TaxVox

Last week the Congressional Budget Office quietly released its October Monthly Budget Review showing preliminary 2009 budget numbers. The $1.4 trillion deficit more than tripled the previous record of $459 billion set just last year (see top table). More than half of the increase was due to a $530 billion jump in outlays but 44 percent came from a 17 percent drop in revenues. That decline resulted in the federal government collecting a smaller share of taxes than at any time in the last half century.

Just abut every conversation I’ve had with a Democratic elected official or staffer in the past few weeks came around to the same urgent question. And, no, it was not about health reform. It was about jobs. When, they ask with more than a hint of panic in their voices, will the jobs come back?

In a posting last week, I discussed the tools under existing law for curbing bad tax return preparers and suggested that these tools may not adequately address the problem. Too many returns are poorly done. Many taxpayers are victims, not only of incompetence, but fraud. The other victim is the government, which likely loses substantial tax revenue from those whose returns are poorly—or dishonestly—prepared.

In a blog post earlier this week, I concluded that whether a payment to government service is classified as a tax or a user fee is sometimes arbitrary and that how the payment is labeled is of secondary importance. Mike Udell of Ernst and Young, a former staffer on the Joint Committee on Taxation, reminds me, however, that labeling could have real consequences. Mike raises another example from the health reform legislation – the proposed “fee” on sales of pharmaceutical and medical device products. If the fee were an excise tax, it would be deductible and not included in the gross revenue of manufacturers of these products. But as a fee, it is not deductible, so income tax collections from these firms are higher than if they could exclude the payments from taxable income.