100% "Full" Expensing Distorts the Market, Argues Forbes Opinion Piece

[Editor's note: 1031Gateway supports the efforts of groups like www.SaveThe1031.org, which is exposing the devastation this tax reform proposal would unleash on our economy and mobilizing Americans to make their opposition known to Congress in order to stop this bill. Please visit www.SaveThe1031.org and fill out their form to directly send individual letters to your representative and senators in Congress, urging them to fight for the 1031 exchange.]

"As it is the U.S. tax code is a monument to industrial policy whereby politicians play favorites, and 100% expensing would sadly add to what makes no sense.

Subsidizing capital spending by businesses would first off reward the misallocation of always precious resources. It would be better here to leave tax considerations out of business investment. Beyond that, thriving Uber’s most precious capital asset is an app, while bailout recipients of the GM and Chrysler variety are very long on capital equipment. The 100% expensing subsidy aids the businesses reliant on heavy equipment at the expense of those that aren’t. ... The tax code should favor neither the less capital intensive businesses of the future, nor the capital-reliant concepts of the past."

John Tamny, Forbes Opinion
Political Economy editor at Forbes
Editor of RealClearMarkets.com
Senior Fellow in Economics at Reason Foundation
Senior Economic Advisor to Toreador Research & Trading

Access 1031 Exchange PropertiesName *PhoneEmailRoleGoalEquity