只“濟富”的美國稅改法案

The Republican tax plan will soon enter American law. The bill passed the Senate in the early hours of Saturday, and will now be reconciled to the not-too-different House version, readying it for the presidential pen. The vote fell strictly on party lines amid an ugly frenzy of last-second amendments scribbled in the margins. Even the senators did not know precisely what they were voting on. So it is worth taking a step back to consider, in broad outline, the changes that the plan will bring.

美國共和黨的稅改計劃很快將成爲法律。上週六凌晨，該法案在參議院獲得通過，現在將與大同小異的衆議院版本進行協調，隨後遞交給總統簽署。投票嚴格按照黨派站隊，在最後一秒匆匆加入了很多修正（瘋狂的“馬拉松連續投票”程序）。甚至連參議員們自己都並非準確知道自己在爲怎樣的法案投票。因此現在有必要退一步，大致考慮一下，這項稅改計劃將帶來哪些變化。

These fall into three categories: big tax cuts for business, which will significantly increase the budget deficit; a reshuffling of individual tax rates, which will have a much more limited net effect; and several halfhearted efforts at genuine reform.

變化主要有三類：對企業大幅減稅，這將大幅增加預算赤字；重新調整個人稅率，這對預算平衡的最終影響要有限得多；以及朝着真正的改革方向做出的多項不溫不火的努力。

Economically, the most important question is the effect on growth and investment of cutting the headline corporate tax rate from 35 per cent to 20 per cent. There are few certainties here. One is that the cut will increase the deficit by a large amount — at least $1tn — over a decade. The idea that the cut would pay for itself has modest support in theory and none in history. It is also certain that the cut will produce some growth: it is if nothing else an injection of cash into the economy. The question is whether the growth will be worth the cost. The battle lines on this issue are drawn. Only experience will resolve the debate conclusively.

在經濟方面，最重要的問題是把企業稅從35%削減至20%的舉措對於經濟增長和投資的影響。關於這個問題，一切幾乎都不確定。一種影響是，削減企業稅將使未來10年赤字大幅增加——至少增加1萬億美元。認爲削減企業稅可以“自己爲自己買單”的想法在理論上的依據有限，在歷史上沒有先例可循。此外，可以肯定削減企業稅將帶來一定的增長：至少相當於向經濟注入資金。問題在於，它帶來的經濟增長是否足以補償它的的成本。在該問題上，已經形成了對立的兩派。只有經驗才能最終爲這場辯論敲定勝負。

It must be noted, however, that the additional money will land in corporate coffers at a time when profits are already near all-time highs and many companies are flush with cash. Fixed investment is low despite this. Still higher profits may not change this pattern. It does not help that executive pay packages have changed in the recent decades, encouraging distribution rather than investment of profit.

然而，需要注意的是，減稅帶來的額外資金將在如下情況下進入企業的金庫：企業利潤已經接近歷史高點、很多企業現金充裕。儘管如此，固定投資仍然低迷。利潤進一步增加可能無法改變這種模式。另一個無助於模式改變的因素是，最近幾十年高管薪酬制度已經改變，鼓勵把利潤拿出來分配、而不是投資。

On the individual side, average rates on wages will fall one percentage point, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Marginal rates — the amount paid on an additional dollar of wages — will fall by 2.4 points. The plusses and minuses are complex. The child tax credit increases, for example, but some important deductions disappear. In any case the long-term impact will be muted: all the changes to individual rates disappear after a decade. Because of the massive expense of the corporate rate cuts, the sunset of the individual changes was necessary to satisfy Senate deficit rules.

對個人而言，據美國國會稅收聯合委員會(Joint Committee on Taxation)表示，工資的平均稅率將降低1個百分點。邊際稅率（工資每額外增加1美元需要支付的稅款）將減少2.4個百分點。具體稅率增減項情況非常複雜。比如，兒童稅收抵免提高，但一些重要的應稅收益額抵免被取消了。無論如何，從長期來看影響都會消失：個人所得稅的所有變化都會在十年後消失。由於削減企業稅的巨大支出，個人所得稅的稅率變化設置廢止時間對於滿足參議院的赤字規定來說必不可少。

It is dispiriting but not surprising that the bill does as much as it does for the most fortunate. The carried-interest tax break remains, the estate tax falls, and the top marginal rates will apply to less taxpayers (and will probably fall). More beneficial to the rich than any of these, most likely, is the reduction in taxes on income from “pass-through” business structures, which pay no corporate taxes. The nominal justification for this is to help small business, most of which is structured in this way. In all likelihood, however, the great majority of the benefit will go to wealthy investors and professionals. Efforts to write rules to distinguish the two groups will add complexity and may prove ineffective. There is room for the lavish treatment of the rich to be restrained as the Senate and House versions are reconciled. Centrist Republicans should press hard for this.

該法案儘可能地爲富人服務，這令人沮喪但並不意外。附帶權益稅收優惠仍然保留，遺產稅降低，最高一檔邊際稅率的適用人數將減少（稅率也很可能降低）。對於富人來說，最有利的可能是來自“過渡法人企業”(pass-through business)結構——此類企業不交納企業稅——的收入稅收減少。該做法名義上是幫助中小企業，因爲大多數中小企業都屬於這類結構。然而，十有八九，絕大部分好處將流向富有的投資者和專業人士。試圖制定規則來區分這兩類羣體，將增加複雜度，並且可能收效甚微。在參議院和衆議院協調各自的稅改法案版本的過程中，仍然有空間來限制對富人的稅收優待。中間派共和黨議員應該努力促成這一點的實現。

There are various elements in the bill that gesture towards real reform. Deductions for mortgage interest, corporate debt costs, and state and local taxes will be curtailed. There is also a partial move from a global to a territorial system. None of these go far enough. But they do serve as reminders of what a visionary tax-reform bill — as opposed to what is in effect a big tax cut for business — might have looked like.

該法案中有多處地方做出了進行真正改革的姿態。按揭利息、企業債務成本以及州和地方稅收對應稅收益額的抵免都將被削減。該法案中還有從全球系統部分邁向區域系統的舉措。這些都力度不夠。但它們確實提醒了人們，一項富有遠見的稅改法案——而不是這樣一份實際上等同於大幅削減企業稅的法案——可能會是什麼樣。