mesothelioma survival rates australia,mesothelioma survival rates uk,mesothelioma survival rates after surgery,mesothelioma survival rates wiki,mesothelioma mortality rates,mesothelioma survival rate stage 1,mesothelioma survival rate by stage,mesothelioma survival rate stage 2,mesothelioma survival rate without treatment,mesothelioma survival rate 2015,peritoneal mesothelioma survival rates,mesothelioma survival rates in usa introduction,abdominal mesothelioma survival rates,mesothelioma prognosis survival,stage 4 mesothelioma survival rates,survival rates mesothelioma cancer,survival rates for mesothelioma,survival rates for malignant mesothelioma,what is mesothelioma survival rates,survival rates of mesothelioma,mesothelioma surgery survival rates,insurance quotes,insurance companies,insurance near me,insurance broker,insurance definition,insurance auto auction,insurance premium,insurance adjuster,insurance marketplace,insurance deductible,insurance in spanish,insurance agent salary,insurance journal,insurance jobs,insurance agent,insuranceclaimcheck,insurance companies near me,insurance license,insurance car,insurance agency,insurance agents near me,insurance auto,insurance adjuster jobs,insurance agency near me,insurance agent jobs,insurance actuary,insurance attorney,insurance agent job description,insurance adjuster license,insurance associates,insurance adjuster salary,insurance agent license,insurance agency for sale,insurance appraiser,insurance binder,insurance broker near me,insurance broker salary,insurance breast pump,insurance by the mile,insurance bond,insurance broker license,insurance bee,insurance broker definition,insurance beneficiary,insurance blackjack,insurance broker vs agent,insurance business,insurance bad faith,insurance brokerage firms,insurance blockchain,insurance brokers of mn,insurance board,insurance claim,insurance commissioner,insurance card,insurance claim check,insurance calculator,insurance can help you,insurance company ratings,insurance carrier,insurance coverage,insurance commercials,insurance claims adjuster,insurance comparison,insurance companies in florida,insurance commission,insurance cost,insurance careers,insurance declaration page,insurance depot,insurance doctor,insurance designations,insurance direct,insurance declaration,insurance department,insurance discounts,insurance defense,insurance def,insurance dental,insurance dictionary,insurance defense attorney,insurance degree,insurance design administrators,insurance denial codes,insurance donut hole,insurance estimator,insurance exchange,insurance express,insurance endorsement,insurance exam,insurance etf,insurance enrollment,insurance exchange of america,insurance education,insurance eob,insurance exemption,insurance effective date,insurance estimate car,insurance education association,insurance examiner,insurance estimator jobs,insurance epo,insurance expense asset or liability,insurance exposure,insurance for dogs,insurance for kids,insurance for cars,insurance for veterans,insurance fraud investigator,insurance forums,insurance for college students,insurance for students,insurance for pregnant women,insurance for small business,insurance for rental cars,insurance form for taxes,insurance for less,insurance for braces,insurance for pets,insurance for dummies,insurance for rental property,insurance for teens,insurance for uber drivers,insurance geico,insurance group number,insurance general,insurance group,insurance giant,insurance glossary,insurance group number on card,insurance guy,insurance gov,insurance gap,insurance gif,insurance ga,insurance general agent,insurance guarantee association,insurance gap between jobs,insurance group of america,insurance girl,insurance game,insurance guaranty fund,insurance health,insurance house,insurance handbook for the medical office,insurance hub,insurance hmo,insurance headhunters,insurance history,insurance holder,insurance health companies,insurance humor,insurance hit and run,insurance hsa,insurance hours,insurance helper,insurance hra,insurance hotline,insurance huntsville al,insurance humana,insurance helpline,insurance insider,insurance institute for highway safety,insurance industry,insurance investigator,insurance institute,insurance information institute,insurance institute of america,insurance is a financial service that allows a,insurance icon,insurance inspector,insurance in blackjack,insurance investigator jobs,insurance industry trends,insurance id number,insurance industry news,insurance internships,insurance images,insurance intermediaries inc,insurance jobs near me,insurance jokes,insurance jobs from home,insurance jobs atlanta,insurance jobs salary,insurance jobs for nurses,insurance jobs houston,insurance jingles,insurance jobs tampa,insurance job titles,insurance jobs san diego,insurance jobs charlotte nc,insurance jobs denver,insurance jobs richmond va,insurance jobs san antonio,insurance jobs in ct,insurance jobs in nj,insurance king,insurance king commercial,insurance key terms,insurance kaiser,insurance king rockford il,insurance king reviews,insurance knowledge,insurance ky,insurance killeen tx,insurance kansas city,insurance king ohio,insurance kentucky,insurance kennewick wa,insurance keywords,insurance keeps going up,insurance kalamazoo,insurance king hours,insurance klamath falls,insurance kannapolis nc,insurance kpis,insurance lawyer,insurance leads,insurance lapse,insurance logos,insurance land,insurance law,insurance license ca,insurance linked securities,insurance license classes,insurance license texas,insurance life event,insurance license ga,insurance license exam,insurance license lookup ca,insurance license nc,insurance loss ratio,insurance lounge,insurance license search,insurance mandate,insurance meaning,insurance meme,insurance management services,insurance medical,insurance marketing,insurance mga,insurance mandate 2018,insurance management group,insurance man,insurance marketing ideas,insurance manager salary,insurance mayhem,insurance magazines,insurance mart,insurance manager,insurance michigan,insurance m,insurance news,insurance navy,insurance number,insurance noodle,insurance nation,insurance news net,insurance nurse jobs,insurance network,insurance now,insurance names,insurance nexus,insurance national producer number,insurance nurse,insurance nationwide,insurance naic number,insurance navigator,insurance news articles,insurance nerds,insurance online,insurance one,insurance office of america,insurance on the spot,insurance open enrollment,insurance options,insurance offers consumers,insurance online quote,insurance one agency,insurance on the go,insurance offices near me,insurance overload,insurance on a new car,insurance out of pocket,insurance on a leased car,insurance on rental car,insurance open today,insurance on a camaro,insurance on iphone,insurance policy,insurance policy number,insurance plans,insurance panda,insurance penalty,insurance providers,insurance policy definition,insurance places near me,insurance penalty 2017,insurance producer,insurance progressive,insurance plus,insurance places,insurance prices,insurance proceeds taxable,insurance penalty 2018,insurance ppo,insurance payor,insurance quote online,insurance quotes car,insurance quotes texas,insurance quote geico,insurance qualifying event,insurance questions,insurance quotes ga,insurance quote progressive,insurance quotes florida,insurance quotes health,insurance quotes nj,insurance quote state farm,insurance quotes ny,insurance quotes pa,insurance quizlet,insurance quote comparison,insurance quotes az,insurance quotes michigan,insurance rates,insurance rider,insurance risk,insurance reimbursement,insurance recruiters,insurance reviews,insurance rates by state,insurance risk manager,insurance retention,insurance rate calculator,insurance risk services,insurance rates by car,insurance regulation,insurance rebating,insurance reserves,insurance resume,insurance rental car,insurance rn jobs,insurance referral,insurance sales,insurance services,insurance service center,insurance services office,insurance solutions,insurance sales jobs,insurance sales agent,insurance specialist,insurance score,insurance subscriber,insurance schools,insurance sales salary,insurance stocks,insurance scams,insurance state farm,insurance settlement,insurance subscriber number,insurance synonyms,insurance slogans,insurance terms,insurance types,insurance tax form,insurance to go,insurance tpa,insurance test,insurance types word search,insurance training,insurance technology,insurance the general,insurance that covers ivf,insurance trust,insurance tax penalty 2018,insurance tax credit,insurance thought leadership,insurance total loss,insurance that covers braces,insurance tax penalty 2017,insurance tax,insurance underwriter,insurance underwriter salary,insurance underwriter jobs,insurance unlimited,insurance umbrella,insurance underwriting process,insurance usaa,insurance umbrella policy,insurance underwriter definition,insurance usps,insurance until 26,insurance uber,insurance university,insurance utah,insurance umr,insurance united,insurance usps cost,insurance underwriter resume,insurance underwriter training,insurance verification,insurance verification form,insurance verification jobs,insurance value,insurance verification specialist,insurance vocabulary,insurance verifier,insurance verizon,insurance vin check,insurance value chain,insurance violation,insurance value of my car,insurance verifier salary,insurance vs assurance,insurance verification salary,insurance verification specialist resume,insurance verification training,insurance veterans,insurance verification specialist job description,insurance verification letter,assurance wireless,insurance world,insurance waiver,insurance work from home jobs,insurance warehouse,insurance website builder,insurance wiki,insurance west,insurance wholesaler,insurance when buying a new car,insurance waiting period,insurance with the general,insurance work from home,insurance wichita ks,insurance write off,insurance words,assurance wireless customer service,insurance with no car,insurance x dates,insurance xchange,insurance xpress,insurance xenia ohio,insurance x dates leads,insurance x c u,insurance co,insurance xactimate,insurance xchange bustleton ave,insurance xfinity mobile,insurance xml standards,insurance x date definition,insurance check,insurance xol,insurance xl catlin,insurance xl,insurance xl group,insurance yuma az,insurance yakima,insurance york pa,insurance yuba city,insurance you can buy online,insurance you need,insurance youtube,insurance yellow book,insurance yelp,insurance yukon ok,insurance you almost had it,insurance yearly cost,insurance yonkers ny,insurance year,insurance yugioh,insurance yuba city ca,insurance youngstown ohio,insurance yanceyville nc,insurance you should have,insurance yuma,insurance zebra,insurance zone,insurance zone destin,insurance zombie apocalypse,insurance zone destin fl,insurance zurich,insurance zip code rating,insurance zephyrhills fl,insurance zipcar,insurance zebra review,insurance zeeland mi,insurance zanesville ohio,insurance zander,insurance zebulon nc,insurance zip code,insurance zenni optical,insurance zachary la,insurance zebulon ga,insurance zebra crunchbase,insurance quotes online,insurance quotes geico,insurance quotes comparison,insurance quotes colorado,insurance quotes california,insurance quotes sc,insurance quotes indiana,insurance quotes ky,insurance quotes allstate
home design,house plans,house designs,home plans,house design,living room design,home interior design,small house plans,bedroom design,home interior,house interior design,house floor plans,house decoration,building plans,small house design,interior design websites,floor plans,home design plans,interior design for living room,home floor plans,new home designs,room design,best home design,small home design,modern house design,house interior,new house design,small home plans,cottage house plans,house blueprints,modern house plans,best interior design,new home plans,custom home plans,modern home design,house building plans,house plan design,best house designs,bedroom interior design,craftsman house plans,home building plans,ranch house plans,custom house plans,architecture design for home,simple house plans,design your own house,bedroom interior,design your home,best house plans,country house plans,small house floor plans,blueprint homes,house plans and more,one story house plans,custom home designs,design my home,bungalow house plans,house designers,ranch style house plans,bedroom designer,dream house plans,exterior home design,modern home plans,contemporary house designs,home decor,latest home design,interior home decoration,new house plans,house plans and designs,contemporary house plans,design for house,best interior design websites,narrow lot house plans,design my own house,interior design,room interior design,single story house plans,home dizayn,design my house,design your house,beach house plans,ranch home plans,new home floor plans,house construction plan,dream home plans,home and design,modern interior design,house interior decoration,designer houses,craftsman style house plans,beautiful house plans,craftsman home plans,custom home floor plans,designer house,2 story house plans,home construction plans,custom floor plans,desing home,home design websites,new interior design,interior design sites,residential building plans,architecture design house,simple house design,french country house plans,interior home,dream home design,unique house plans,contemporary home design,residential house plans,exterior house design,design your own house plans,ranch floor plans,contemporary interior design,mediterranean house plans,shop interior design,home decoration design,home building design,homeinteriors,build your own house plans,house plans with porches,in home design,interior decoration,best home interior design,design your dream house,home plans and more,at home design,architectural design house plans,new home interior design,architectural house plans,contemporary home plans,house design and floor plan,my house plans,house layout plans,home architecture,colonial house plans,house design inside,house models and plans,two storey house plans,open floor house plans,small space interior design,dizain home,country style house plans,european house plans,house design websites,indian interior design,home layout planner,home dezine,open plan house,2 storey house plans,new house floor plans,building design,townhouse designs and floor plans,house plan drawing,h0me design,home designer architectural,modern floor plans,large house plans,home inside design,in house design,latest home interior design,building design plan,living room decor ideas,architectural floor plans,architectural home plans,new house interior design,architecture and design houses,single level house plans,hd home design,home floor plan designer,home plans and designs,country house design,traditional house plans,house layout,home design home design,model house plan,virtual interior design,interior design books,house building design,dream home floor plans,design interior,home decor ideas,house inner design,home by design,home house design,home design software,cottage home plans,house floor plan design,interior design magazine,italian interior design,house decorating ideas,floor plan designer,home house plans,home get dizain,house design software,best home plans,home internal design,best home interior design websites,new home blueprints,internal house design,interior design images,home design sites,home interior ideas,building plans and designs,my house design,houses and plans,modern house floor plans,home interior design ideas,classic interior design,unique home plans,beach house designs,home inner design,interior design software,home interiors catalog,custom home blueprints,internal decoration of house,interior design online,interior decorating ideas,modern home interior design,blueprint house plans,residential blueprints,interior design ideas,living room design ideas,new style home design,new house plans and prices,home design images,home get design,interior design ideas for living room,3d home design software,house layout design,home design furniture,new construction house plans,custom house designs,house floor plans and prices,house plans online,villa designs and floor plans,home designs and interiors,bedroom design ideas,house plan interior design,villa plans and designs,residential home plans,residential design,home indoor design,interior home plans,new build house designs,find house plans,modern decor ideas,home interior design websites,big house plans,car interior design,interior designer,home design online,beautiful home interior designs,dream house floor plans,home design interior design,interior design photos,unusual house plans,country home plans,residential floor plans,free home design software,interior design ideas bedroom,simple house floor plan,unique house designs,decoration ideas,new home building plans,interior design styles,residential house design,new model house interior design,home design app,free house plans,free home plans,residential house design plans,project house,luxury house design,house model,i design homes,house building plans and prices,architectural design home plans,new dizain home,house design online,great house plans,designer in the house,house indoor design,narrow house plans,house plans floor plans,house and home plans,office interior design ideas,home design 3d,build your own home plans,new home layouts,find house blueprints,homes and interiors,beautiful house interior design,house floor design,country home designs,room design ideas,dizajn home,house get dizain,home design home,house plans by design,townhouse plans,new design home plans,interior design games,interior ideas,my home plan,house interior design ideas,free interior design software,floor plans for building a house,luxury house floor plans,how to design a house,blueprint home plans,a house design,new house blueprints,new home construction plans,home design design,new house plan design,home design magazines,home design ideas,dream house blueprints,house design house design,new latest home design,modern contemporary interior design,best house interior designs,latest house interior designs,3d interior design,home plans with photos,all home design,house and design,house blueprint maker,house room design,home interiors,home blueprint designer,3d house plans,hom design,house blueprint designer,interior colour design,home builders floor plans,luxury home design,3d house design,new home floor plans and prices,house projects plans,home planners inc house plans,design your own home online,house to home designs,plan your home design,house design sites,modern interior design ideas,latest house designs,new build designs,home design house plans,h0use plans,from house design,home interior design plans,custom home design plans,home floor design,build your own house floor plans,where to find house plans,design plan,home designs and floor plans,the best home design,your home design,indoor house design,architectural design floor plans,what is interior design,best home interiors,villa design plan,where to get house plans,interior decorating styles,condo interior design,residential building design plans,interior design pictures,family home plans,contemporary interior designers,interior design portfolio,a home design,house design ideas,home design inside style,design from home,house pictures designs,build it house plans,internal home decoration,homes models and plans,cheap interior design,architectural design plans,interior house plans,house plan maker,interior design help,new house room design,house layout maker,best dizain home,new build floor plans,hd house design,house architecture,house dsgn,house building blueprints,build your home,apartment interior design,in design homes,home out design,latest building designs and plans,residential house plans and designs,home design and decor,home decoration tips,new build house plans,interior design tips,interior design and decoration,in house designer,architectural design,build your house,home building blueprints,house in design,get design house,custom house blueprints,interior design trends,interior design blogs,home ideas,interior design show,design your own home plans,house creator,in home designer,build own house plans,french interior design,designers homes,house of interior design,house room interior design,architectural plans,house designer builder,architecture design house interior,free interior design,home design photo,house construction plans and designs,interior design inspiration,build house plans design,virtual home design,home for design,housing blueprints floor plans,home interior design photos,home design free,home room design,house and home design,latest model home design,blueprints for my home,interior design stores,design your house plans,famous interior designers,inhouse plans,inside house designs plans,the home designers,history of interior design,cheap hotels,booking hotel,hotel deals,booking hotels,last minute hotel deals,hotel room,hotel search,hotel finder,hotel websites,discount hotels,last minute hotels,hotel booking sites,cheap hotel rooms,cheap hotel deals,book hotels,hotels near me,best hotel deals,hotel prices,hotel reservations,online hotel booking,cheap accommodation,cheap rooms,hotel sites,best hotel prices,hotel rates,discount hotel sites,cheap hotel rooms near me,hotel booking websites,find cheap hotels,hotel search engines,cheap hotel booking,motel,cheap hotel sites,best hotel booking site,nearby hotels,hotels near,cheap hotel prices,hotel comparison,budget hotel,cheap motels,hotel chains,best hotels,best hotel rates,hotel search sites,local hotels,hotel room booking,discount hotel rooms,luxury hotels,hotel s,boutique hotel,hotel booking offers,best hotel website,hotels in,hotel online,low cost hotels,hotel last minute,the hotel,hotel packages,book accommodation,cheap hotel websites,hotel accommodation,a hotel,low price hotels,cheap hotel reservations,5 star hotel,discount hotel rates,lowest hotel rates,cheap hotel rates,hotel reservation sites,hotel rentals,hotel breakers,hotel a,cheap hotel booking sites,cheap hotels in,suite,hotels rooms,hotel offers,hotel bargains,hotel suites,cheap hotel suites,best hotel finder,hotel rate,hotel deal sites,cheap last minute hotels,find hotel deals,best hotel sites,discount hotel websites,cheap hotel search,airport hotel,late hotel deals,discount hotel deals,find hotel rooms,hotel room prices,hotel room deals,suite hotels,best cheap hotels,motel discounts,cheap hotel stays,best hotel search,cheap hotel offers,accommodation sites,great hotel deals,hotel deals websites,hotel finder websites,travel hotel,hotel finder sites,hotel resort,affordable hotels,cheap hotel rentals,hotel booking deals,hotel room booking sites,top hotel,last minute hotel booking,hotel booking discount,discount hotel prices,beach hotel,discount rooms,looking for hotels,find hotels near address,last minute hotel rooms,hotel suite,cheap cheap hotels,find me a hotel,very cheap hotels,where to book cheap hotels,cheap hotel discounts,five star hotel,hotel room finder,online hotel reservation,good deals on hotels,discount hotel reservations,where to find cheap hotels,hotel deals near me,book cheap hotels online,where to book hotels,inexpensive hotels,bargain hotel deals,bookit hotels,hotel price finder,cheap hotel accommodation,best hotel booking,best hotel rooms,hotel room rates,book cheap hotel rooms,business hotel,hotel inn,best site to find hotels,hotel at,cheap lodges,websites to book hotels,hotel prices near me,hotels and resorts,hotel room search,cheap hotel packages,find cheap hotel rooms,cheapest site to book hotels,discount accommodation,com hotel,best hotel discount sites,best deals on hotel rooms,cheap hotel breaks,hotel room reservation,find me a hotel room,reserve hotel,good cheap hotels,low cost hotel rooms,best price hotel rooms,hotels downtown,cheap hotels i,online hotel deals,discount hotel booking sites,late hotels,best hotel discounts,cheap luxury hotels,cheap hotel booking website,hotels on,hotel reservation websites,room deal,the cheapest hotel,hotel accommodation deals,hotels cheap hotels,cheap accommodation deals,cheapest place to book hotels,book a room near me,hotel search websites,hotel hotel,best hotel rates online,looking for cheap hotels,4 star hotel,cheap hotels at,find cheap hotel deals,hotel room websites,hotel price search,get cheap hotel rates,gets hotel,get cheap hotels,discount lodging,3 star hotel,websites to find cheap hotels,get hotel deals,places to book hotels,economy hotel,cheapest website to book hotels,hotel room sites,hot deals hotels,search hotel deals,book hotel reservations,find cheap hotel rates,find me a cheap hotel,cheap hotels on,area hotel,best site for hotel deals,best hotel price finder,book cheap rooms,low price hotel rooms,hotels around,best offers on hotel booking,booking hotels in,a cheap hotel,to book a hotel,bargain hotel rooms,cheap hotels motels,cheapest hotel rates online,late hotel rooms,where can i find cheap hotels,find best hotel rates,cheap hotel chains,where to find cheap hotel deals,inexpensive hotel rooms,hotel bargain sites,low price hotel booking,best website to find hotels,hotel offers near me,find best hotel deals,best deal in hotel booking,hotel suite deals,lowest hotel deals,hotel motel,good hotel prices,cheap hotels online,find lodging,great hotel rates,where to get cheap hotels,looking for hotel deals,book hotel now,hotel rate finder,best website to find cheap hotels,hotel savings sites,web booking hotel,book cheap accommodation,search all hotels,discount hotel suites,hotel hotel hotel,cheap hotels and motels,where to book hotel,hotel booking in,discount luxury hotels,websites to book cheap hotels,find cheap motels,reservation hotel,cheap room rates,sites to find cheap hotels,great hotel prices,best site for cheap hotels,compare hotel prices,cheap accommodation sites,find discount hotels,get cheap hotel rooms,sites to book cheap hotels,hotel booking cheapest rates,discount hotel search,best place to book hotels,hotel for,book hotel with,i need a hotel room,cheap lodge deals,hotels uk,find available hotel rooms,find cheap rooms,find a hotel room near me,hotels in price,hotel low cost,cheap hotel room rates,family hotel,best price for hotel booking,hotel rate search,the hotel book,find cheap accommodation,hotel france,extended stay hotels,where to find hotels,find hotel prices,book a room hotel,cheap discount hotel rooms,best cheap hotel finder,hotel directory,hotell,find hotels online,hotel de charme,hotel suite finder,budget hotel booking,special hotel rates,cheap hotel deals and discounts,affordable hotel rooms,get a hotel room,cheap hotel specials,book hotel accommodation,hotel motel discounts,accommodation low priced,find cheap hotel prices,pet friendly hotels,book in hotels,cheap hotels a,romantic hotels,find cheap hotels online,cheap and hotel,aparthotel,hotel club,compare hotel rates,hotels near me booking,cheap hotel reservations online,cheap and best hotel,hotel reservation service,awesome hotel,hotel room booking website,cheap hotel room websites,low price hotels near me,hotel specials,best site to look for hotels,all suites hotel,cheap motels nearby,hotel reviews,best hotel room rates,hotel savings websites,find hotel availability,hotel saving sites,how to find cheap hotels,website of hotel,four star hotel,best site to book cheap hotels,a hotel booking,cheap reservations,rooms hotel,cheap hotel room sites,hotel rooms online,best site to find hotel deals,hotel availability finder,cheapest hotel deals online,discount accommodation sites,to book a hotel room,hotel travel,find the hotel,great hotel deals near me,bellagio hotel,address hotel,accommodation booking websites,best website to book cheap hotels,cheap hotel deals near me,for hotel reservations,discount hotel stays,disneyland hotel,cheapest hotel prices online,luxor hotel,hotel rooms in,places to stay,hotels and prices,hotel suite search,booking in a hotel,reasonable hotel rooms,metatrader 4,forex trading,forex valuta,forex demo,forex pro,trader forex,forex robot,fx forex,forex signals,forex eur usd,bonus forex,forex euro,expert advisor,forex trading software,forex usd,forex spread,forex strategie,valuta forex,valuta trading,forex dollar,forex trading for dummies,forex trading in india,options trading,forex for dummies,trading on line,forex indonesia,trading online,currency trading for dummies,trading platforms,forex handel,online share trading,day trading software,forex trading training,forex trading course,fx trading,forex malaysia,online stock trading,share trading,trading signals,trading software,forex trading platforms,canadian forex,forex bonus,top forex,learn forex trading,forex demo account,free forex signals,stock market trading,best forex signals,stock trading,best forex trading platform,best forex broker,best online trading stocks,stock trading software,forex trading tutorial,how to trade forex,fx broker,online trading,online trading account,forex trading tips,commodity trading,forex trading books,forex training,forex trading for beginners,daytrading,forex trading strategies,belajar forex,ea forex,day trading,online broker,online trading platforms,automated trading,cfd trading,forex trading signals,currency trading,trading courses,i forex,forex broker,forex uk,forex analysis,forex account,what is forex trading,trading account,broker forex,foreign exchange trading,metatrader,forex ea,intraday trading,top forex brokers,forex investing,forex for beginners,online forex trading,meta trader 4,day trade,forex indicators,trading,day trading stocks,forex trading basics,currency options trading,trading strategies,forex strategies,futures trading,forex trading demo,forex trading system,forex forecast,metatrader 5,forex simulator,no deposit bonus forex,forex trading hours,gold trader,trading system,live forex charts,fx trader,forex market,day trader,forex kontor,forex trading broker,paper trading,forex exchange,how to trade currency,trade market,managed forex accounts,forex currency,day trading strategies,instaforex,forex strategy,simulated forex trading,forex australia,forex reviews,forex trading reviews,forex books,learn forex,forex technical analysis,forex charts,best forex robot,forex online,best online trading,forex tips,forex options,free forex charts,ukforex,forum forex,online forex,forex capital,scalping forex,forexlive,forex forum,dailyfx,stock trading strategies,forex trading australia,forex india,forex software,best forex strategy,forex pdf,forex platform,foreign currency trading,fx options,automated trading system,cfd,forex news,finanzas forex,forex currency exchange,forex education,spread trading,forex trading education,lite forex,currency market,forex club,forex rate,best forex,fibonacci trading,fx market,forex broker reviews,gold forex,global forex,foreign currency,forex company,forex tutorial,forex exchange rate,online currency trading,fx charts,money trade,forex calculator,iforex,technical analysis,forex blog,oanda forex,swing trading,what is forex,e forex,fx signals,foreign currency exchange,forex day trading,trading markets,forex bank,forex signal provider,forex contest,exchange rate,forex news live,forex market hours,fxcm,forex tester,easy forex,forex trend,option trading software,foreign exchange market,forex money,forex trading uk,forex system,foreign currency exchange rates,best forex indicator,trend trading,online trading software,forexworld,pip forex,how to do forex trading,foreign exchange,swiss forex,fibonacci forex,forex capital markets,forex trading forex rates forex market,forex brokers list,forex trading account,online commodity trading,forex course,forex wiki,fx trading platforms,forex basics,currency chart,trader,live forex rates,فركس,forex signal service,currency exchange rate,forex school,what is leverage in forex,alpari,forex money exchange,forex quotes,forex predictions,foreign exchange broker,fx currency,currency broker,forex currency rates,forex currency trading,fx street,automated forex trading,forex converter,forex business,forex calendar,forex currency converter,currency rate,ecn forex,best forex platform,metastock,foreign exchange calculator,forex affiliate,forex expert advisor,mt4 forex,forex cargo,master forex,fx exchange,4x trading,forex exchange market,currency trading tips,guide for forex trading,forex directory,forex historical data,hedging forex,money forex,fx trading strategies,forex market news,forex mobile,forex game,forex trading forum,forex trading robot,real time forex,forest trading,internet trading,gft forex,forex broker comparison,accurate forex signals,forex market analysis,forex scam,free forex trading,forex trading times,forex cfd,global forex trading,forex futures,forex metatrader,fx news,forex trading charts,forex trading simulator,cms forex,forex trading news,free forex,live forex trading,forex video,forex practice account,traders,what is forex market,forex data,fx pro,fx rates,currency trading basics,forex bot,forex guide,forex training course,best forex trading system,forex trading companies,action forex,forex jobs,what is fx trading,forex peace army,forex website,forex metal,what is currency trading,bforex trading,free forex robot,forex alerts,online foreign exchange,forex on line,management accounting,go forex,best forex trading software,fx online,x forex,about forex trading,forex trading wiki,learn to day trade,free forex trading signals,expert advisors,forex profit,currencies,change money forex,forex help,best forex traders,forex trader pro,forex arbitrage,forex advisor,day trading online,forex factory,forex trading scams,forex ebook,about forex,forex trading website,forex mentor,currency trading strategies,capital forex,managed forex,forex download,automated forex trading software,jutawan forex,forex charting software,forex tools,fx account,forex seminar,currency exchange,learn forex trading online,free forex training,forex market trading,forex auto trader,forexmarket,forex trading plan,forex göteborg,how to forex,forex broker rating,forex secrets,forex exchange trading,forex services,real forex,earnforex,forex stock,swing trading forex,forex trading school,forex history,stock market trading software,forex trading practice,free forex trading course,stock trading system,commodity futures trading,forex brokerage,forex chat,treding forex,forex dealers,easy forex trading,ava forex,forex marketing,forex trading sites,currency trading platforms,i forex trading,forex scalping system,metatrader brokers,currency calculator,forex forex,spot forex,best forex software,what is margin in forex,forex sites,forex trading tools,fapturbo,forex management,forex trading indicators,forex tv,all about forex trading,forex trading techniques,day trading courses,forex capital market,forex tsd,currency futures trading,forex trading game,online forex trading platforms,forex megadroid,forex trading contest,forex trading room,forex pairs,forex trading secrets,forex foreign exchange,currency,forex trading analysis,online forex brokers,automatic forex trading,online forex trading course,best forex system,the forex,reuters forex,forex trading adalah,forex price,online forex trading account,forex expert,future,commodity,learn currency trading,forex signals software,forex information,currency market trading,bforex online trading,fx forex trading,automated forex trading system,cmc forex,forex bank valuta,online future trading,currency converter,futures trading software,acm forex,forex fund,forex options trading,currency trading software,online forex trading forex,forex program,online forex exchange,forex practice,managed forex trading,forex trading blog,online fx trading,forex trading seminar,fx trading signals,futures trading system,forex ab,forex trend trading,stock market day trading,international forex trading,system forex,fx trading software,4x market,forex bank logga in,automatic forex trading software,free forex trading software,make money forex trading,the forex market,forex advice,forex trading information,forex trading mentors,forex autopilot,forex made easy,currency trading account,make money with forex,what is forex trading all about,fortex trading,forex global,where to trade forex,what is forex exchange,fx currency trading,forex day trading strategies,online forex trading system,forex mini account,gci forex,currency exchange trading,forex killer,interbank fx,what is bforex,forex futures trading,whats forex,currency news trading,what's forex trading,introducing broker forex,fx trading system,currency trading courses,currency forex online trading,spot forex trading,forex t,forex norge,best forex training,day trading systems,all about forex,forex trading programs,mini forex,forex c,market maker forex,currency trading system,forex trading usa,forex easy,fx money exchange,mobile forex trading,forex trading club,currency trading brokers,microfx,forex kontakt,forex trading methods,autofx,forex currency broker,forex daytrading,que es forex trading,forex yard,forex recommendations,forex trading made easy,currency option trading,what's forex,fx money,in forex,4x forex,online foreign exchange trading,forex micro,trade and forex,when to trade forex,forex money changer,online forex training,forex trading signals software,how to trade in forex market,forex trading services,fibonacci forex trading,forex research,forex trading advice,foreign exchange currency trading,forex bank internetbank,förex,currency trading charts,forex in,what is iforex,forex trading alerts,forex bank ab,interbank forex,forex now,forex trading what is it,about forex market,ex forex,marketing fx,fx automated trading,forex day trading system,free forex trading systems,forex best,what is bforex trading,fx trader exchange rates,forex bank malmö,forex english,what is iforex and how does it work,crown forex,pro forex,forex trading today,forex trading station,forex trading forex,currency trading training,define forex trading,forex bank göteborg,currency trading site,foreign exchange market trading,forex bank kontakt,forex market today,forex trading money,fx dealer,forex bank norway,bank forex trading,day trading currency,tentang forex trading,what is forex trading online,forex bank kundtjänst,forex bank öppettider,forex bank login,forex commentary,on line trading forex,forex forex trading,forex automoney,mini forex trading,forex trading forex rates forex,international forex market,currency trading website,trader fx,forex exchange sweden,fortex bank,currency trading signals,how to trade in foreign exchange market,how does forex exchange work,what is foreign exchange trading,online forex market,forex currency market,forexd,forex currency trading system,4x currency trading,forex trading explained,www forec,how to trade foreign currency online,forex trading info,international currency trading
This post continues the question, who bears the burden of the corporate tax? The next post will have broader thoughts on the tax plan and economists' reaction to it.
I'm responding in many ways to Larry Summers, who weighed in on the corporate taxes issue in a Washington Post oped. He eloquently and concisely makes most of the arguments floating around now against the corporate tax cut, so I don't have to wade through the venom in Krugman posts to find nuggets of economic sense that one discuss on objective grounds.
This is a long post, so let me summarize the conclusions
1) Even if stockholders do bear the burden of the corporate tax, that is entirely the stockholders who are there when the tax is announced. Current stockholders bear little or no burden.
2) The novel "monopoly" argument is seriously deficient.
3) Even if stockholders bear the burden of the corporate tax, the corporate tax is an insanely inefficient way to make a more progressive tax code.
So who does bear the burden of the corporate tax?
I think every economist in this debate admits, if some reluctantly, that "corporations" pay no taxes. As an accounting matter, every cent corporations pay comes from higher prices, lower wages, or lower payments to shareholders. The only question is which one. And indirect general equilibrium effects are central. The question is not just, how do corporations respond immediately, but how do wages, prices, and capital in the whole economy adjust. "Make corporations pay their fair share" is just nonsense.
The sales tax is a good place to start thinking about this question. Corporations "pay" sales taxes, but It's a natural first guess if the sales tax were abolished, prices would stay about the same and we'd pay less overall. Customers "bear the burden" of sales taxes. That's the same thing as saying the sales tax comes out of the wage, as wages only matter relative to prices.
I doubt anyone's first guess would be that companies would raise prices one for one with the reduced sales tax, and stockholders would get higher dividends. We also might guess that companies would sell more, raising output, and try to hire more people increasing employment and wages.
(Let me add quickly that these effects of sales tax are not obvious when you do the economics right. This is just an example to help people see that who pays the tax isn't necessarily the same as who bears the burden of the tax. )
Now, who bears the burden of the corporate tax? The usual principle is that he or she bears the burden who can't get out of the way. So, how much room do companies, as a whole, have to raise prices, lower wages, lower interest payments, or lower dividends? It used to be thought that it was easy to lower payments to shareholders -- "the supply of savings is inelastic" -- so that's where the tax would come from. The newer consensus is that companies as a whole have very little power to pay less to investors, as you'll see in detail below, so the corporate tax comes from lower wages or, equivalently, higher prices. Then, indirectly, reducing the corporate tax would increase capital, which would result in higher wages.
Which stockholders bear the burden
Summers disagrees, feels that stockholders bear most of the burden of the corporate tax, so lowering the corporate tax would primarily benefit stockholders, as explained in his Washington Post oped
Let's start with this:
What happens then if we lower the corporate tax rate? As Larry points out, stock prices rise. If the company grows at the rate \(g\), then \[ P_t = \int_{s=0}^\infty e^{-rs} (1-\tau) D_s ds = (1-\tau) D_t \int_{s=0}^\infty e^{(g-r)s} ds \] \[P_t = (1-\tau)\frac{D_t}{r-g}\] Reducing the tax rate \(\tau\) raises the stock price, and, here, does nothing else.
But think about how this works. The day the corporate tax is announced, the stock price drops by the new tax rate. Then the price stays low, but the return is the same as before. You pay a lower price to get the lower dividend, leaving the return the same, \(r\) here.
So the entire corporate tax is pre-paid, or borne, by the stockholders who are unfortunate enough to be around when the corporate tax is announced. Anyone who buys shares after the corporate tax is imposed gets the shares at a lower price, so his or her return is entirely unaffected by the corporate tax.
People who buy shares after the corporate tax is imposed bear no burden of the tax. The corporate tax does not affect the rate of return received by current owners at all, because they got to buy at low prices.
So much for corporate taxes soaking the rich. This is an important fact, missing in all the distributional analysis I have seen.
Now, think about lowering or (let us hope, someday) repealing the corporate tax. In my grossly simplified example, as in Larry's claim, the only impact will be to raise stock prices, and to give a big burst of value to whoever holds stocks on the merry day that the tax cut is announced.
Larry claims that this "primarily benefits wealthy individuals." Well, maybe (more on that later). But Larry leaves out that, if so, we are only giving back some of what was taken on the day that the corporate tax was announced. Maybe right, maybe wrong, but this is not a gift, it is a partial restoration. Since Larry's point is entirely about redistribution, this is not an inconsequential point.
You may object, most shares have changed hands, so it is a restoration to different people, and in that sense maybe a gift. But it is not a pure gift.
Alexander Hamilton faced a similar issue with revolutionary war debt. A lot of this debt had been bought by soldiers, but as the chances of the debt being repaid declined, its value declined. Many soldiers sold their debt for pennies on the dollar to "speculators." By proposing to pay back the debt at face value, restoring the previous value of the debt, Hamilton did something that primarily benefitted these "speculators." Assuming the state debts was surely a "handout to the rich," bondholders then being like stockholders now plausibly better off than the average citizen. The bonds were a sunk cost, as Larry views today's capital. But Hamilton did it, for reasons that now seem wise. Fortunately, not every decision revolved around redistribution then.
Larry's case, that capital is fixed in the short run, amounts to the usual argument that the government can grab existing wealth without distortion, so long as it promises "just this once" and not to grab future wealth. Alas, the "just this once" promise has proven futile in the past, and wealth holders learn not to save. Hamilton, among other things, bought reputation, vital when the country needed to borrow again. Larry is mostly worried about giving a present (or returning a theft) to current owners of capital, never mind the "long run" of capital formation. But reputations matter, and the long run comes quicker than you think, a fact those of us of a certain age can tell you.
You may object to all this that we have not seen any big stock price movements along with rather substantial changes in corporate taxes over history. I agree. Which points exactly that the first assumption is wrong -- that corporate taxes don't come out of dividends in the first place, but rather out of prices and wages. And if the price didn't go down when the corporate tax was imposed, it won't go up when the corporate tax is removed.
Is the rate of return really constant?
Larry would quickly object to my example that I held the rate of return constant as I changed the corporate tax rate. Larry disputes that assumption:
The "small open economy model" says, as I have above, that if dividends and other payments to shareholders are reduced by taxation, the price of US stocks will fall until the rate of return is the same as it is in the rest of the world. The "marginal" investors whose actions determine stock prices can buy here or abroad, and they will simply sell or try to sell, pushing prices down, until their prospective risk-adjusted after-tax return is the same here as it is abroad.
The "Ramsey model" proposition is more subtle. Any attempt to make people suffer a lower rate of return induces them to save less. Less savings means less investment and the capital stock falls. This keeps going until the before-tax marginal product of capital rises enough to pay the tax and give investors the original rate of return. The long-run after-tax return to investors is always the same. This argument is entirely domestic, and doesn't rely on any international investors. (Many commentaries ignore this, more important, effect and just talk about whether the US is big or how open capital markets are.)
This proposition is behind the now classic result that the optimal capital tax -- the corporate tax and personal income taxes on rates of return -- is zero. (Chamley 1986 and Judd 1985.) It lies behind the modern move to consumption taxation and away from trying to tax wealth and rates of return, including the Obama administration's well-noted efforts to reduce corporate taxes. It's why we have 401(k)s, dividend and capital gains rates lower than ordinary income, capital gains step up at death, and so on. It's why most countries have a VAT and have already reduced their corporate rates.
Here's my best attempt to explain this result, beyond the previous two paragraphs. The most basic equation in macroeconomics is \[ r = \delta + \gamma g \] where \(r\) is the rate of return, \(g\) is the economy's growth rate, \(\gamma\) measures how reluctant people are to rearrange consumption to have less now and more later, and \(\delta\) measures how impatient people are. (This, together with \(r=f'(k)\) are the \(E=mc^2\) of modern macroeconomics.) A higher growth rate \(g\) means people consume less today than they expect consume tomorrow, and people must receive a higher after-tax real return \(r\) to defer consumption. (This equation is the continuous time version of \[ u'(c_t) = \beta R u'(c_{t+1})\] using the standard \(u'(c)=c^{-\gamma}\).)
Now, none of these tax arguments are (yet) about the long-run growth rate of the economy. Reductions in marginal rates raise the level of output, and give a boost of growth along the way, but they do not raise the long run growth rate. (Endogenous growth theory is not part of the argument. Yet.)
So, we have the "Ramsey" theorem: If the long-run growth rate of the economy is unchanged, then the long run rate of return is unchanged.
Larry did not have the (apparently endless) space I have, but it's not clear how he disputes this simple and classic result -- and, by implication, the vast changes in tax policy that it has produced. Larry notes only that "real interest rates vary vastly through space and time," and "generations of economic research show that the savings rate rather than being infinitely sensitive to the interest rate is almost entirely insensitive to the interest rate." Neither point has anything to do with the question at hand. The theorem did not say that interest rates are constant, merely that rate of return will revert after an attempt to tax it, over very long spans of time -- the time needed to reduce the capital stock and raise its marginal product. Similarly, the research Larry refers to is about high frequency correlations between expected consumption growth and interest rates. He is right here -- tests of my above equations in monthly and quarterly data don't work well. That should give big pause to the use of business cycle models, including the models used to evaluate stimulus programs, in which those equations lie front and center. But this is a long run proposition.
In fact, the central proposition works quite well at the medium and longer runs we are talking about. Consumption growth and real rates of return move together across countries and at medium and longer runs in a country. Economic booms and booming economies have higher rates of return. Economic busts and declining economies have lower rates of return. And that variation is why real interest rates "vary through space and time!" The variation proves the equation, rather than deny it. And to leave it at "savings is almost entirely insensitive to the interest rate" really puts the central question of the effects of corporate taxes outside of economics -- and is a tellingly static view of the world.
The central question is this: Seeing that dividends are (this is Larry's assumption) going to be heavily reduced by corporate taxation, do people simply fail to react and pay the same price for the stocks, and thus suffer a lower rate of return? That's what Larry asserts, and when you think about it that way seems pretty dubious. (Investment lines up with stock prices, not with real interest rates.)
The argument is also inconsistent. If people pay the same price and enjoy (tax cut) or suffer (tax increase) lower rates of return, then lowering the capital gains tax will not lead to a big stock price increase! You can't have it both ways.
You also may object that as we do not see variations in stock market values (P/D or P/E) when corporate tax rates change, we also do not see variations in average rates of return lining up with corporate tax changes. Again, I would say this proves the point. That we don't see either price or return changes suggests that dividends do not bear the burden of the tax, but wages and prices do instead.
Monopoly
The latest argument for corporate taxation is that somehow there is now more "monopoly power" in US business, and this justifies a higher corporate tax. Paul Krugman has been advancing this idea most strongly. I'm always suspicious when the questions change but the answer doesn't, but still, let's unpack this argument. It goes together with Larry's point that full expensing of investment alone would offset many of the disincentives to capital formation:
\[\max (1-\tau) \left[ F(K,L) - wL \right] - rK \]
Notice by the way how a corporate tax is different from a sales tax. A sales tax only applies to output, so the firm problem is
\[\max (1-\tau) F(K,L) - wL - rK \]
The sales tax distorts the decision to hire labor. The corporate tax does not distort that decision -- we have \(F_L=w\) because the tax applies to both of them.
But what if dividend payments were tax deductible? Then we'd have
I'm responding in many ways to Larry Summers, who weighed in on the corporate taxes issue in a Washington Post oped. He eloquently and concisely makes most of the arguments floating around now against the corporate tax cut, so I don't have to wade through the venom in Krugman posts to find nuggets of economic sense that one discuss on objective grounds.
This is a long post, so let me summarize the conclusions
1) Even if stockholders do bear the burden of the corporate tax, that is entirely the stockholders who are there when the tax is announced. Current stockholders bear little or no burden.
2) The novel "monopoly" argument is seriously deficient.
3) Even if stockholders bear the burden of the corporate tax, the corporate tax is an insanely inefficient way to make a more progressive tax code.
So who does bear the burden of the corporate tax?
I think every economist in this debate admits, if some reluctantly, that "corporations" pay no taxes. As an accounting matter, every cent corporations pay comes from higher prices, lower wages, or lower payments to shareholders. The only question is which one. And indirect general equilibrium effects are central. The question is not just, how do corporations respond immediately, but how do wages, prices, and capital in the whole economy adjust. "Make corporations pay their fair share" is just nonsense.
The sales tax is a good place to start thinking about this question. Corporations "pay" sales taxes, but It's a natural first guess if the sales tax were abolished, prices would stay about the same and we'd pay less overall. Customers "bear the burden" of sales taxes. That's the same thing as saying the sales tax comes out of the wage, as wages only matter relative to prices.
I doubt anyone's first guess would be that companies would raise prices one for one with the reduced sales tax, and stockholders would get higher dividends. We also might guess that companies would sell more, raising output, and try to hire more people increasing employment and wages.
(Let me add quickly that these effects of sales tax are not obvious when you do the economics right. This is just an example to help people see that who pays the tax isn't necessarily the same as who bears the burden of the tax. )
Now, who bears the burden of the corporate tax? The usual principle is that he or she bears the burden who can't get out of the way. So, how much room do companies, as a whole, have to raise prices, lower wages, lower interest payments, or lower dividends? It used to be thought that it was easy to lower payments to shareholders -- "the supply of savings is inelastic" -- so that's where the tax would come from. The newer consensus is that companies as a whole have very little power to pay less to investors, as you'll see in detail below, so the corporate tax comes from lower wages or, equivalently, higher prices. Then, indirectly, reducing the corporate tax would increase capital, which would result in higher wages.
Which stockholders bear the burden
Summers disagrees, feels that stockholders bear most of the burden of the corporate tax, so lowering the corporate tax would primarily benefit stockholders, as explained in his Washington Post oped
Let's start with this:
The main point of my [justly famous 1981] paper ... was that because of slow adjustment costs, the impact of tax changes was felt primarily on asset prices for a long time. This meant that as my paper showed, the primary impact of a corporate tax cut would be to raise after-tax profits and the stock market. This in turn, as I noted, primarily benefits wealthy individuals.Let's unpack that. Suppose for a moment that essentially all the corporate tax comes out of lower dividends, not higher prices or lower wages. And let's even leave new investment off the table, either because adjustment costs are large (Larry) or out of the feeling that corporate profits come from some "monopoly rent" unrelated to the capital stock.
What happens then if we lower the corporate tax rate? As Larry points out, stock prices rise. If the company grows at the rate \(g\), then \[ P_t = \int_{s=0}^\infty e^{-rs} (1-\tau) D_s ds = (1-\tau) D_t \int_{s=0}^\infty e^{(g-r)s} ds \] \[P_t = (1-\tau)\frac{D_t}{r-g}\] Reducing the tax rate \(\tau\) raises the stock price, and, here, does nothing else.
But think about how this works. The day the corporate tax is announced, the stock price drops by the new tax rate. Then the price stays low, but the return is the same as before. You pay a lower price to get the lower dividend, leaving the return the same, \(r\) here.
So the entire corporate tax is pre-paid, or borne, by the stockholders who are unfortunate enough to be around when the corporate tax is announced. Anyone who buys shares after the corporate tax is imposed gets the shares at a lower price, so his or her return is entirely unaffected by the corporate tax.
People who buy shares after the corporate tax is imposed bear no burden of the tax. The corporate tax does not affect the rate of return received by current owners at all, because they got to buy at low prices.
So much for corporate taxes soaking the rich. This is an important fact, missing in all the distributional analysis I have seen.
Now, think about lowering or (let us hope, someday) repealing the corporate tax. In my grossly simplified example, as in Larry's claim, the only impact will be to raise stock prices, and to give a big burst of value to whoever holds stocks on the merry day that the tax cut is announced.
Larry claims that this "primarily benefits wealthy individuals." Well, maybe (more on that later). But Larry leaves out that, if so, we are only giving back some of what was taken on the day that the corporate tax was announced. Maybe right, maybe wrong, but this is not a gift, it is a partial restoration. Since Larry's point is entirely about redistribution, this is not an inconsequential point.
You may object, most shares have changed hands, so it is a restoration to different people, and in that sense maybe a gift. But it is not a pure gift.
Alexander Hamilton faced a similar issue with revolutionary war debt. A lot of this debt had been bought by soldiers, but as the chances of the debt being repaid declined, its value declined. Many soldiers sold their debt for pennies on the dollar to "speculators." By proposing to pay back the debt at face value, restoring the previous value of the debt, Hamilton did something that primarily benefitted these "speculators." Assuming the state debts was surely a "handout to the rich," bondholders then being like stockholders now plausibly better off than the average citizen. The bonds were a sunk cost, as Larry views today's capital. But Hamilton did it, for reasons that now seem wise. Fortunately, not every decision revolved around redistribution then.
Larry's case, that capital is fixed in the short run, amounts to the usual argument that the government can grab existing wealth without distortion, so long as it promises "just this once" and not to grab future wealth. Alas, the "just this once" promise has proven futile in the past, and wealth holders learn not to save. Hamilton, among other things, bought reputation, vital when the country needed to borrow again. Larry is mostly worried about giving a present (or returning a theft) to current owners of capital, never mind the "long run" of capital formation. But reputations matter, and the long run comes quicker than you think, a fact those of us of a certain age can tell you.
You may object to all this that we have not seen any big stock price movements along with rather substantial changes in corporate taxes over history. I agree. Which points exactly that the first assumption is wrong -- that corporate taxes don't come out of dividends in the first place, but rather out of prices and wages. And if the price didn't go down when the corporate tax was imposed, it won't go up when the corporate tax is removed.
Is the rate of return really constant?
Larry would quickly object to my example that I held the rate of return constant as I changed the corporate tax rate. Larry disputes that assumption:
Second, neither the Ramsey model nor the small open economy model is a reasonable approximation for the world we live in. In the Ramsey model, savings are infinitely elastic, so the real interest rate always returns to some fixed level. In fact, real interest rates vary vastly through space and time, and generations of economic research show that the savings rate rather than being infinitely sensitive to the interest rate is almost entirely insensitive to the interest rate.
The United States is not a small open economy. If it were, the effect of an effective investment incentive would be a major increase in the trade deficit as capital inflows forced an excess of imports over exports. I imagine that President Trump at least feels that a greatly augmented trade deficit is not good for American workers.Let me unpack those arguments. You are a "small open economy." The rate you pay at the bank is the same no matter whether you borrow $100 or $1000; the price you pay at the grocery store is the same whether you buy one or 20 bananas. You're not big enough to affect market prices.
The "small open economy model" says, as I have above, that if dividends and other payments to shareholders are reduced by taxation, the price of US stocks will fall until the rate of return is the same as it is in the rest of the world. The "marginal" investors whose actions determine stock prices can buy here or abroad, and they will simply sell or try to sell, pushing prices down, until their prospective risk-adjusted after-tax return is the same here as it is abroad.
The "Ramsey model" proposition is more subtle. Any attempt to make people suffer a lower rate of return induces them to save less. Less savings means less investment and the capital stock falls. This keeps going until the before-tax marginal product of capital rises enough to pay the tax and give investors the original rate of return. The long-run after-tax return to investors is always the same. This argument is entirely domestic, and doesn't rely on any international investors. (Many commentaries ignore this, more important, effect and just talk about whether the US is big or how open capital markets are.)
This proposition is behind the now classic result that the optimal capital tax -- the corporate tax and personal income taxes on rates of return -- is zero. (Chamley 1986 and Judd 1985.) It lies behind the modern move to consumption taxation and away from trying to tax wealth and rates of return, including the Obama administration's well-noted efforts to reduce corporate taxes. It's why we have 401(k)s, dividend and capital gains rates lower than ordinary income, capital gains step up at death, and so on. It's why most countries have a VAT and have already reduced their corporate rates.
Here's my best attempt to explain this result, beyond the previous two paragraphs. The most basic equation in macroeconomics is \[ r = \delta + \gamma g \] where \(r\) is the rate of return, \(g\) is the economy's growth rate, \(\gamma\) measures how reluctant people are to rearrange consumption to have less now and more later, and \(\delta\) measures how impatient people are. (This, together with \(r=f'(k)\) are the \(E=mc^2\) of modern macroeconomics.) A higher growth rate \(g\) means people consume less today than they expect consume tomorrow, and people must receive a higher after-tax real return \(r\) to defer consumption. (This equation is the continuous time version of \[ u'(c_t) = \beta R u'(c_{t+1})\] using the standard \(u'(c)=c^{-\gamma}\).)
Now, none of these tax arguments are (yet) about the long-run growth rate of the economy. Reductions in marginal rates raise the level of output, and give a boost of growth along the way, but they do not raise the long run growth rate. (Endogenous growth theory is not part of the argument. Yet.)
So, we have the "Ramsey" theorem: If the long-run growth rate of the economy is unchanged, then the long run rate of return is unchanged.
Larry did not have the (apparently endless) space I have, but it's not clear how he disputes this simple and classic result -- and, by implication, the vast changes in tax policy that it has produced. Larry notes only that "real interest rates vary vastly through space and time," and "generations of economic research show that the savings rate rather than being infinitely sensitive to the interest rate is almost entirely insensitive to the interest rate." Neither point has anything to do with the question at hand. The theorem did not say that interest rates are constant, merely that rate of return will revert after an attempt to tax it, over very long spans of time -- the time needed to reduce the capital stock and raise its marginal product. Similarly, the research Larry refers to is about high frequency correlations between expected consumption growth and interest rates. He is right here -- tests of my above equations in monthly and quarterly data don't work well. That should give big pause to the use of business cycle models, including the models used to evaluate stimulus programs, in which those equations lie front and center. But this is a long run proposition.
In fact, the central proposition works quite well at the medium and longer runs we are talking about. Consumption growth and real rates of return move together across countries and at medium and longer runs in a country. Economic booms and booming economies have higher rates of return. Economic busts and declining economies have lower rates of return. And that variation is why real interest rates "vary through space and time!" The variation proves the equation, rather than deny it. And to leave it at "savings is almost entirely insensitive to the interest rate" really puts the central question of the effects of corporate taxes outside of economics -- and is a tellingly static view of the world.
The central question is this: Seeing that dividends are (this is Larry's assumption) going to be heavily reduced by corporate taxation, do people simply fail to react and pay the same price for the stocks, and thus suffer a lower rate of return? That's what Larry asserts, and when you think about it that way seems pretty dubious. (Investment lines up with stock prices, not with real interest rates.)
The argument is also inconsistent. If people pay the same price and enjoy (tax cut) or suffer (tax increase) lower rates of return, then lowering the capital gains tax will not lead to a big stock price increase! You can't have it both ways.
You also may object that as we do not see variations in stock market values (P/D or P/E) when corporate tax rates change, we also do not see variations in average rates of return lining up with corporate tax changes. Again, I would say this proves the point. That we don't see either price or return changes suggests that dividends do not bear the burden of the tax, but wages and prices do instead.
Monopoly
The latest argument for corporate taxation is that somehow there is now more "monopoly power" in US business, and this justifies a higher corporate tax. Paul Krugman has been advancing this idea most strongly. I'm always suspicious when the questions change but the answer doesn't, but still, let's unpack this argument. It goes together with Larry's point that full expensing of investment alone would offset many of the disincentives to capital formation:
First, a cut in the corporate tax rate from 35 to 20 percent in the presence of expensing of substantial or total investment has very little impact on the incentive to invest. Imagine the case of full expensing. If a company is permitted to deduct all of its investment costs and then is taxed on all of its investment profits, the tax rate has no impact at all on the investment incentive. ...
...Mankiw’s model does not recognize the possibility of monopoly profits or returns to intellectual capital or other ways in which a corporate tax cut benefits shareholders without encouraging investment.Let me try, with some trepidation, to put the argument in equations which will clarify it. We had started this discussion in the last post with a firm problem
\[\max (1-\tau) \left[ F(K,L) - wL \right] - rK \]
Notice by the way how a corporate tax is different from a sales tax. A sales tax only applies to output, so the firm problem is
\[\max (1-\tau) F(K,L) - wL - rK \]
The sales tax distorts the decision to hire labor. The corporate tax does not distort that decision -- we have \(F_L=w\) because the tax applies to both of them.
But what if dividend payments were tax deductible? Then we'd have
\[\max (1-\tau) \left[ F(K,L) - wL - rK \right] \]
and the decision to invest would not be distorted by the corporate tax. Perhaps more clearly, suppose investment is financed by retained income, and investment expenditures are completely deductible. Then the firm's problem is
\[\max (1-\tau) \left[ F(K,L) - wL - K_{t+1}-(1-\delta)K_t \right] \] where \(\delta\) is depreciation. Again if it's inside the brackets, the corporate tax does not distort the decision.
If you've taken an economics course, you quickly spy the problem. If the corporate tax lets firms deduct payments to workers, then lets firms deduct payments to capital, there isn't anything left! \(F(K,L)=F_K K + F_L L = rK + wL\). If economic profits are zero, and we tax economic profits, we don't distort any decisions, but we don't raise any money either.
So suppose now there is a monopoly element, so \(F(K,L) > wL + rK\), revenue exceeds payments to labor and the payments necessary to get physical capital. Now there is, apparently, a profit, a pure rent, that can be taxed without distortion!
That is apparently the golden goose of public finance: some source of pure rent, some completely inelastically supplied factor, that can be taxed and does not distort any decision.
Then, and this is the crucial point, Larry (and Paul and company) are asserting that taxing corporate profits does not discourage investment in whatever is producing corporate profits, so it is non-distorting.
Well, is that true?
Here is where I get a little frustrated at the east coast approach to economic policy making. OK, there is a new idea floating around the right cocktail parties: "monopoly rents" are on the rise. So we must quickly "do something," or in this case offer a new reason for the same old answer, corporate taxes.
Really? If there is pervasive monopoly in the economy, why isn't the right public policy answer to do something about the monopoly? More to the point here, before we start taxing things, it is vital to understand what the source of the "monopoly" profit really is, and be really sure that taxing it will not discourage its production, just like that of physical capital. There is something to the story. Measures of entry and dynamism are indeed way down. Corporate profits and stock prices are high, but investment is not following them. High profits should lead to a desire to expand. But if you don't understand it, you can come quickly to wrong answers.
There are two natural stories for monopoly: 1) Government license. Just about every long-lasting monopoly in history is so because of government restrictions on entry and competition. Think taxicabs before Uber. We just had a huge increase in regulation of about 40% of the economy in Obamacare and Dodd-Frank, posing explicit and implicit barriers to entry. Regulation and compliance costs have increased dramatically in many other parts of the economy as well. But if this is the case, government-created monopoly and then government taxation of its rents hardly seems like the ideal policy mix.
2) Intellectual property. Larry mentions this one. Google is, the story goes, a "monopoly" because it has intellectual property others can't match. Drug companies are "monopolies" because they have patents that allow them to charge high prices for drugs. Here I think Larry's (and, more vocally, Paul's) argument falls apart. Intellectual property is not an exogenous fixed factor, the "land" of the land tax. Intellectual property is produced. If Google or the drug companies have rents to intellectual property, this is precisely the high rate of return that provides incentive for people to produce new intellectual property. And taxing it away kills that incentive. Go right back to Greg's math, and relabel "K" as intellectual property.
In sum, for the monopoly argument to go through, the monopoly rent must accrue to some really fixed factor, or to some economically wasteful investment such as lobbying. If the monopoly rent accrues to intellectual property, or anything else that must be produced, then we're right back where we started and corporate taxes damage economic growth, investment, and wages.
The argument is more pervasive. Corporate as well as personal income taxes affect people's decision to choose careers, to start a company rather than take a steady job as, say, an economics teacher. The subsequent profits may look like "rents," but they are returns to human capital investments, which will go away if taxed to highly.
Suppose there is, however, some permanent monopoly power, and it accrues to some fixed factor that current companies have, and will have forever. Never mind how Google unseated the "monopoly" of AOL, Yahoo, and Netscape. Even so, how monopoly power changes optimal taxes is not (to me, at least) obvious.
The question is not about individual firm's monopoly power. The question is monopoly power in the whole corporate sector. This is the opposite side of the usual fallacy of composition in taxation. Usually, a firm may scream, "we can't pay taxes, since if we raise our prices we'll lose all our business." The firm ignores the fact that everyone else has to pay the tax too, so everyone else has to raise their prices. The firm demand curve is irrelevant; the industry demand curve is irrelevant; what matters is the demand curve of the whole corporate sector. Individual monopoly power is not at all obviously relevant to that question.
My first instinct was in fact the opposite. He or she bears the tax who cannot get out of the way. Hence, if firms have monopoly power over prices and wages, they have more power to raise prices and wages to pay taxes. This turns out not to be right, or at least up to the entry and exit margin which I haven't examined. (If you make companies pay so much taxes that they go out of business, you get fewer companies.)
The reason is that in the presence of monopoly power, firms have already raised prices and lowered wages, and adding a corporate tax does not change their incentive. Here is where much of Krugman's writing on monopoly goes wrong, in my opinion. The fact that there is more money there does not mean that when you raise taxes you get the money. Tax theory has to be about which decisions are changed by the tax. You can sense in the "monopoly" writing almost a feeling that "tax the corporations" might make sense, in part to address righteous indignation at monopoly. But it still just ain't so.
Perhaps blog readers are aware of a treatment of corporate taxes in the presence of monopoly and monopsony power of similar clarity to Greg Mankiw's example covered in the last post. It might start with Dixit-Stieglitz monopolistically competitive producers, also hiring in differentiated labor markets giving some monopsony power, and get all the general equilibrium parts right.
The inefficiency of the corporate tax as redistribution
So, in the last chain of "suppose I'm wrong about all that," let's suppose Larry is right -- corporate taxes do come out out of stockholders' pockets, and wage growth following a corporate tax cut would be small.
Look at the argument. It is entirely income-based redistribution. Larry, the preeminent public finance economist of his generation, does not make arguments about economic efficiency, tax efficiency, growth of the pie overall, the insane crony-capitalist rot by which the effective corporate tax rate is half its stated rate, or any of the other things economists normally think about when evaluating a tax. His bottom line is that a corporate tax cut will raise wages, but not enough, and it will raise stock prices, but too much, and the increase in the size of the pie is not worth letting the stockholders get more than he wants them to.
OK, but even so, the corporate tax is an insanely inefficient way to redistribute income.
Yes, direct stockholders are more wealthy than the average person. But do not forget that most stock is now held by institutions -- pension funds, including those of state and local government employees that are about to sink Illinois and California, nonprofit endowments, 401(k) plans, and so on.
Another interesting fact about rich people is that they don't spend stock market gains. (I'm pretty sure Larry would endorse this fact, for example, when disliking stimulus efforts that operate through higher stock prices.) So consumption inequality does not rise. "Paper" wealth rises, until the next stock market crash. Is this really so terrible?
Moreover, why must every single element of the tax code be evaluated on its own for its impact on redistribution across income categories? Why must every single change in the tax code always increase income-based redistribution, and be evaluated only on that basis?
Why is it out of consideration to eliminate the highly distorting corporate tax and make up the redistribution with a more progressive personal income tax, or with elimination of the state and local deduction, mortgage interest deduction, health care deduction, and charitable deduction, which only benefit people in the highest tax brackets. (Those deductions really are "tax cuts for the rich!")?
And does the government not spend money? And is not the vast majority of that money spent on redistribution (social security, medicare, medicaid, pensions, etc.?)
Economists have a few basic insights to contribute to public policy. 1) Don't tax wine more than beer in an attempt to redistribute income. Do redistribution efficiently through a progressive income or better consumption tax. 2) Evaluate things like redistribution comprehensively, not on a case by case basis. You can do a lot better if you are allowed to trade off a little less redistribution in a grossly inefficient tax for a little more redistribution in a less inefficient tax or in a spending program.
Yes, Democratic politicians have decided that their best talking point is to echo "tax cuts for the rich" no matter what the Administration and congressional republicans propose, and to attack elements they don't like (corporate tax cuts) on that basis, while conveniently ignoring regressive elements they do like, such as the deductions for state and local taxes. But does simply echoing that political talking point with equations really help us all to the goal of a better economy?
(To be fair, Larry also complained that the reduction in rates does not come with enough base broadening, so it increases the deficit -- -meaning future taxes, or unspecified spending cuts. This is a valid argument, which I will take up in the next post.)
The CEA has just issued a white paper, "The growth effects of tax reform and implications for wages" I can't wait to hear the analysis. Let me guess.. "tax cuts for the rich?" No, surely that would be too predictable.
Update:
Pietro Peretto reminds me there is an active literature on optimal taxation in endogenous-growth economies, including his Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy , Schumpeterian Growth with Productive Public Spending and Distortionary Taxation, The Growth and Welfare Effects of Deficit-Financed Dividend Tax Cuts and Implications of Tax Policy for Innovation and Aggregate Productivity Growth. Nir Javinovich and Sergio Rebelo have a nice recent "Nonlinear effects of taxation on growth,'' in the JPE, Nancy Stokey and Sergio have "Growth effects of flat-rate taxes" also in the JPE, and I have inside information that Chad Jones is working on it too. So, there is no lack of academic literature on the question just which kinds of taxes reduce growth, which of course leads to huge distortions. On the other hand, given the utter distaste of people in this policy discussion to talk about incentives and growth rather than redistribution at all, the lessons of this literature will likely have to wait for the next tax reform. Let us hope it's not another 31 years.
If you've taken an economics course, you quickly spy the problem. If the corporate tax lets firms deduct payments to workers, then lets firms deduct payments to capital, there isn't anything left! \(F(K,L)=F_K K + F_L L = rK + wL\). If economic profits are zero, and we tax economic profits, we don't distort any decisions, but we don't raise any money either.
So suppose now there is a monopoly element, so \(F(K,L) > wL + rK\), revenue exceeds payments to labor and the payments necessary to get physical capital. Now there is, apparently, a profit, a pure rent, that can be taxed without distortion!
That is apparently the golden goose of public finance: some source of pure rent, some completely inelastically supplied factor, that can be taxed and does not distort any decision.
Then, and this is the crucial point, Larry (and Paul and company) are asserting that taxing corporate profits does not discourage investment in whatever is producing corporate profits, so it is non-distorting.
Well, is that true?
Here is where I get a little frustrated at the east coast approach to economic policy making. OK, there is a new idea floating around the right cocktail parties: "monopoly rents" are on the rise. So we must quickly "do something," or in this case offer a new reason for the same old answer, corporate taxes.
Really? If there is pervasive monopoly in the economy, why isn't the right public policy answer to do something about the monopoly? More to the point here, before we start taxing things, it is vital to understand what the source of the "monopoly" profit really is, and be really sure that taxing it will not discourage its production, just like that of physical capital. There is something to the story. Measures of entry and dynamism are indeed way down. Corporate profits and stock prices are high, but investment is not following them. High profits should lead to a desire to expand. But if you don't understand it, you can come quickly to wrong answers.
There are two natural stories for monopoly: 1) Government license. Just about every long-lasting monopoly in history is so because of government restrictions on entry and competition. Think taxicabs before Uber. We just had a huge increase in regulation of about 40% of the economy in Obamacare and Dodd-Frank, posing explicit and implicit barriers to entry. Regulation and compliance costs have increased dramatically in many other parts of the economy as well. But if this is the case, government-created monopoly and then government taxation of its rents hardly seems like the ideal policy mix.
2) Intellectual property. Larry mentions this one. Google is, the story goes, a "monopoly" because it has intellectual property others can't match. Drug companies are "monopolies" because they have patents that allow them to charge high prices for drugs. Here I think Larry's (and, more vocally, Paul's) argument falls apart. Intellectual property is not an exogenous fixed factor, the "land" of the land tax. Intellectual property is produced. If Google or the drug companies have rents to intellectual property, this is precisely the high rate of return that provides incentive for people to produce new intellectual property. And taxing it away kills that incentive. Go right back to Greg's math, and relabel "K" as intellectual property.
In sum, for the monopoly argument to go through, the monopoly rent must accrue to some really fixed factor, or to some economically wasteful investment such as lobbying. If the monopoly rent accrues to intellectual property, or anything else that must be produced, then we're right back where we started and corporate taxes damage economic growth, investment, and wages.
The argument is more pervasive. Corporate as well as personal income taxes affect people's decision to choose careers, to start a company rather than take a steady job as, say, an economics teacher. The subsequent profits may look like "rents," but they are returns to human capital investments, which will go away if taxed to highly.
Suppose there is, however, some permanent monopoly power, and it accrues to some fixed factor that current companies have, and will have forever. Never mind how Google unseated the "monopoly" of AOL, Yahoo, and Netscape. Even so, how monopoly power changes optimal taxes is not (to me, at least) obvious.
The question is not about individual firm's monopoly power. The question is monopoly power in the whole corporate sector. This is the opposite side of the usual fallacy of composition in taxation. Usually, a firm may scream, "we can't pay taxes, since if we raise our prices we'll lose all our business." The firm ignores the fact that everyone else has to pay the tax too, so everyone else has to raise their prices. The firm demand curve is irrelevant; the industry demand curve is irrelevant; what matters is the demand curve of the whole corporate sector. Individual monopoly power is not at all obviously relevant to that question.
My first instinct was in fact the opposite. He or she bears the tax who cannot get out of the way. Hence, if firms have monopoly power over prices and wages, they have more power to raise prices and wages to pay taxes. This turns out not to be right, or at least up to the entry and exit margin which I haven't examined. (If you make companies pay so much taxes that they go out of business, you get fewer companies.)
The reason is that in the presence of monopoly power, firms have already raised prices and lowered wages, and adding a corporate tax does not change their incentive. Here is where much of Krugman's writing on monopoly goes wrong, in my opinion. The fact that there is more money there does not mean that when you raise taxes you get the money. Tax theory has to be about which decisions are changed by the tax. You can sense in the "monopoly" writing almost a feeling that "tax the corporations" might make sense, in part to address righteous indignation at monopoly. But it still just ain't so.
Perhaps blog readers are aware of a treatment of corporate taxes in the presence of monopoly and monopsony power of similar clarity to Greg Mankiw's example covered in the last post. It might start with Dixit-Stieglitz monopolistically competitive producers, also hiring in differentiated labor markets giving some monopsony power, and get all the general equilibrium parts right.
The inefficiency of the corporate tax as redistribution
So, in the last chain of "suppose I'm wrong about all that," let's suppose Larry is right -- corporate taxes do come out out of stockholders' pockets, and wage growth following a corporate tax cut would be small.
Look at the argument. It is entirely income-based redistribution. Larry, the preeminent public finance economist of his generation, does not make arguments about economic efficiency, tax efficiency, growth of the pie overall, the insane crony-capitalist rot by which the effective corporate tax rate is half its stated rate, or any of the other things economists normally think about when evaluating a tax. His bottom line is that a corporate tax cut will raise wages, but not enough, and it will raise stock prices, but too much, and the increase in the size of the pie is not worth letting the stockholders get more than he wants them to.
OK, but even so, the corporate tax is an insanely inefficient way to redistribute income.
Yes, direct stockholders are more wealthy than the average person. But do not forget that most stock is now held by institutions -- pension funds, including those of state and local government employees that are about to sink Illinois and California, nonprofit endowments, 401(k) plans, and so on.
Another interesting fact about rich people is that they don't spend stock market gains. (I'm pretty sure Larry would endorse this fact, for example, when disliking stimulus efforts that operate through higher stock prices.) So consumption inequality does not rise. "Paper" wealth rises, until the next stock market crash. Is this really so terrible?
Moreover, why must every single element of the tax code be evaluated on its own for its impact on redistribution across income categories? Why must every single change in the tax code always increase income-based redistribution, and be evaluated only on that basis?
Why is it out of consideration to eliminate the highly distorting corporate tax and make up the redistribution with a more progressive personal income tax, or with elimination of the state and local deduction, mortgage interest deduction, health care deduction, and charitable deduction, which only benefit people in the highest tax brackets. (Those deductions really are "tax cuts for the rich!")?
And does the government not spend money? And is not the vast majority of that money spent on redistribution (social security, medicare, medicaid, pensions, etc.?)
Economists have a few basic insights to contribute to public policy. 1) Don't tax wine more than beer in an attempt to redistribute income. Do redistribution efficiently through a progressive income or better consumption tax. 2) Evaluate things like redistribution comprehensively, not on a case by case basis. You can do a lot better if you are allowed to trade off a little less redistribution in a grossly inefficient tax for a little more redistribution in a less inefficient tax or in a spending program.
Yes, Democratic politicians have decided that their best talking point is to echo "tax cuts for the rich" no matter what the Administration and congressional republicans propose, and to attack elements they don't like (corporate tax cuts) on that basis, while conveniently ignoring regressive elements they do like, such as the deductions for state and local taxes. But does simply echoing that political talking point with equations really help us all to the goal of a better economy?
(To be fair, Larry also complained that the reduction in rates does not come with enough base broadening, so it increases the deficit -- -meaning future taxes, or unspecified spending cuts. This is a valid argument, which I will take up in the next post.)
News Flash:
The CEA has just issued a white paper, "The growth effects of tax reform and implications for wages" I can't wait to hear the analysis. Let me guess.. "tax cuts for the rich?" No, surely that would be too predictable.
Update:
Pietro Peretto reminds me there is an active literature on optimal taxation in endogenous-growth economies, including his Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy , Schumpeterian Growth with Productive Public Spending and Distortionary Taxation, The Growth and Welfare Effects of Deficit-Financed Dividend Tax Cuts and Implications of Tax Policy for Innovation and Aggregate Productivity Growth. Nir Javinovich and Sergio Rebelo have a nice recent "Nonlinear effects of taxation on growth,'' in the JPE, Nancy Stokey and Sergio have "Growth effects of flat-rate taxes" also in the JPE, and I have inside information that Chad Jones is working on it too. So, there is no lack of academic literature on the question just which kinds of taxes reduce growth, which of course leads to huge distortions. On the other hand, given the utter distaste of people in this policy discussion to talk about incentives and growth rather than redistribution at all, the lessons of this literature will likely have to wait for the next tax reform. Let us hope it's not another 31 years.
0 comments