IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedker/y1996iqiiip5-19nv.81no.3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How would a flat tax affect small businesses?

Author

Listed:
  • John E. Golob

Abstract

The U.S. Congress is considering several strategies to reform the federal income tax system. The most widely discussed strategy, a flat tax, would tax income received by businesses and individuals at the same low, flat rate. Flat tax proposals would eliminate most tax deductions and tax credits but would increase the personal exemption for individual taxpayers. While the debate continues over whether a flat tax would be fair to individual taxpayers, assessing the effect of a flat tax on economic growth and business activity is also important.> Most economists who analyze tax incentives conclude that a flat tax would encourage economic growth, which would have a positive effect on businesses in general. The effects on businesses would not be uniform, however, and many small businesses would be affected differently than large businesses. Small businesses are an important component in the U.S. economy, producing about half of private sector output and employing over half of the work force, so tax reformers need to understand how a flat tax would affect the small business sector of the economy.> Golob examines the effects of a flat tax on businesses in general and on small businesses in particular. He concludes that businesses in general are likely to benefit from a flat tax and that small businesses are likely to benefit more than large businesses. Most businesses would benefit from higher economic activity associated with a flat tax. Small businesses would benefit even more than large businesses, due in part to reduced compliance costs. In addition, a flat tax would eliminate tax deductions and tax credits less widely available to small businesses, thereby leveling the playing field between large and small businesses. Moreover, lower interest rates under a flat tax would offset more of the loss of interest deductibility for small businesses than for large businesses.

Suggested Citation

  • John E. Golob, 1996. "How would a flat tax affect small businesses?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 81(Q III), pages 5-19.
  • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:1996:i:qiii:p:5-19:n:v.81no.3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.kansascityfed.org/documents/998/1996-How%20Would%20a%20Flat%20Tax%20Affect%20Small%20Businesses%3F.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nada Eissa, 1995. "Taxation and Labor Supply of Married Women: The Tax Reform Act of 1986 as a Natural Experiment," NBER Working Papers 5023, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. John E. Golob, 1995. "How would tax reform affect financial markets?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 80(Q IV), pages 19-39.
    3. repec:hoo:wpaper:e-90-11 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Barry Bosworth & Gary Burtless, 1992. "Effects of Tax Reform on Labor Supply, Investment, and Saving," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 3-25, Winter.
    5. Robert K. Triest, 1990. "The Effect of Income Taxation on Labor Supply in the United States," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(3), pages 491-516.
    6. Thomas MaCurdy & David Green & Harry Paarsch, 1990. "Assessing Empirical Approaches for Analyzing Taxes and Labor Supply," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 25(3), pages 415-490.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Engen, Eric M. & Skinner, Jonathan, 1996. "Taxation and Economic Growth," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 49(4), pages 617-642, December.
    2. Kumar, Anil, 2008. "Labor supply, deadweight loss and tax reform act of 1986: A nonparametric evaluation using panel data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 236-253, February.
    3. Alan J. Auerbach & Joel Slemrod, 1997. "The Economic Effects of the Tax Reform Act of 1986," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 35(2), pages 589-632, June.
    4. Nada Eissa, 1996. "Tax Reforms and Labor Supply," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 10, pages 119-151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Thomas J. Kniesner & James P. Ziliak, 2002. "Tax Reform and Automatic Stabilization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 590-612, June.
    6. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    7. Nezih Guner & Remzi Kaygusuz & Gustavo Ventura, 2008. "Taxation, aggregates and the household," Working Papers 660, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    8. Michael P. Keane, 2011. "Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(4), pages 961-1075, December.
    9. Nezih Guner & Remzi Kaygusuz & Gustavo Ventura, 2012. "Taxation and Household Labour Supply," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(3), pages 1113-1149.
    10. Blundell, Richard & Macurdy, Thomas, 1999. "Labor supply: A review of alternative approaches," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1559-1695, Elsevier.
    11. Gravelle, Jane G., 1995. "Behavioral Feedback Effects and the Revenue-Estimating Process," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 48(3), pages 463-477, September.
    12. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    13. N. Eissa & H. W. Hoynes, "undated". "The Earned Income Tax Credit and the Labor Supply of Married Couples," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1194-99, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty.
    14. Anil Kumar, 2016. "Lifecycle-consistent female labor supply with nonlinear taxes: evidence from unobserved effects panel data models with censoring, selection and endogeneity," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 207-229, March.
    15. Bar Michael & Leukhina Oksana, 2009. "To Work or Not to Work: Did Tax Reforms Affect Labor Force Participation of Married Couples?," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-30, July.
    16. Soren Blomquist & Anil Kumar & Che-Yuan Liang & Whitney K. Newey, 2022. "Nonlinear Budget Set Regressions for the Random Utility Model," Working Papers 2219, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    17. Heim, Bradley T. & Meyer, Bruce D., 2004. "Work costs and nonconvex preferences in the estimation of labor supply models," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(11), pages 2323-2338, September.
    18. Hans G. Bloemen & Arie Kapteyn, 2008. "The estimation of utility-consistent labor supply models by means of simulated scores," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4), pages 395-422.
    19. Bargain, Olivier & Orsini, Kristian & Peichl, Andreas, 2011. "Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US," IZA Discussion Papers 5820, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Anil Kumar, 2012. "Nonparametric estimation of the impact of taxes on female labor supply," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(3), pages 415-439, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Flat-rate income tax; Small business;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedker:y:1996:i:qiii:p:5-19:n:v.81no.3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Zach Kastens (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbkcus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.