The U.S. Economic Crisis and a Revised New Jobs Tax Credit

Similar documents
Michigan's Economic Development Policies

Local Economic Development Policies

EXAMINING THE LOCAL VALUE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL FOR AUDIT SERVICES RFP W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research 300 S. Westnedge Ave. Kalamazoo, MI 49007

Green Recovery: How Weatherization Works for Iowans Sustainable Policy Assists Struggling Families, Enhances Iowa s Economy

Economic Development Strategies

2014 was yet another great year!

Summary and Analysis of President Obama's Education Budget Request

Unemployment. Rongsheng Tang. August, Washington U. in St. Louis. Rongsheng Tang (Washington U. in St. Louis) Unemployment August, / 44

Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Business Commons

MassBenchmarks volume thirteen issue one

The Economic Impacts of Idaho s Nonprofit Organizations

Housing HOME Program HUD $2.25 billion To be used for capital investments in Assure HPRP program staff

Implementing Subsidy Reforms: lessons from international experience Maria Vagliasindi, Program Leader, GCC, World Bank SUBSIDY REFORM 11 1

The Upper Peninsula of Michigan: Opportunities for growth and development in the economy!

Serving the Community Well:

BUILD MISSOURI PROGRAM SUMMARY. A Program Jointly Administered By The: (Rev. October 2013)

A Report of The Heritage Center for Data Analysis

THE EFFECTS OF LOCAL TAXES AND SPENDING ON BUSINESS STARTUPS. Todd M. Gabe. University of Maine Winslow Hall, Room 200

THE STATE OF THE MILITARY

Florida s Financially-Based Economic Development Tools & Return on Investment

How are Things Going? Thoughts to Barry County

Site Selection Incentives for Medical Device Manufacturers

The Unemployed and Job Openings: A Data Primer

4.07. Infrastructure Stimulus Spending. Chapter 4 Section. Background. Follow-up to VFM Section 3.07, 2010 Annual Report. Ministry of Infrastructure

Job Applications Rise Strongly with Posted Wages

Virginia Association of Economists

SSAP 35 STATEMENT OF STANDARD ACCOUNTING PRACTICE 35 ACCOUNTING FOR GOVERNMENT GRANTS AND DISCLOSURE OF GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE

FISCAL FEDERALISM. How State and Local Governments Differ from the National Government

Employers in Health Services Struggle to Fill Open Job Positions The Sector s Mean Vacancy Duration Rises to 51 Working Days in Early 2017

Economic Impact of Human Services in Santa Cruz County

Sri Lanka Accounting Standard LKAS 20. Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

Partial Action Plan for New York Business Recovery and Economic Revitalization

75th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. House Bill 2933 SUMMARY

Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

Guidelines for the Major Eligible Employer Grant Program

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS

$787 Billion Economic Recovery Package Clears Congress; Focuses On Long- Term Competitiveness, in Addition to Job Creation

Bringing Jobs to People

Federal Stimulus Dollars for Louisiana

The Future of the Nonprofit Sector in China Speech at the American Chamber of Commerce Hong Kong, January 2010 By James Abruzzo

Understanding the Federal Economic Stimulus Legislation and the Expected Impact on Kentucky

Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

TENNESSEE TEXAS UTAH VERMONT VIRGINIA WASHINGTON WEST VIRGINIA WISCONSIN WYOMING ALABAMA ALASKA ARIZONA ARKANSAS

Sri Lanka Accounting Standard-LKAS 20. Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

Do Hiring Credits Work in Recessions? Evidence from France

State Profile on Job Creation and Economic Growth. Colorado

Guidelines for the Virginia Investment Partnership Grant Program

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Frequently Asked Questions

VI. UNIVERSITY PURCHASING AND PAYROLL

Chapter 9: Labor Section 1

Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

Job Development Investment Grant (JDIG) Funding Study

Federal Economic Stimulus Package

Economic Impact of the proposed The Medical University of South Carolina

Model Legislation for Accountability in Economic Development: Clawbacks and Rescissions. Taxpayer Protection Act (Clawbacks and Rescissions)

Available at

Accounting for Government Grants

Job Development Investment Grant (JDIG) N.C. Gen. Stat. 143B to 143B

URBAN VITALITY JOB CREATION PILOT PROGRAM

Policies for displacement in Japan

Rebuilding America... With American Steel

In today s fiscally-constrained environment, it is critical that federal agencies synchronize efforts

Cardinal Bank & George Mason University

KRS Global Biotechnology Inc. Catalyst Fund Application (TTC) to Governor s Office Of Economic Development

Incentive schemes to promote renewables and the WTO Law of subsidies: World Trade Forum 2007

Layering Financial Incentives Lowering the Bottom Line. 15th FBA Annual Conference October 28, 2012

78th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. House Bill 2087

Telecommuting or doing work

AESC State of the Executive Search Industry Q1 2012

MASB Standard 31. Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance

Partnering with you to help your clients fund innovation and improve productivity by claiming R&D tax relief

RURAL HEALTH RESEARCH POLICY ANALYSIS CENTER. A Primer on the Occupational Mix Adjustment to the. Medicare Hospital Wage Index. Working Paper No.

Accounting for Government Grants

in partnership with Partial Action Plan S-1 for New York Firms Suffering Disproportionate Loss of Workforce

What is the Research & Development (R&D) Tax Incentive?

Debi Durham Director Iowa Economic Development Authority

KEY FACTS ON CORPORATE FOUNDATIONS

Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform

City of Loveland Incentive Policy. Adopted October 2017

paymentbasics The IPPS payment rates are intended to cover the costs that reasonably efficient providers would incur in furnishing highquality

RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT TAX CREDITS FOR ASSOCIATED BUILDERS & CONTRACTORS

Department of Labor and Workforce Development FY

COLORADO FIRST AND EXISTING INDUSTRY CUSTOMIZED TRAINING PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2014 REPORT TO THE JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Qualified Facility Income Tax Credit Program

GREATER PHOENIX ECONOMIC SNAPSHOT Chris Camacho, President & CEO

Expenditures by Program Explore Minnesota Tourism 0 9,915 10,626 11,626 22,252. Full-Time Equivalents (FTE)

Testimony of. Before the House Armed Services Committee on the Economic Consequences of Defense Sequestration. October 26, 2011

Asset Transfer and Nursing Home Use: Empirical Evidence and Policy Significance

Estimating the Economic Contributions of the Utah Science Technology and Research Initiative (USTAR) to the Utah Economy

Regional Network Survey

BLS Spotlight on Statistics: Women Veterans In The Labor Force

TAX PHASE-IN GUIDELINES FOR BEXAR COUNTY AND CITY OF SAN ANTONIO

Innovation Village, Cal Poly Pomona Economic Benefits Analysis City of Pomona

ARLINGTON programs and incentives

Questions and Answers Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Employment and Unemployment Data Release July 2018 (Released August 17, 2018)

Analyst HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE IN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY REGIONAL

Public/Private Partnership Program. November 4, 2013

FEDERAL FINANCING OF RURAL FIRMS IN THE U.S.

7KH LQWHUQHW HFRQRP\ LPSDFW RQ (8 SURGXFWLYLW\DQGJURZWK

Transcription:

Upjohn Institute Policy Papers Upjohn Research home page 2008 The U.S. Economic Crisis and a Revised New Jobs Tax Credit Timothy J. Bartik W.E. Upjohn Institute, bartik@upjohn.org Policy Paper No. 2008-003 Citation Bartik, Timothy J. 2008. "The U.S. Economic Crisis and a Revised New Jobs Tax Credit." Policy Paper No. 2008-003. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. https://doi.org/10.17848/pol2015-003 This title is brought to you by the Upjohn Institute. For more information, please contact ir@upjohn.org.

The U.S. Economic Crisis and a Revised New Jobs Tax Credit Timothy J. Bartik, Senior Economist W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research e-mail: bartik@upjohn.org Policy Paper No. 2008-003 October 16, 2008 Abstract An efficacious economic stimulus to help the U.S. economy recover from its current recession is the revival of the New Jobs Tax Credit. Unlike the original credit utilized by the federal government in 1977 1978, the new version should be a refundable credit but at a lower current dollar value. My 2001 book, Jobs for the Poor: Can Labor Demand Policies Help? proposed a permanent version f the New Jobs Tax Credit that would be automatically triggered when the unemployment rate is high. My estimates, updated to 2008, suggest that such a revised credit might increase aggregate U.S. employment by 1.3 million jobs per year at a public cost of less than $20,000 per job. Prolonged unemployment poses a serious social problem that could be addressed with a revised New Jobs Tax Credit. Key Words: labor demand policy, tax credit, wage subsidy, employment creation

W.E. UPJOHN INSTITUTE FOR EMPLOYMENT RESEARCH 300 South Westnedge Avenue Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007 Ph. 269-343-5541 The U.S. Economic Crisis and a Revised New Jobs Tax Credit by Timothy J. Bartik, Senior Economist, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research bartik@upjohninstitute.org October 16, 2008. Because of the current worldwide economic crisis, there is a renewed interest in fiscal stimulus proposals. It seems likely that the U.S. economy is already in a recession, which may be severe and prolonged. Because of the problems in the financial sector, expansionary monetary policy does not appear to be the best method to stimulate the aggregate economy. Such a situation is a textbook case for some sort of fiscal stimulus. Either tax cuts or spending increases could be used to stimulate the U.S. economy. One type of stimulus that would particularly target job creation is a revival of the New Jobs Tax Credit utilized by the federal government in 1977 and 1978. The New Jobs Tax Credit provided a tax credit to businesses for additions to their overall employment. The program at its peak provided such subsidies to 1.1 million businesses for adding over 2.1 million workers, at an annual cost of a little less than $4 billion, which, in today s dollars, is around $13 billion. Presidential candidate Barack Obama proposed a revised version of the New Jobs Tax Credit on October 13, 2008. Although this New American Jobs Tax Credit is similar to the New Jobs Tax Credit, it differs in some important details. In particular, this new proposal is a refundable credit, whereas the original New Jobs Tax Credit could only be utilized by businesses to offset existing tax liabilities. This revision is likely to make the program more useful to businesses without taxable profits, with, of course, the implication of some increase in costs. In addition, this new proposal is a somewhat smaller wage subsidy than the original New Jobs Tax Credit $3,000 compared to as much as $7,000 (in 2008 dollars). A smaller wage subsidy would probably lower both budgetary costs and job creation impacts. In my 2001 book, Jobs for the Poor: Can Labor Demand Policies Help? I proposed enacting a permanent version of the New Jobs Tax Credit. This credit would be automatically triggered when overall national unemployment is high, or when unemployment is high in a particular metropolitan area. This credit would also be refundable. In addition, however, the revised New Jobs Tax Credit outlined in my book would also be applicable to expansions of employment by nonprofit employers or state and local governments. My estimates, updated to 2008, suggest that such a revised New Jobs Tax Credit might increase aggregate U.S. employment by about 1.3 million jobs per year due to incentive effects on the subsidized employers. This is the net increase in jobs, compared to what these employers would

have done in a world without this tax credit; the gross number of subsidized jobs would be greater. In addition, there would be some multiplier effects on job creation of simply spending the additional funds on the revised New Jobs Tax Credit. Therefore, total job creation would likely be greater than 1.3 million jobs. The estimated annual budgetary cost of this revised tax credit would be $26 billion. My estimates of the job creation effects of a revised New Jobs Tax Credit are based on several evaluations of the job creation impact of the original credit program. A 1979 study by Jeffrey Perloff and Michael Wachter suggests that businesses that knew about the New Jobs Tax Credit increased their employment by 3 percent more than firms that did not know about it. This implies an economywide increase in employment of 700,000 jobs in 1977. A 1981 study by John Bishop, which looks at employment in construction, retail trade, wholesale trade, and trucking, and its relationship to business knowledge of the New Jobs Tax Credit, estimates employment increases in these industries of between 225,000 and 585,000. Of course, the employment impact of a revised New Jobs Tax Credit program might be different in the current economic environment with credit constraints. It is unclear whether the impact would be higher or lower. Credit constraints could prevent some companies from expanding even with wage subsidies. On the other hand, providing cash wage subsidies on a timely basis might help to avoid those constraints. Any such wage subsidy program would to some extent provide subsidies for employment expansions that would occur anyway. This is unavoidable. Empirical estimates suggest that about two out of the three jobs subsidized by the original New Jobs Tax Credit would have been created even without the credit (Bartik 2001, p. 226). However, one of the three jobs subsidized would be a net addition to national employment. It seems likely that the social benefits of the new jobs created would exceed the budgetary costs. Under my 2001 proposal, the total costs per job created through these incentives would be less than $20,000 per job in today s economy ($26 billion in annual subsidies divided by job creation of over 1.3 million jobs). This is considerably less than the average one-year compensation for a full-time equivalent job. Furthermore, it seems likely that many of these jobs will continue beyond the subsidy period, which increases the social benefits of the additional employment. Finally, the social benefits of reducing unemployment go beyond the immediate economic benefit to the newly employed; they include positive effects on families, friends, and neighbors. The likely prolonged rise in unemployment due to the current recession poses a serious social problem. Fiscal stimulus measures should address job creation and unemployment reduction as directly as possible. A revised New Jobs Tax Credit could play an important role in a fiscal stimulus package focused on reducing the social costs of unemployment. References

Bartik, Timothy. 2001. Jobs for the Poor: Can Labor Demand Policies Help? New York and Kalamazoo: Russell Sage Foundation and W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. This book was named among Noteworthy Books in Industrial Relations and Labor Economics, 2001 by the Industrial Relations Section, Princeton University. The Table of Contents and Chapter 1 summarizing the book are available for free at http://www.russellsage.org/publications/books/0-87154-097-5. Bishop, John H. 1981. Employment in Construction and Distribution Industries: The Impact of the New Jobs Tax Credit. In Studies in Labor Markets, Sherwin Rosen, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 209 246. Perloff, Jeffrey J., and Michael L. Wachter. 1979. The New Jobs Tax Credit: An Evaluation of the 1977 78 Wage Subsidy Program. American Economic Review 69(2): 173 179.