If a member of Congress told you that he was going
to use some of your hard-earned tax dollars to support an international
organization that demands that you pay higher taxes, what would you say?
Unfortunately, the question is not hypothetical, because that is exactly what
is now happening. Congress is giving more than $70 million a year to
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which
has morphed over the last two decades from an organization that promoted trade
and growth policies to an organization that pushes for higher taxes, which will
reduce economic growth.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady wrote
this past week that the OECD “in its Base Erosion and Profit Shifting
(BEPS) project has advanced ideas that will make it harder for our companies to
compete and grow. Worldwide American companies are rightly concerned that the
BEPS project will result in higher foreign taxes, higher compliance costs, and
double taxation.” As Mr. Brady also correctly points out,
the OECD efforts will likely cause more American companies to move
their headquarters overseas, thus reducing the number of Americans that both
companies and their suppliers employ.
A quarter of a century ago, the OECD was in favor
of competition, but then it was captured by French and other European
bureaucrats who didn’t like the fact that lower-tax countries were increasing
jobs and growing faster than the old high-tax countries. Rather than advocate
lower taxes in the high-tax countries, the OECD has done the opposite
and become lobbyists and advocates to increase tax rates in low-tax countries
so the high-tax countries would not be at a competitive disadvantage.
But it gets worse. The staff and officials of the OECD,
and most of the other major international organizations, such as the
International Monetary Fund and United Nations, have tax-free salaries and very
generous benefits. After all, in the words of insightful Wall Street Journal
columnist and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan, they are part of the
“protected class.” No worries about job security, retirement, medical insurance
or having the connections and wherewithal to send their children to private
schools. The hypocrisy of advocating for higher taxes on others while not
having to pay taxes themselves is merely part of the price one has to pay for
being a “global public servant.” They are akin to the protected class of the
Hollywood elite, and the left-leaning billionaires, who think the rest of us
should not have guns and should drive small, unsafe fuel-efficient cars while
they fly around in their private jets with their bodyguards.One might have
thought that the U.S. Congress would have immediately cut funding for
the OECD, but the organization’s officials and lobbyists in
Washington undertook an active campaign to wine and dine members of
Congress and other agents of influence, including members of the news
media, in order to preserve the funding they obtain from U.S. taxpayers, which
accounts for about 25 percent of the OECD budget. In effect, U.S.
taxpayers were sold out for the price of a good meal — one of the many reasons
the people hate Washington.
What is particularly galling is the economic nonsense
peddled by many at the OECD. They are now recommending higher government
spending to spur economic growth, a thoroughly discredited neo-Keynesian idea.
One might have thought they would have noticed that the big increases in
government spending over the last decade did not improve growth but only
saddled taxpayers with more growth-destroying government debt.
The OECD has been on a crusade to get countries to
“harmonize” their corporate tax base and rates as a way of suppressing
international tax competition. They are even leaning on jurisdictions that have
no corporate tax to put one in under the false notion that it is only “fair.”
All of this ignores the fact that most tax economists view the corporate tax as
one of the worst taxes, in that it falls in very uneven ways on consumers in
the form of higher prices and less innovation, and on workers in the form of lower
wages — while investors have the option of putting their money in less
tax-disadvantaged investments.
Competition is a plus — whether it is in sports, political
systems and parties, goods and services, or in tax policies and rates. A global
tax monopoly, as the big-government protected class seeks, will be destructive
as are other monopolies. The world will enjoy higher real incomes and more jobs
if the BEPS project and its now-corrupted incubator, the OECD, are
strangled by having their taxpayer funds withdrawn. Speaker of the House Paul
Ryan has promised a return to “regular order,” which may enable those members
of Congress who are awake to the OECD power grab and not
yet corrupted by it to stop its funding.
Richard
W. Rahn is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman
of the Institute for Global Economic Growth.
1 comment:
Any halfway competent economist knows that corporate taxes are pretty much the worst taxes imaginable --- except perhaps for wealth or land taxes.
Under the US Constitution, corporate taxes remain unconstitutional. If Scalia was replaced with a real Conservative, they would be gone for good.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.