Reduce Tax Rates on Low-Income Families by Extending Tax Phase-Outs

By :: June 29th, 2012

An ominous announcement for a House Ways & Means Committee joint hearing on “how welfare and tax benefits can discourage work” seemed a set-up to attack programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and Child Tax Credit (CTC) for their apparent disincentive to work. But that’s not what happened.  Rather than eliminate or downsize the programs, witnesses at the June 27 hearing suggested another possibility: Extend the credits so they phase out more slowly.

At issue are the high marginal tax rates that low- and moderate-income families face as their income rises and they lose the benefit of both transfer payments and tax credits (a problem I’ve discussed here).  The Urban Institute’s Net Income Change Calculator let’s you create your own examples of these phenomena.

At the extreme, a Connecticut mom of two children who participates in every tax and transfer for which she is eligible could double her earnings from $17,000 to $34,000 in 2008 but her post-tax and transfer income would increase by only about $2,000. Chairman Davis’s opening remarks might have led you to believe the problem was a too-generous tax and transfer system. But there is an alternate explanation:  Our system  phases out benefits  too quickly.

As noted by my colleague Gene Steuerle, it’s the classic liberal-conservative compromise. Liberals want to distribute benefits to the needy and conservatives want the programs to be limited. The end result is the need to phase programs out quickly – and when multiple programs phase-out at the same time, beneficiaries end up paying very high marginal tax rates. If the programs are universal, as is often the case in Europe, the problem goes away. You can make-up the lost revenue by putting these somewhat hidden rates directly in the tax code.

But beyond that, before supposing we ought to limit programs, we ought to understand the full effect of the programs. Time and again, research shows that the EITC encourages people to work. Its incentive effect outweighs any disincentive that might exist at higher earnings levels, as noted in Jared Bernstein’s testimony.

I agree with others that we need a simpler tax system. But we don’t need to eliminate programs like the EITC. We need to reform them so they work even better.


  1. Brian McGrail  ::  3:04 pm on June 29th, 2012:

    Could one accomplish the same effect in this instance by changing the payroll tax structure on low-wage earners (or on the first $20,000 or whatever number you want to pick of wages)? If this is possible, it seems like a solution that might be more congenial to conseratives who claim to be worried about marginal tax rates (although I acknowledge that they seem far more concerned about marginal tax rates at the upper-end of the income distribution).

  2. Michael Bindner  ::  3:52 pm on June 29th, 2012:

    I like the other option – combine them, increase them to $500 per month federal (with an additional state match) and never phase them out – and pay them to all workers and parents in paid adult education, votech, college or the last two years of high school as if they were working. Education after age 16 has opportunity costs. Paying people to go just makes sense. The other part of this is to make these credits against a Net Business Receipts Tax (essentially a consumption tax with offsets and no border adjustment) and drop all tax filing for low income individuals.

  3. Guest Commentary: Reduce Tax Rates on Low-Income Families by Extending Tax Phase-Outs | Tax Credits for Working Families  ::  1:29 pm on July 2nd, 2012:

    […] By Elaine Maag, Senior Research Associate at the Tax Policy Center(This blog also appears on the TPC’s Tax Vox Blog) […]

  4. AMTbuff  ::  12:55 pm on July 5th, 2012:

    You can make-up the lost revenue by putting these somewhat hidden rates directly in the tax code.

    I don’t believe that Congress would ever willingly ‘fess up to the true marginal tax rates by eliminating phase-outs. Voters would be shocked to see 40%+ rates at middle incomes. You could tell them that they were already paying that rate, but it would make no difference. Voters would not believe it because they wouldn’t want to believe it.

  5. Tax Roundup, 7/23/2012 « Roth & Company, P.C  ::  10:59 am on July 23rd, 2012:

    […] because these safety net programs phase out as incomes rise, some people face marginal tax rates as high as 80 percent for getting a better […]

  6. Ward  ::  2:18 pm on December 16th, 2012:

    A luxury watch may be purchased for multiplicity of reasons,
    personal satisfaction, gift for a friend, treasured keepsake, present for a special someone
    or an heirloom set aside with thoughts of the passing generations.
    The very expensive watches have various functionalities on them but
    they are primarily treated as an accessory that a man
    can possess. Some of the finest classics will never be sold by their

  7.  ::  10:58 pm on May 30th, 2014:

    Whats up this is kind of of off topic but I was wanting to know
    if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML.

    I’m starting a blog soon but have no coding
    knowledge so I wanted to get advice from someone with experience.

    Any help would be greatly appreciated!

  8. dragon city free tool  ::  8:01 am on August 20th, 2014:

    This post is really a good one it helps new web people,
    who are wishing for blogging.

  9. cheats for dragon city  ::  12:13 pm on September 8th, 2014:

    It’s not my first time to pay a quick visit this web
    page, i am visiting this web page dailly and get
    fastidious information from here every day.

  10. Dyan J. Seanez  ::  9:57 pm on October 2nd, 2014:

    For latest information you have to pay a quick visit the web and on internet I found
    this website as a best web site for most up-to-date updates.