PROTECTING SMALL BUSINESS, PROMOTING ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Pro-Growth Tax Reform: Lower Rates and Expensing are Vital to Small Businesses

By at 20 September, 2017, 10:17 am

 

by Raymond J. Keating-

From at least 2007 to 2016, U.S. entrepreneurs, businesses, investors and workers were beaten down thanks to misguided and costly government actions, including tax hikes and increased regulatory costs. (The policy ills, along with proposed remedies, were spelled out in a November 2016 SBE Council report.) The U.S. desperately needs pro-growth relief and reform on both the tax and regulatory fronts.

Relief and Reform Needed

When looking at the tax issue, efforts in Congress and by the White House to advance major relief and reform are most welcome. Make no mistake, the U.S. economy is need of both tax relief and tax reform. Recall that during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, that’s exactly what was accomplished, via a major tax cut passed in 1981 and then tax reform in 1986. Today, the hope is that Congress and the White House will combine these into one effort. That’s a sound policy choice in order to quickly derive the benefits for our economy, its workforce and entrepreneurs. Both relief and reform must be achieved.

Pro-Growth Means Lower Tax Rates and Full Expensing

Unfortunately, some dispute has emerged between reducing tax rates on entrepreneurs and businesses, and providing full expensing for capital expenditures by entrepreneurs and businesses. This is not a productive debate if policymakers are serious about providing a sound foundation upon which economic, income and employment growth can flourish.

If tax relief and reform is going to be substantive and pro-growth, then a substantial and across-the-board lowering of tax rates on personal income, corporate income and capital gains are required. That’s more or less a given in tax reform circles.

At the same time, providing straightforward expensing as an option stands out as a necessity as, again, if we are serious about making this a pro-growth initiative. After all, investment in technology, facilities, equipment, tools, software and so on are vital for economic and productivity growth, which in turn help drive profitability and increased incomes for workers.

Moving Beyond Limited Expensing: The Benefits

Currently, expensing is limited for small businesses. That is, expensing is limited to $500,000 per year (with that indexed for inflation in future years) in capital spending, with a dollar-for-dollar phase out occurring when such investments hit $2 million and climb to $2.5 million. Full expensing would simply allow all capital expenditures to be written off or deducted as a business cost in the year the investments were made.

Further incentivizing private-sector capital investment through expensing is a win-win-win-win for entrepreneurs, small businesses, large firms and workers. And assorted studies drive home this point.

For example, a study published in early 2015 by the NFIB Research Foundation estimated that permanent small business expensing at the $500,000 level would, over ten years, boost jobs by 197,000 and real economic output by $18.6 billion. (Permanent small business expensing was signed into law in December 2015.)

Also, in a July 2016 Tax Foundation study of the House Republican tax reform plan, allowing for full expensing of capital investments was estimated to boost GDP growth over a ten-year period by 5.4 percent, which in this model accounted for more than half of the positive growth impact of the overall tax reform package.

Much has been made of the Tax Foundation study estimating a revenue “loss” to the federal government of $2.2 trillion over the first decade with full expensing. However, that is according to unrealistic static analysis, while under more realistic dynamic scoring, the “loss” falls to $883 billion, and shrinks further into the future.

Another Tax Foundation report noted, “By removing nearly all barriers to investment from the business tax code, full expensing could grow the long-run size of the U.S. economy by 4.2 percent, which would lead to 3.6 percent higher wages and 808,000 full-time jobs.” These analyses also find that moving to full expensing would have a larger economic growth impact than would a reduction in the corporate tax rate. Of course, though, it must be made clear that reducing the tax rate also has a significant positive impact on GDP growth. Again, pro-growth tax reform requires both.

The Small Business Point

Finally, it must be noted that when we are talking about expensing and tax rate cuts, this is overwhelmingly a small business story. Overall and industry by industry, it is small businesses doing the investing. For example, just looking at C corporations, consider the following (according to U.S. Census Bureau data):

• Among all C corporations, 86 percent have less than 20 employees, and 96.9 percent less than 100 workers.

• In mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction, 75.2 percent of C corporations have less than 20 workers, and 89.2 percent less than 100 employees.

• In construction, 88.4 percent of C corporations have less than 20 workers, and 98.2 percent fewer than 100.

• And finally, in manufacturing, 67.7 percent of C corporations have fewer than 20 employees, and 89.2 less than 100 workers.

In the end, whether we’re talking about lower tax rates or full expensing, pro-growth tax reform very much is a small business issue and it is essential that a tax package making its way to President Trump’s desk includes both.

_______

Raymond J. Keating is chief economist for the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council.

Keating’s latest book published by SBE Council is titled Unleashing Small Business Through IP:  The Role of Intellectual Property in Driving Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Investment and it is available free on SBE Council’s website here.

News and Media Releases