What they're saying is that, yes, expensive health plans would be taxed more [under the recent Bush health proposal]. But people would respond to the new policy by scaling back their health plans. Thus they’d avoid the tax.

...Snow and Baicker are right to say that if the proposal becomes law, compensation packages will adjust, with expensive plans being scaled back and the savings passed on in higher wages. But those higher wages will be taxed. No matter how the compensation package is rearranged, the percentage of compensation that is taxed will go up for these people.

Ponnuru is correct, as far as I can see. I wonder what Ms. Baicker will say here. Personally, I would make 100 percent of employer-paid health care benefits subject to tax, and then cut tax rates. That is known as tax reform.

CATEGORIES: Tax Reform

COMMENTS (1 to date)

Latest Comment

PJens writes:

Three cheers!

It has long been argued that the tax code is complicated in order to make it more "fair". Life is not fair. Never has, never will be. A.Kling is correct, let people pay health insurance premiums out of pocket and reduce tax rates. It would be tax reform. How simple can it be?

Posted January 30, 2007 6:59 PM

Comments for this entry have been closed

Read comments

Return to top

Blogging software: Powered by Movable Type 4.2.1.
Pictures courtesy of the authors.
All opinions expressed on EconLog reflect those of the author or individual commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views or positions of the Library of Economics and Liberty (Econlib) website or its owner, Liberty Fund, Inc.

The cuneiform inscription in the Liberty Fund logo is the earliest-known written appearance of the word "freedom" (amagi), or "liberty." It is taken from a clay document written about 2300 B.C. in the Sumerian city-state of Lagash.

Contact Site Map Privacy and Legal http://www.econlib.org