The Washington Post

Deficit spending is progressive

We spend a lot of time debating the distributional impact of policies to cut the deficit. Gallons of ink (and millions of pixels) have been spent debating who gets hit most by tax increases, or changes to Medicare, or cuts to Social Security. But what if we don't cut the deficit? The would presumably hurt some folks more than others. Who gets hit hardest?

American Enterprise Institute's Aspen Gorry and Matt Jensen have a new paper that tries to answer that question. They note that the federal government has to regularly pay out the principal plus interest on bonds it sells, a process that has to be paid for out of tax revenues. So the cost of the debt burden will be borne primarily by those who pay most federal taxes, to whit the upper-middle and upper classes. Assuming that the debt is continually serviced in this manner rather than paid down ahead of time, they estimate how much this process will cost each year given our current debt load ($11.254 trillion as of last week), and which groups pay most of the taxes that pay for it.

They find, unsurprisingly, that debt payments are highly progressive, and will grow more so if Obama passes his budget. Here's how much each income group pays, under current policies and under the revenue provisions of Obama's proposed budget*:

What if the debt keeps accumulating? Still progressive. Here's how much servicing both the pre-2012 debt and post-2012 debt will cost come 2022:

None of this is particularly shocking. The main sources of general revenue — the income tax, estate tax, corporate tax, capital gains tax, etc. — are quite progressive. The payroll tax is regressive, but it cannot be used to pay for debt servicing, as its proceeds are dedicated to Social Security and Medicare. If those programs are in surplus, payroll tax revenues can be used for general purposes, but as the baby boomers age it has stopped posting surpluses. So the taxes that are paying for new debt fall heavily on high earners.

All of which is to say that deficit reduction isn't distributionally neutral, even apart from the cuts to programs for the poor that could come with a debt deal. In fact, it'd function much like the the Bush tax cuts. Everyone would pay less if we didn't have to service debt anymore — but the wealthy would get the biggest break by far.

* I used Gorry and Jensen's numbers in conjunction with the average incomes for each income group in 2013 under the Tax Policy Center's baseline to calculate the average tax burden.



Success! Check your inbox for details. You might also like:

Please enter a valid email address

See all newsletters

Show Comments
Most Read



Success! Check your inbox for details.

See all newsletters

Your Three. Video curated for you.
Next Story
Sarah Kliff · October 2, 2012

To keep reading, please enter your email address.

You’ll also receive from The Washington Post:
  • A free 6-week digital subscription
  • Our daily newsletter in your inbox

Please enter a valid email address

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Please indicate agreement.

Thank you.

Check your inbox. We’ve sent an email explaining how to set up an account and activate your free digital subscription.