The Paris-based OECD is particularly bad on fiscal policy and it is infamous for its efforts to prop up Europe’s welfare states by hindering tax competition.
It even has a relatively new “BEPS” project that is explicitly designedso that politicians can grab more money from corporations.
So it’s safe to say that the OECD is not a hotbed of libertarian thought on tax policy, much less a supporter of pro-growth business taxation.
Which makes it all the more significant that it just announced that supporters of free markets are correct about the Laffer Curve and corporate tax rates.
The OECD doesn’t openly acknowledge that this is the case, of course, but let’s look at key passages from a Tuesday press release.
Taxes paid by companies remain a key source of government revenues, especially in developing countries, despite the worldwide trend of falling corporate tax rates over the past two decades… In 2016, corporate tax revenues accounted for 13.3% of total tax revenues on average across the 88 jurisdictions for which data is available. This figure has increased from 12% in 2000. …OECD analysis shows that a clear trend of falling statutory corporate tax rates – the headline rate faced by companies – over the last two decades. The database shows that the average combined (central and sub-central government) statutory tax rate fell from 28.6% in 2000 to 21.4% in 2018.
So tax rates have dramatically fallen but tax revenue has actually increased. I guess many of the self-styled experts are wrong on the Laffer Curve.
By the way, whoever edits the press releases for the OECD might want to consider changing “despite” to “because of” (writers at the Washington Post, WTNH, Irish-based Independent, and Wall Street Journal need similar lessons in causality).
Let’s take a more detailed look at the data. Here’s a chart from the OECD showing how corporate rates have dropped just since 2000. Pay special attention to the orange line, which shows the rate for developed nations.
And the chart only tells part of the story. The average corporate rate for OECD nations was 48 percent back in 1980.
In other words, tax rates have fallen by 50 percent in the developed world.
I’ll close with a caveat. The Laffer Curve is very important when looking at corporate taxation, but that doesn’t mean it has an equally powerful impact when looking at other taxes.
It all depends on how sensitive various taxpayers are to changes in tax rates.
Business taxes have a big effect because companies can easily choose where to invest and how much to invest.
The Laffer Curve also is very important when looking at proposals (such as the nutty idea from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) to increase tax rates on the rich. That’s because upper-income taxpayers have a lot of control over the timing, level, and composition of business and investment income.
But changes in tax rates on middle-income earners are less likely to have a big effect because most of us get a huge chunk of our compensation from wages and salaries. Similarly, changes in sales taxes and value-added taxes are unlikely to have big effects.
Increasing those taxes is still a bad idea, of course. I’m simply making the pointthat not all tax increases are equally destructive (and not all tax cuts generate equal amounts of additional growth).