TaxBytes

The dreaded and feared sequester has been a success. Policymakers should add blunt tools like the sequester as a backstop into every future fiscal agreement.

Killing the goose to get the gold inside leaves one with only a dead goose.

It was a disappointment to see President Obama use tax reform as little more than a bait-and-switch for his same old demand for higher taxes and more federal spending.

Comparing some of his positions to the polling data, Mr. Enzi might be better off if the voters don’t look too closely at his record, particularly his long time fight to allow state tax collectors to reach across state lines to force businesses in other states to collect tax for them.

The New York Times and several U.S. senators, with GAO report in hand, seem to have a problem understanding the difference between marginal and effective tax rates. Should they be opining on tax reform?

There’s nothing more authentically American than complaining about high taxes, and taking action against an unresponsive, unrepresentative government.

We can simply no longer afford an uncompetitive corporate tax rate that is wildly out of whack with our international competitors.

Tax policy is one way in which the states compete. Ideally, states would compete on the basis of overall low tax rates; however, in practice that has never been the case. Tax credits, which essentially mitigate the harm of high tax rates, are thus the most common tools states use to compete with each other in tax policy.

The Wireless Tax Fairness Act, newly reintroduced this week, would put a five-year moratorium on any new state and local discriminatory wireless taxes.

Instead of engaging in easy demagoguery, Congress should modernize our tax code to reflect the reality of global competition, capital mobility, and the fact that U.S. companies today do the majority of their business overseas.