阿瑟·拉弗
出自 MBA智库百科(https://wiki.mbalib.com/)
| 本条目包含过多不是中文的内容，欢迎协助翻译。 若已有相当内容译为中文，可迳自去除本模板。 |
目录 |
阿瑟·拉弗生于1941年，美国南加利福尼亚大学商学研究院教授，在尼克松政府时期曾担任行政管理和预算局的经济学家。也许冥冥之中有一种说不清道不明的因素在起作用，当拉弗还是斯坦福大学研究生时，就预言里根会在加利福尼亚州州长竞选中获胜，他的同学对此颇为怀疑，但事实证明拉弗是对的。经过拉弗的努力，拉弗成为里根的“莫逆好友”，这对日后供给学派理论成为“里根经济学”的核心部分也许起到了一定的作用。里根政府时期，他是总统经济政策顾问委员会成员。拉弗之所以引人注目，最主要的还是他所提出的描述税收与税率之间关系的曲线——“拉弗曲线”，尽管这一曲线最初是画在华盛顿饭店餐巾纸上的，但由于其对税收政策影响经济的解释更形象、更形式化，从而确立了“拉弗曲线”作为供给学派思想精髓的地位。
1974年的一天，经济学家阿瑟·拉弗和一些著名记者及政治家坐在华盛顿的一家餐馆里。他拿来一张餐巾并在上面画了一幅类似倾斜的抛物线的图，向在座的人说明税率与税收收入的关系：税率高到一定程度，总税收收入不仅不增长，反而开始下降。这便是著名的拉弗曲线。拉弗曲线问世二十多年来，并没有多少国家的实践证明拉弗的这一假设，但经济学家们大都相信：税收会造成社会总经济福利的减少，过高的税率带给政府的很可能不是税收增加的美好前景。美国经济学家曼昆把税收造成的总福利的减少称为税收的“无谓损失”。
拉弗曲线说明的是这样一个问题：总是存在产生同样收益的两种税率，所以减税未必使政府税收收益减少，于是可以通过减税增加供给又不用担心会减少政府收入。如果税率为零，意味着人们可以获得生产的全部成果，政府的收益自然就为零。这样，政府对生产没有妨碍作用，生产即可达到最大化。但是，由于税率为零，政府的收益也为零，政府就不可能存在。如果税率为100%，政府的收益仍为零，这是因为由于人们的所有劳动成果都被政府征税，他们就不愿意再工作了。生产中断，自然没有什么可供100%的税，因此，政府的收益就等于零。税率从0—100%，税收总额从零回归至零。在一定的税率之下，政府的税收是随税率增加而增加的，而一旦税率再增加而越过转折点，政府的税收将随税率进一步增加而减少。换句话说，总是存在产生同样收益的两种税率，所以减税未必使政府税收收益减少，于是可以通过减税增加供给又不用担心会减少政府收入。
14, 1940, Youngstown, Ohio, U.S.
in full Arthur Betz Laffer American economist who propounded the idea that lowering tax rates could result in higher revenues. His theory on taxes influenced U.S. economic policy in the 1980s.
Laffer studied economics at Yale University (B.A., 1963) and international economics at Stanford University (M.B.A., 1965; Ph.D., 1972). As chief economist for the Office of Management and Budget (1970–72), Laffer attracted attention for his supply-side economic theories, which held that reductions in federal taxes on businesses and individuals would lead to increased economic growth and in the long run to increased government revenue.
Laffer drew the famous Laffer curve, which showed that starting from a zero tax rate, increases in tax rates will increase the government's tax revenue; at some point, however, when the rates become high enough, further increases in tax rates will decrease revenue. This occurs because higher tax rates become strong disincentives against earning (and/or declaring) taxable income. Cuts in marginal tax rates could therefore increase tax revenues. Laffer's point was already well known to economists in public finance, but they treated it as an intellectual curiosity. In the late 1970s, Laffer was the first economist to emphasize its possible application to the U.S. income tax system.
The real controversy concerned where the American economy in the 1980s should be located on the Laffer curve. Laffer believed that conditions were right for cuts in tax rates that he predicted would increase tax revenues. He turned out to be wrong about the U.S. economy as a whole but right about a small group of Americans earning more than $200,000 a year and paying, at the time he wrote, a top marginal tax rate of between 50 and 70 percent. Whereas economists before Laffer had ignored the effect of high tax rates on the incentive to earn taxable income, Laffer's emphasis, and the evidence subsequently gathered by others, caused the economists to treat the incentive effect of taxes more seriously than they had. President Ronald Reagan was thought to have based his 1981 economic plan on the idea that cuts in marginal tax rates would increase tax revenues. Reagan's economists projected a large revenue loss from his tax cuts, but they too were wrong: the actual revenue loss was less than had been projected, largely because the cuts in tax rates gave individuals an incentive to earn more taxable income.
Laffer worked as a political consultant while teaching at the University of Chicago (1974–76), the University of Southern California (1976–84), and Pepperdine University (1984–87). He also served as a consultant to the U.S. Treasury and Defense departments (1972–77) and as an economic policy adviser to President Reagan. In 1986 in California Laffer made an unsuccessful attempt for a seat in the U.S. Senate. Laffer is the founder and chairman of Laffer Associates, a San Diego-based economics consulting firm.
