Orrin Hatch: “one negative aspect of Senator Coburn's amendment No. 436, as modified, to the Economic Development Revitalization Act…”

“one negative aspect of Senator Coburn's amendment No. 436, as modified, to the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011 is that it is a tax increase that is not offset by a tax cut of an equal or greater amount. It takes away a tax incentive and therefore increases taxes but fails to cut taxes in another area, such as by lowering tax rates. I do not favor taking away tax incentives without cutting taxes in other areas to reach a revenue-neutral result. Revenue-neutrality should be judged using a current-policy baseline and not the unrealistic current-law baseline that builds in trillions of dollars of tax increases. However, in this case, the policy considerations regarding ending the tax incentive for corn-based ethanol outweigh this general principle. I will note that this is not the case for the larger-dollar, and more significant, tax incentives such as the home mortgage interest deduction. With respect to these tax incentives, any changes that increase revenue must be offset with a tax cut in another area, such as by lowering tax rates. My vote in favor of the Coburn amendment should not be viewed as a precedent for increasing taxes. Taxes are already headed higher than they historically have been according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Americans are not undertaxed, Washington overspends, and we need to get that spending under control.…”