The Heart of the Economy
By nearly every conventional statistical measure, the American economy is performing very well today -- continued economic growth; a strong employment market; household wealth is at historic highs; inflation has been kept in check; interest rates are still low by historic standards.
But this was not the case three years ago. The economy was still struggling with the head winds from the economic downturn that began in 2000, the impact of the terrorist attacks, and the excesses of the late '90s -- seen most glaringly in the bursting of the equity-market high-tech bubble.
While officially the recession had ended in late 2001, the pace of the recovery was too slow. Growth was anemic, business confidence low and -- of critical importance -- capital investment was way down. As a result job growth was nonexistent.
President Bush recognized that something needed to be done to overcome those headwinds and, in particular, to create a more favorable climate for capital investment that would result in job creation. To do so he sent Congress far-reaching proposals to encourage capital formation by lowering taxes on investment returns. Congress responded with the Jobs and Growth Act, which was signed into law in May 2003.
Since then we have seen a remarkable turn-around in the economy. After nine consecutive declining quarters of real annual business investment, we have had 10 straight quarters of rising business investment. This business expansion led to a substantial increase in employment. In the intervening period, some 4.7 million new jobs have been created and the unemployment rate -- 6.3% in 2003 -- today stands at 4.7%, lower than the average of the 1970s, '80s and '90s.
While many factors contributed to the improved performance of the economy, the tax reductions on capital have been at the heart of the progress we have seen.
The president's proposals didn't simply provide a short-term stimulus. They did provide a stimulus, but they also did far more: By lowering the cost of capital, the president's proposals improved the inherent efficiency of the economy. We know that you always get less of something you tax. By lowering the taxes on capital, the proposals encouraged increased long-term investment. Increased long-term investment in turn improves the long-term outlook of the economy. It makes the economy more productive. With additional capital, labor output rises. And with rising labor output the demand for labor increases.
Sound monetary policy from the Fed complemented the tax cuts, of course. The combined effect was essentially an unleashing of the economic power that rises so naturally in a free-market economy. That power comes, at its roots, from risk-takers and investment capital.
With 4.7 million new jobs created and fully half of all households benefiting from the lower tax on dividends alone, there can be no doubt that lower taxes on investment benefited the majority of the American people quite directly.
It concerns me that some in Congress are today looking to increase taxes on capital gains and dividends. Worse yet, there have been suggestions that the administration should choose between protecting the middle class from the Alternative Minimum Tax and extending the low rates on capital gains and dividends.
In both cases, the middle class is at serious risk; choosing one or other is not an option. An AMT fix must be approved by the Congress for 2006 and eventually find a permanent remedy through fundamental tax reform, and the lower rates on investment must hold. Increasing those taxes would damage economic growth, hurt job creation, and raise taxes on half of all American households.
* * *
Keep in mind that the typical investor today, according to the Securities Industry Association, is a middle-class person saving for retirement with a household income of about $65,000.
If Congress fails to extend the 15% rate on capital gains and dividends, what harm will it bring to our economy? To me, the answer is very straightforward: Raising tax rates on capital gains and dividends would strike at the heart of the economy with damaging long-term effects on economic growth. A slowdown in investment would be inevitable, and a slowdown in job growth almost certain to follow.
The role of government is to put in place the foundations for American innovators and workers to do the real work that propels the economy forward. A pillar of that foundation is the low tax rates on capital gains and dividends that ultimately translate into higher living standards for all Americans. Congress owes it not just to the 91 million Americans who own equities, but to all Americans who benefit from a strong and growing economy to keep this pillar of growth in place and extend the 15% rate on capital gains and dividends.
Mr. Snow is the U.S. Treasury secretary.
美国经济增长的基石
几乎从任何一个常规的统计数字来看，今日的美国经济都运转得非常良好──经济持续增长、就业形势喜人、家庭财富处于历史高点、通货膨胀温和、利率仍处于历史低点。
但3年前可是另外一幅景象，当时美国经济迟迟不见好转，面临著一系列负面因素，如从2000年开始的经济滑坡、恐怖袭击事件的影响、上世纪90年代的产能过剩。最让人痛心疾首的恐怕是高科技股票泡沫的破灭。
尽管官方的说法是经济衰退于2001年年末结束，但经济复苏的步伐过于缓慢。经济增长乏力、商业信心低迷，最重要的是资本投资呈下降之势。因此，就业增长也就无从谈起。
布什总统意识到必须采取措施来克服这些负面因素的影响，特别是创造一个更为有利的投资环境，从而创造出新的就业机会。于是他向国会提交了一系列具有深远意义的提议，旨在通过降低投资所得税来鼓励财富积累。国会响应了总统的提议，制定了《就业与增长法案》(Jobs and Growth Act)，并于2003年5月生效。
从那之后，我们看到经济开始显著好转。实际年度商业投资扭转了连续9个季度下滑的势头，迎来了连续10个季度增长的大好局面。商业扩张促成就业人口的显著增加。在此期间，美国经济创造出了470万的新增就业机会，失业率从2003年的6.3%降至4.7%，低于70年代、80年代和90年代的平均水平。
虽然经济的回暖要归功于多种因素，但削减资本所得税一直在推动经济复苏的过程中扮演著核心角色。
总统的提议并非只是短期的提振。它们的确是提振，但意义更加深远：资本成本的降低令经济的内在效率得到了改善。我们都知道，所有的应税项目在缴税之后都会变少。降低资本所得税鼓励人们扩大长期投资，而长期投资的增加又改善了经济的长期前景，最终使得经济更加繁荣。伴随著资本的增加，劳动力产值也会增加，进而刺激招工需求。
当然，美国联邦储备委员会(Fed)稳健的货币政策也对减税政策起到了辅助作用。在货币政策与减税政策的双重作用下，美国经济释放出了全部潜力，在市场经济体制下经济增长自然也就水到渠成。归根到底，经济增长动力来自愿意承担风险的投资者和投资资本。
仅从470万新增就业人口和半数家庭受益于股息税下调这两点来看，投资所得税的降低给大部分美国人民带来了直接利益，这一点无可争辩。
让我感到不安的是如今有一些国会议员提出应上调资本增值税和股息税。更糟糕的是，还有人建议政府应该在保护中产阶级利益免受替代最低税额(Alternative Minimum Tax)的影响，与维持低资本增值税和股息税之间做出取舍。
这两种选择无论哪一种都会将中产阶级置于巨大的风险之中。二者只选其一并不能解决问题。国会必须在2006年修改替代最低税额，最终通过基本税收改革找到一劳永逸的解决办法。此外，必须坚持降低投资所得税的做法。上调投资所得税将阻碍经济增长、影响就业，还会加重半数美国家庭的纳税负担。
请牢牢记住，美国证券业协会(Securities Industry Association)的数据显示，如今的典型投资者就是中产阶级，他们为退休未雨绸缪，家庭收入约为65,000美元。
如果国会未能延长目前为15%的资本增值税和股息税税率，将给美国经济带来什么样的伤害？我的答案一目了然：上调资本增值税和股息税税率将动摇美国经济的根基，对经济增长将产生长期的负面影响。投资增长放缓将不可避免，就业增长十有八九也会放缓。
政府的责任是为美国创新者和工人打好基础，以便于他们切实地推动经济的增长。较低的资本增值税和股息税是经济的重要基石，最终会提升全体美国人民的生活水平。国会有责任延长资本增值税和股息税，呵护这块推动经济增长的基石，因为这不仅有利于9,100万美国股民，还会造福于那些从经济强劲增长中受益的全体美国人民。
（编者按：本文作者斯诺(John W. Snow)是美国财政部部长。）
