|
« Back
Hedge-Fund Tax Really Attacks Capital Gains
U.S. News & World Report
By James Pethokoukis
July 11, 2007
"I have come here not to bury the capital-gains-tax rate, but to
save it," was the de facto message delivered by Sen. Chuck Grassley
at the U.S. Senate committee hearing I attended today on the wisdom
of forcing hedge-, venture-capital-, and private-equity-fund managers
to pay a higher tax rate—ordinary income rather than the cap-gains
rate—on their 20 percent "carried interest" in the profits of their
funds.
The Iowa Republican said he wanted to make it clear that the possibility
of changing the tax law was not about raising taxes or "attacking
the investor class." People making those charges should "cool it,"
he said.
Instead, the idea was all about removing a quirk in the tax code
that was "undermining" support for keeping the long-term-capital-gains
rate of 15 percent, below the rate for ordinary income. Plus, Grassley
added, the carried interest preference made keeping the lower cap-gains
rate past 2010 —when it and all the other Bush tax cuts are due
to expire—more expensive.
Yet listening to many of the Democrats on the committee, it sure
seems as though they believe higher capital-gains-tax-rates would
be a good thing and that the "hedge-fund tax" would be only the
beginning. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon made it clear he wants to remove
the tax preference given to capital gains as way of making the tax
code simpler and reducing economic distortions. Sen. Chuck Schumer
of New York, while repeating his past support for lower investment
taxes, admitted that the government does need to raise revenue to
pay for education and infrastructure spending.
And what would be the harm in raising capital-gains-tax rates?
Peter Orszag, head of the Congressional Budget Office, testified
before the panel that the capital-gains-tax rate has little economic
impact and, besides, there is plenty of capital out there right
now.
Of course, that sort of "static analysis" tends to ignore the behavioral
impact of taxes, such as the one highlighted by venture capitalist
Kate Mitchell, head of Scale Venture Partners. Mitchell said higher
taxes would reduce the incentive for people like her to be in such
a high-risk business, forsaking much comfier and safer jobs on Wall
Street or with technology companies.
See, while there may be "infinite capital" available for investing,
"intellectual capital" is a bit more limited. And incentives matter.
One person who did not "cool it" was Sen. John Ensign, a Nevada Republican.
Ensign called changing the tax code an "absolutely dangerous idea."
« Back

|