Tag Archives: political economy

Federal Revenue

Posted on by
Reply

The Wall Street Journal is concerned about the IRS exercising its claimed authority to delay implementation of some tax requirements for which Congress had set strict enforcement deadlines. Apart from the question of whether the IRS actually has that authority, the concern centers on how the agency moves might impact revenues for the Federal government.

…the tax agency’s moves frustrate lawmakers’ attempts to raise revenue and plug gaps in tax compliance.

The real question, though, centers on an aspect of Federal revenues about which I’ve written before. This is the claim made in the linked-to article’s headline, and which is repeated in the body of the article:

It Could Cost $8 Billion

And

The Internal Revenue Service has now postponed them [certain rules for tax collections] all for two years—which could cost the Treasury more than $8 billion.

This is risible on its face. Aside from the fact that the Federal government has not established any need for the money, say the dollar value of the claim is accurate. Those $8 billion are the sole property of us taxpaying Americans. It doesn’t cost the Federal government one single copper penny—or copper-plated zinc penny in today’s currency—to not receive what doesn’t belong to it in the first place.

Further, while the IRS’ delays might reduce, in the immediate term, revenues to the Federal government, the delays result in those $8 billion being left in the hands of us taxpayers—who know much better than Government how to spend those dollars, or save them, on our individual needs and wants. That leads to increased activity in our private economy, and that leads, in the mid- to longer-term, to net increases in revenues to Government.

It would lead to even more revenues to Government were the IRS’ delays functionally made permanent by eliminating altogether those tax items for which the IRS is delaying collection. That increase in certainty regarding the reduction in Government confiscation of our dollars in the form of taxes would lead to even greater private economic activity, and so to even more revenue, on net, to Government.

Customer Choice

Posted on by
Reply

New Mexico’s Progressive-Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham has gotten to be enacted rules mandating battery cars and trucks in New Mexico.

Starting in calendar year 2026, 43% of all new passenger cars and light-duty trucks shipped to New Mexico auto dealerships by national auto manufacturers must be zero emission vehicles. Similarly, beginning in calendar year 2026, 15% of all new commercial heavy-duty trucks shipped to New Mexico auto dealerships by national auto manufacturers must be zero emission vehicles. These percentages gradually increase over time.

“Increase over time:” by 2031, those 43% rise to 82%. By 2034, the minima for Ford F-250, Ford F-450, and tractor-trailer type trucks rise to 55%, 75%, and 40%, respectively.

Disingenuously, Lujan Grisham says regarding those limits on choice,

The adoption of these rules is a victory for customer choice….

That’s the Progressive-Democrat’s definition of customer choice: the State taking on the burden of choosing, thereby relieving its subjects citizens of that burden.

No. I decline to use Lujan Grisham’s Newspeak Dictionary. I’ll stay with American English dictionaries and their definitions of “customer choice:” us ordinary Americans acting on our own selections.

That choice is clear, too, for the good citizens of New Mexico, who’ve already made theirs: less than 1% of the 650,000 vehicles registered in New Mexico, despite tax credits, are EVs. Those good citizens do, however, need to select better at the next ballot box.

91%

Posted on by
Reply

That’s the outcome of a Freedom Economy Index survey of 70,000 small businesses, of whom 905 responded, producing a survey with a 3% margin of error and a 95% confidence interval for the outcome.

And having delayed the lede, here is that outcome.

Fully two-thirds of the respondents think college graduates have educations that are useless to business needs, and another quarter of them think those graduates don’t have very useful educations. Here are some of the comments from respondents, which the survey reported verbatim:

  • The Talent shortage will just get worse because high schools and colleges produce no talent.
  • The skills should be taught in highschool [sic].
  • A good work ethic would be a good place to start!
  • They don’t show up to an interview, and work is too hard, 9-5 is such a struggle.

And this:

Four-fifths of the respondents’ positions range from don’t care about hiring a graduate of a “major” school to strongly less likely to hire such a one. Some more verbatim comments:

  • I found that graduates with the aforementioned scholastic achievements typically have an incompatible ideology with my business culture.
  • We would hire someone with hands-on experience over someone that read about it in a book.
  • I only care about skills. If you ain’t got the skills you ain’t got a job.

And these two, which pretty much speak for themselves:

Businesses—small businesses, anyway—are catching on to the utter failure that is our current generation of colleges and universities.

The survey itself covers a broad range of items of concern to the small business community; it’s well worth reading in its entirety.

So It Should Be with General Infrastructure

Posted on by
Reply

The subheadline outlines part of the problem:

Companies often need to show progress to get government cash but struggle without it

In the body of the Wall Street Journal article at the link is this:

Some of the companies are in Catch-22 situations. Washington won’t issue them loans until they raise outside money and move ahead with projects.

It’s true enough that big, established companies are better able to game the situation. It’s also true that high interest rates—especially after an extended period of no- to low rates—and inflation have hurt, but these only emphasize my point in this post.

It isn’t just “clean” energy: the problem is both broader and more narrowly defined.

What needs to happen regarding Federal funds transfers needs to happen all across the infrastructure terrain, whether the transfers are to individual businesses or to States more generally. Contracts must be let and particular projects must have a minimum of six months of concrete, publicly measurable progress before any taxpayer money can be transferred to the individual business executing the project.

Regarding States in particular, any taxpayer money must be sent directly to the business carrying out the State-identified infrastructure project (and only after the business has satisfied the above criterion), and the State must have already transferred State taxpayer funds to the particular business. Finally, before any Federal taxpayer funds can flow, the business must have a minimum of six months of concrete, publicly measurable progress with the State’s taxpayer money before any Federal taxpayer money can flow to the business.

Sent directly to the business: it’s important, too, that Federal funds entirely bypass the State and go directly to the business in question. Even in honest circumstances, the State’s middlemen siphon off entirely too much of the Federal taxpayer’s money.

They’re Confessing Their Crimes

Posted on by
Reply

They’re really quite blatant about it, too.

A ransomware gang claimed this past week that it broke into the systems of the fintech platform MeridianLink. The breach has been reported to regulators.
The company didn’t report it, as new rules will require them to do. The hackers did.

AlphV (or Black Cat, depending on who’s speaking for the gang) aren’t the only criminal hackers to do this sort of thing. Other hackers are joining in on telling the cops of their deeds, as a means of pressuring the victims to pay up. Or their security failures will be made public.

Aside from only cowards meekly surrender and functionally if not legally aiding and abetting the criminals by paying, and the situation is straightforwardly enough greatly mitigated by those companies getting serious about their IT security, a separate question exists.

These criminals have all confessed their crimes. Where are the regulators? Where is DoJ? Certainly, it’s hard to identify the members of these criminal organizations, but hard means possible. In the meantime, these crime syndicates can themselves be traced back and their accesses to the Internet hindered severely, if not outright blocked. And their identities publicly disclosed.