## The Benefits and Costs of a U.S. Tax Cut

_IMF Blog, September 1, 2017_

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [The Benefits and Costs of a U.S. Tax Cut](https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2017/09/01/the-benefits-and-costs-of-a-u-s-tax-cut)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/en/blogs/articles/2017/09/01/the-benefits-and-costs-of-a-u-s-tax-cut/index.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/en/blogs/articles/2017/09/01/the-benefits-and-costs-of-a-u-s-tax-cut/index.json)
- [Bundle manifest](/en/blogs/articles/2017/09/01/the-benefits-and-costs-of-a-u-s-tax-cut/bundle-manifest.json)

## Bibliographic details
- Authors: Sandra Lizarazo, Adrian Peralta-Alva, Damien Puy
- Published: September 1, 2017

---

### Overview
- Title and authors: "The Benefits and Costs of a U.S. Tax Cut" by Sandra Lizarazo, Adrian Peralta-Alva, Damien Puy.
- Publication date: September 1, 2017.
- Central question: Can lowering effective personal income tax rates boost growth, improve income distribution, and avoid increasing the budget deficit?

### Context and motivation
- The U.S. economy is in one of its longest expansions in history, but medium-term prospects are constrained by:
  - weak productivity growth;
  - falling labor force participation;
  - increasingly polarized income distribution;
  - high levels of poverty.
- Observed historical trends cited:
  - labor share of national income reduced by about 5 percent in 15 years;
  - the middle class shrunk to the smallest share of the population in 30 years;
  - aside from the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis, the lowest potential growth rate since the 1940s.
- Tax policy is considered an important lever among other policy areas such as trade, education, and health.

### Model and approach
- The paper assesses dynamic effects of lowering effective personal income tax rates on income distribution and the U.S. economy using a quantitative macroeconomic model that includes:
  - heterogeneous households differentiated by education level;
  - different productive sectors (manufacturing and services) linked through a realistic input-output structure;
  - international trade;
  - dynamics and forward-looking behavior to capture medium-term effects beyond standard static incidence analyses.

### Three key results
- First:
  - Personal income tax cuts provide a one-time boost to GDP, consumption, and investment.
  - These effects are never strong enough to prevent a loss of revenue.
  - Therefore, tax cuts would need to be financed by either increasing public debt, cutting spending, or raising revenues from other taxes.
  - The paper focuses on financing cuts via a shift from personal income taxes to consumption taxes, combined with an expansion of the earned income tax credit to protect the poor.
- Second:
  - Personal income tax cuts can benefit lower-income groups even if bottom earners do not directly receive a tax cut.
  - Mechanism: tax cuts targeted at middle (or high) income groups increase spending on non-tradable services, which are typically provided by lower-income people.
  - Wealthier groups, on average, dedicate a larger share of their consumption expenditures to services; when they pay less in taxes their spending on services increases, raising demand for—and the wages of—low-skilled labor.
- Third:
  - There is a fundamental tradeoff between growth and income inequality, depending on who receives the tax cut.
  - Tax cuts for higher income groups may generate greater gains in GDP through higher investment and labor supply but also exacerbate income polarization and inequality, both already at historical highs.
  - Even with richer households' consumption benefiting lower-income producers and with an increase in the earned income tax credit, the income gap would still widen substantially if taxes were cut for higher income groups.
  - A tax cut targeted at middle-income groups would help reduce income disparity and polarization but might provide smaller growth dividends.

### Policy implications
- A personal income tax cut alone will not sufficiently raise growth to offset revenue loss.
- Financing choices matter: shifting from personal income taxes to consumption taxes plus expanding the earned income tax credit is analyzed as a strategy to preserve modest growth upside while seeking better distributional outcomes.
- Targeting of tax cuts determines the balance between growth benefits and distributional consequences:
  - Cuts favoring higher-income groups: larger GDP gains, larger increases in inequality.
  - Cuts favoring middle-income groups: reduced inequality, smaller growth gains.

*Source: The Benefits and Costs of a U.S. Tax Cut, Sandra Lizarazo, Adrian Peralta-Alva, Damien Puy, September 1, 2017.*

---


## References

- [https://www.imf.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/BLOG980x560-US-ART-IV-ipurestockxthree068004-Ingram-Publishing-Newscom.jpg](https://www.imf.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/BLOG980x560-US-ART-IV-ipurestockxthree068004-Ingram-Publishing-Newscom.jpg)
- [working paper](http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2017/09/01/Macroeconomic-and-Distributional-Effects-of-Personal-Income-Tax-Reforms-A-Heterogenous-Agent-45147)
- [labor share of national income](http://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2017/07/24/What-Explains-the-Decline-of-the-U-S-45086)
- [latest economic assessment of the U.S. economy](http://www.imf.org/en/news/articles/2017/07/26/na072717-ten-ways-to-expand-us-growth)

_Source: https://www.imf.org/en/blogs/articles/2017/09/01/the-benefits-and-costs-of-a-u-s-tax-cut_