负转嫁给了富豪阶层。这样的再分配方案极大地挫伤了税收链顶端人群的激励，因而是得不偿失的。
With a bit more ambition, Mr Rangel could have suggested reforms that make the tax code more progressive and, at the same time, simpler. America's personal income tax code is riddled with deductions—from the subtraction of mortgage interest to countless incentives for savings. Such deductions, which are worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year, narrow the tax base and distort behaviour, and their benefits flow disproportionately to the most affluent taxpayers. Capping these deductions, or getting rid of some altogether, would be a far better way to pay for AMT repeal.
如果兰格再激进一些，也许可以提出更深入、同时也更公平的税法改革方案。减税条款在美国个人所得税税法中随处可见---从降低抵押贷款利率到数不清的储蓄激励。这些消减的税款达到每年数千亿美元之巨，从而消弱了税基，也扭曲了行为，而且减税的好处大多被最富裕的纳税者占去了。限制或者干脆取消一些减税条款远比兰格的方案更适合作为取消AMT的补救措施。
Good in only one part 唯一亮点
Mr Rangel's timidity is all the more disappointing because he does propose just such a base-broadening reform to America's corporate income tax. Much as Reagan slashed corporate tax rates and removed deductions in 1986, Mr Rangel wants to cut America's top rate of corporate income tax from 35% (about the highest in the OECD) to 30.5%. The revenue (almost $400 billion over a decade) would be recouped by getting rid of several deductions, including a distorting tax credit for domestic manufacturers. Given that Democrats have long refused to consider cutting corporate income tax, for fear it would be construed as handing tax cuts to the rich, Mr Rangel's ideas mark a clear step forward. Too bad he couldn't muster the courage to do the same in the rest of the bill.
更加令人失望的是兰格的畏首畏尾，他只在美国企业所得税层面提出了这种扩大税基的的改革方案。兰格的计划与里根在1986年消减企业所得税率并移除减税条款的做法如出一辙：美国最高企业所得税率将从35%（与经合组织最高水平相当）降到30.5%，所减少的财政收入（十年内将有近4000亿）将通过取消减税条款（如国内生产商适用的扭曲性税务信用）的方式得以补偿。长久以来，民主党一直反对消减企业所得税，因为这一举措总被认为是在为富人减税。因此兰格的计划可谓是前进了一大步。可惜的是他没能一鼓作气将这一方案推广到其他税种中。
Taxes in America 美国税改
Nov 1st 2007
From The Economist print edition
