Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Don’t Expect the UAW to GrowThere is no evidence of a resurgence in the UAW or other industrial unions today.

Thoughts About Trump’s Tax PlanIn considering any tax change, first ask how it might eventually reduce the debt.

China Is a Poor and Failing NationChina is getting in the way of its own economic growth.

Work From Home Is Here to StayAt least 1 million Hoosiers work from home at least one day per week.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 237
economics 180
education 153
economic development 153
state and local government 140
taxes 126
indiana 117
budget and spending 111
finance 110
migration and population change 109
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

June 29, 2014

Tax Conference Was Really About Tax Fairness

Indiana hosted a conference on tax competitiveness and tax simplicity last week. The event will receive a lot of merited attention in the coming months and years as Indiana grapples with some lingering weaknesses in our tax code. I was lucky enough to attend the conference and can offer a few insights about the event.

Tax competitiveness and tax simplicity are vague phrases that deserve some explanation. Competitiveness in a tax code means a structure of tax rates, tax types and a suite of public services that provoke households and businesses to relocate or stay in Indiana. We surely disagree on how to get there, but as an aspirational goal this would seem a wise pursuit. Simplicity of course means that the tax code is easy for government to administer and easy for households and business to comply.

This obvious definition is only the veneer of simplicity, for you see all complexity in taxes is the result of basic unfairness. Every loophole, every deduction, every exemption, every abatement, every special carve-out of taxes is designed to benefit one class of citizens at the expense of others. In the end these are neither fair nor simple. They are rarely effective.

For every small deduction, credit or exemption crafted in our tax code for disabled veterans or Girl Scout donations, there are hundreds of far more dubious credits that have slipped into the code to benefit installers of solar-powered roof vents, builders of riverboat casinos and others. Fixing these inequities in the tax code was a major theme of the tax conference.

As with any research-based conference on taxation, there were some provocative ideas from thinkers and doers from around the world. We heard about the remarkable transformation of New Zealand’s tax code, which literally rescued the country from bankruptcy while increasing direct payments to the poor and unemployed. We heard about the challenges state tax codes face when linked to federal income tax rules, and the trials of reforming a federal tax system that has become purely political.

Those of us at the conference heard about the difficulty in explaining equity in taxation when a legion of tax preparers and other special interest groups require complexity and unfairness as part of their business model. We heard how corporate taxation reduces worker wages and how we could help lower-income households by dramatically dropping the sales tax rate through the inclusion of a tax on services not just goods. We heard about ways to reduce the business personal property tax while making whole local government revenues. We heard about ways to cut the wheeling and dealing of economic development incentives while making Indiana more attractive to commerce. It was a rare and important content-rich experience of which I will write much more.

Indiana’s taxes are already fairly competitive, but they are neither fair nor simple. Over the coming months and years all of us need to let our wisdom and courage overpower our ideology and make Indiana the model state for tax competitiveness, simplicity and equity.­

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/740/tax-conference-was-really-about-tax-fairness

Tags: economic theory, taxes, reformers


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close