All three options would primarily benefit higher-earning tax filers, with repeal of the SALT cap increasing the after-tax income of the top 1 percent by about 2.8 percent; the bottom 80 percent would see minimal benefit.
Removing the marriage penalty and raising the SALT cap would also mostly benefit higher earners, though after-tax incomes of filers in the 95th to 99th income percentiles would rise the most. For example, raising the SALT cap to $15,000 single and $30,000 joint would result in a 0.8 percent increase in after-tax income for the 95th to 99th income percentiles and a 0.4 percent increase for the top 1 percent.
The top 1 percent benefits less because the SALT cap remains in place, so there is less of a benefit as a portion of their incomes when slightly increasing the cap. For example, a joint filer with $5 million in after-tax income could receive an additional $7,400 in reduced tax liability ($20,000 in increased SALT deductions times the 37 percent top individual income tax rate), which is a 0.1 percent increase in after-tax income.
President Joe Biden and congressional policymakers have proposed several changes to the corporate income tax, including raising the rate from 21 percent to 28 percent and imposing a 15 percent minimum tax on the book income of large corporations. The proposals are being considered to raise revenue for new spending programs and would repeal changes to the corporate tax made by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) in late 2017.
An increase in the federal corporate tax rate to 28 percent would raise the U.S. federal-state combined tax rate to 32.34 percent, highest in the OECD and among Group of Seven (G7) countries, harming U.S. economic competitiveness and increasing the cost of investment in America. We estimate that this would reduce long-run economic output by 0.8 percent, eliminate 159,000 jobs, and reduce wages by 0.7 percent. Workers across the income scale would bear much of the tax increase. For example, the bottom 20 percent of earners would on average see a 1.45 percent drop in after-tax income in the long run.
Policymakers will need to determine if the tax code is the proper vehicle to disburse such cash benefits and if the IRS can handle the additional responsibilities. Over the course of many years, the IRS has been tasked with an ever-growing list of administrative duties that go well beyond simple revenue collection—everything from poverty alleviation to education, housing, and health-care benefits. The American Rescue Plan, in addition to other pandemic response measures, would now require the IRS to administer additional benefits on a recurring monthly basis, much as a traditional spending agency, all while processing upwards of 160 million tax returns.
Corporations in the United States pay federal corporate income taxes levied at a 21 percent rate. Many states also levy taxes on corporate income. Forty-four states and D.C. have corporate income taxes on the books, with top rates ranging from North Carolina’s single rate of 2.5 percent to a top marginal rate of 11.5 percent in New Jersey. Fourteen states levy graduated corporate income tax rates, while the remaining 30 states levy a flat rate on corporate income.
In Nevada, Ohio, Texas, and Washington, corporations are subject to gross receipts taxes in lieu of corporate income taxes. Delaware and Oregon impose a tax on corporate income and a separate levy on gross receipts.