How should the government measure inflation?
Republicans and many economists argue for shifting to a more accurate inflation measure, Gleckman writes, but a new report suggests that move would raise taxes by nearly as much as it would slow Social Security spending over the next decade.
Republicans and many economists argue for shifting to a more accurate inflation measure, Gleckman writes, but a new report suggests that move would raise taxes by nearly as much as it would slow Social Security spending over the next decade.
Changing the way government adjusts spending and taxes for inflation is one of those issues that continues to hang around the edges of the budget debate. Republicans and many economists argue for shifting to a more accurate inflation measure, called the chained Consumer Price Index (CPI).聽President Obama would support聽a version as part of a fiscal grand聽bargain. Because Social Security benefits would likely grow more slowly under this measure, many Democrats and social insurance advocates strongly oppose the idea.
But a new Congressional Budget Office聽estimate聽shows fiscal effects that chained CPI聽backers might not want to see. It turns out that shifting to the new inflation measure聽would raise taxes by nearly as much as it would slow Social Security spending over the next decade. Indeed, after 2021, the adjustment would raise taxes more than it would cut projected Social Security benefits.
CBO figures chained CPI would raise taxes聽by nearly $124 billion over 10 years. It would reduce projected Social Security spending by $127 billion and cut planned spending for all programs by a total of $216 billion. Note that CBO counts a nearly $18 billion cut in refundable tax credits as a spending reduction. If you prefer to include it among the tax hikes, the overall revenue increase would reach $142 billion over 10 years.
Back in 2011, the Tax Policy Center聽figured聽the shift would raise taxes by an average of about $140 per household. Most households within a vast聽income range (from $20,000 to $200,000) would see their after-tax income聽fall by about 0.2 percent on average. Those making more would see their incomes drop聽by聽about half as much. 聽聽
A quick word on聽what鈥檚 happening here: Chained CPI is an effort to measure聽consumer responses to changes in prices. If, for instance, the price of a brand-name drug goes up, consumers may respond by buying the generic version, thus softening the blow of the price hike and slightly lowering inflation.
Because spending programs are adjusted for changes in cost-of-living, the more modest CPI growth would trim benefit increases each year. Advocates for the Social Security status quo argue these small annual changes would add up over many years and the biggest victims would be聽the very old and the very poor.
But the tax increases聽are just as big, though rarely discussed. The government also adjusts tax brackets and other elements of the income tax聽for inflation in an attempt to reduce a phenomenon known as bracket creep. The problem: Rising incomes聽can聽bump people聽into a higher tax bracket.聽
Three decades ago, Ronald Reagan convinced Congress to stop most of this by indexing the income tax聽by the CPI. Shifting to a less generous measure of inflation would restore a bit more bracket creep to the code and raise taxes for about three-quarters of all households, TPC figures.
If the proposal shows up in the next House GOP budget, expect to hear many Democrats object loudly to what they see as the basic unfairness of the plan. But聽neither Republicans nor many Democrats will say聽that moving to chained CPI also crosses both the GOP鈥檚 no-new-taxes pledge and Obama鈥檚 vow to protect individuals聽making $200,000 or less from tax hikes. I wonder if anyone鈥檚 told Grover Norquist?