Question A:
If the US enacts a tax bill similar to those currently moving through the House and Senate — and assuming no other changes in tax or spending policy — US GDP will be substantially higher a decade from now than under the status quo.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question B:
If the US enacts a tax bill similar to those currently moving through the House and Senate — and assuming no other changes in tax or spending policy — the US debt-to-GDP ratio will be substantially higher a decade from now than under the status quo.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Question A Participant Responses
Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
The simplification of the tax code could be beneficial, but it is more than offset by its highly regressive nature.
|
||||
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Tax policy appears to have little effect at the margin on GDP growth in OECD countries.
|
||||
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
It is more likely that GDP will be somewhat higher
|
||||
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
A reduced corporate tax reduction is likely to grow GDP. Whether the overall tax plan is distributionally fair is another matter.
|
||||
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
Of course not. Does anyone care about actual evidence anymore?
|
||||
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Though there is merit in cutting the corp tax and other capital taxes, with no other changes in policy, the fed gov will collapse.
|
||||
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
The incentive effects are unclear to me. Some of the simplifications make sense but many of the changes look like hand-outs to the rich.
|
||||
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
doubt it will substantially change things either way
|
||||
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Expensing of investment would provide a bigger boost to the capital stock and GDP 10 years from now, per dollar of revenue lost.
|
||||
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Keynesian effect will have disappeared. Higher debt will probably outweigh lower corporate tax rates. Unlikely that nothing else will change
|
||||
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Other factors swamp the importance of details of the tax code in determining GDP.
|
||||
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
Aside from the redistribution of wealth, hard to see this changing much.
|
||||
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
Question B Participant Responses
Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
How could it be otherwise?
|
||||
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
Since growth is likely to be little affected, debt to GDP will rise substantially, absent offsetting policies -- which are rarely enacted
|
||||
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Abhijit Banerjee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Markus Brunnermeier |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
By design, the plan increases debt by $1.5 trillion, net of increased-revenue effects. That seems to imply that debt to GDP will rise.
|
||||
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Liran Einav |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Amy Finkelstein |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
Cut taxes. Lose money. Repeat.
|
||||
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
Spending is on a relentless increase relative to revenue. Within 10 years, the fed gov will lose access to credit.
|
||||
Oliver Hart |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
It seems unlikely that the optimistic growth figures are correct and so the budget deficit will rise unless government cuts are made.
|
||||
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Hilary Hoynes |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Steven Kaplan |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
especially worry about the lost revenue from the pass-through loopholes
-see background information here |
||||
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
This is at least is clear. No way the growth effects will be strong enough to offset the revenue losses.
|
||||
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Larry Samuelson |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
The prospect of 5% GDP growth is absurdly unrealistic, and in its absence everyone agrees the proposed tax reform will contribute to debt.
|
||||
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
Provided one agrees that an increase in debt of 5 to 10 percentage points of GDP is substantial.
|
||||
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Carl Shapiro |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Shimer |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|