Few can doubt that the United
States needs a better tax system. We need simple and consistent rules, adequate
revenues to finance current government spending, equitable tax burdens across
and within economic groups, and favorable incentives for productive activity. On
top of these ongoing concerns, we will need to raise substantially more revenue
in the future than we have in the past.
Achieving these goals sounds hopeless, but it is not. A little
creativity in tax policy could go a long way. Many countries, for example,
impose taxes on environmental pollution. Such taxes have the potential to make
taxes simpler and fairer, and to significantly reduce the budget deficit. What’s
more, they would lead to a healthier environment and might even make for better
U.S. foreign policy, too.
Current tax laws not only miss huge opportunities to clean up
the environment, they also actively lead to worse ecological outcomes. The first
step should be to remove subsidies that damage the environment. Federal rules
provide enormous tax preferences for oil, mining, timber and sport utility
vehicles. These subsidies create incentives for overproduction of these goods,
and they stifle incentives for development of better or cleaner
technologies.
Even the mortgage interest deduction is at fault–it may
encourage people to build larger primary residences. The deduction also applies
to second homes, many of which are built in environmentally sensitive areas. A
thorough cleaning of the tax code, with an eye toward environmentally damaging
subsidies, could generate billions of dollars a year in added revenue.
Easy Being Green We can be more ambitious still. When people or firms create
pollution, they are imposing costs on others. In economics, it is well
established that those agents should pay the full costs of their activities. One
way to do this is to require polluters to pay taxes on their emissions.
Pollution taxes can be more effective and flexible than many
forms of regulation because they give incentives to improve efficiency and
environmental quality. They also allow firms to make cost-effective emission
reductions where it makes economic sense–or to pay the tax if not. These taxes
also stimulate innovation for better pollution control methods.
A broad tax on the carbon content of fossil fuels, for example,
would make those who produce or consume products that contribute to global
warming face the full costs of their actions and give them incentives to reduce
those costs. The money generated could be used for some combination of
simplifying and reducing other taxes, paying down the deficit and financing
appropriate spending. An important benefit would be reducing our dependence on
foreign oil–and the political problems that creates–by encouraging the
development of cleaner technologies.
|