Feldsteins on Clinton Plan
Martin and Kathleen Feldstein are probably right that tax avoidance will be the response to President Clinton’s proposal to increase rates on the rich and near-rich (Column Right, March 21) and that the result will be a substantial reduction in anticipated revenue to lower the deficit.
More than one-half the revenue from personal and corporate income taxes goes to pay interest on the national debt. As deficits continue and without new growth, interest payments increase and there is less revenue available to pay for bills. This is a cycle of ruin.
According to the polls, a majority of the public now favor deficit reduction and most members of Congress and many economists consider it a necessity. Rather than rely on a combination of controversial spending cuts and dubious new taxes, I think deficit reduction should be handled separately. A surtax applying only to the deficit should be included in the ultimate budget package. A surtax would have the advantage of being aboveboard, shared by all who pay taxes. There would be no escape for the rich or the affluent. With a surtax we are removed from the blame game and whose ox is being gored. DENTON PORTER
Long Beach
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
