The Laffer Curve Is Even Better Than We Thought

‘Last Train Leaving the Station’: GOP Push for Narrow Border Bill Sparks Backlash Over Missing Pieces

SCOOP: White House Strong-Arms 2 More States on AI

What Lawmakers Say About Virologist Calling Out Fauci, NIH on COVID-19

EXCLUSIVE: Randy Fine Joins House Freedom Caucus

EXCLUSIVE: ICE Announces Arrests of Several Violent Criminals and Sex Offenders

Obama Judge Halts Trump Effort to End Parole for Hundreds of Thousands

House Passes Legislation to Combat Mexican Government’s Seizure of American-Owned Port

How China Dominates the World’s Critical Minerals Production

Reclaiming the Lunar High Ground

The Space Race Is Back: NASA Prepares for Liftoff of Deep Space Exploration Crew

China’s Military Went Silent Around Taiwan for First Time in Years. Why?

Louisiana Senate Primary Tests Power of Trump Endorsement

As House Returns Next Week, Giant Tasks Loom

EXCLUSIVE: Freedom Caucus Takes Strong Stand on Amnesty

As Trump Seeks Iran Deal, Congress Wants Say on Foreign Policy

Spanberger Is ‘Taking Credit’ for Youngkin’s Economic Deals

Trump’s Election Integrity Order Faces Wave of Lawsuits Before Dem-Appointed Judges

Democrats Sue to Stop Trump’s Latest Election Integrity Effort

Trump Mail-In Ballot Order Sets Up Battle With States

Trump Bullish on Iran Deal, but Uncertainty Remains

Where Do Dem Presidential Favorites Stand on Israel?

 PoliticsSecurityNews

Trump Claims Gold Star Families Told Him to ‘Finish the Job’ in Iran

Citing ‘Echo Chamber’ on Iran, Trump Counterterrorism Chief Resigns

Conservative and Proud: Is the Right Representing Women? 

Girl Boss vs. Trad Wife: Forced to Choose?

Beyond the Oyster Fork: An Etiquette Expert’s Tips for ‘Relationships, Work, and Life’

Is the Iran Operation ‘America First’?

Victor Davis Hanson: Why Trump Grew Frustrated With Pam Bondi

International Commentary

‘We’ll Be Your Canada’: Brutal Reality Check for NATO Free Riders

If Donald Trump Did What Obama Did, Media Would Cheer—So Why the Outrage Now?

Victor Davis Hanson: Trump Could Crush Iran, So Why Doesn’t He?

The Laffer Curve Is Even Better Than We Thought

President Donald Trump and Arthur Laffer in the District of Columbia on June 19, 2019. (JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)

Bruce Bialosky is a former presidential appointee, a practicing CPA with a specialty on tax law and founder of the Republican Jewish Coalition of California.

The field of economics fully developed scientifically in the 20th century. The names John Maynard Keynes, Milton Friedman, and Friedrich Hayek come to mind. However, one additional man became the one most referenced in the last part of the 20th century and continues as such today. That man is Arthur Laffer. The Joint Committee on Taxation of the U.S. Congress recently released a report telling us Laffer is even more accurate than previously thought.

Laffer became famous upon his recognition as adviser to President Ronald Reagan before and after the 1980 election. Laffer has a top-notch pedigree, including degrees from Yale and a Ph.D. in economics from Stanford. He then spent time at the University of Chicago. He was a colleague of Friedman, among others, while at Chicago.

Most people associate Laffer with Reagan, but he became notable in 1974 when presenting his thoughts to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as part of the Ford administration. It was then that he drew his famous thought on a napkin to illustrate his beliefs about government’s raising tax rates.

The bell curve drawing was named the “Laffer curve” by Jude Wanniski, who was sitting in on the meeting. The legend was thus born, and the Laffer curve has become one of the most discussed economic ideas related to government levels of taxation. Ronald Reagan used it as his basis for the Reagan tax cuts in 1981 and 1986.

The simple idea of the proposal is that higher tax rates are ineffective in creating revenue. Lowering marginal tax rates increases government revenues. If tax rates are raised, revenues will decrease.

I have had vivid debates with people on the left about this economic concept. They instinctively think the idea is counterintuitive. As is often the case, these folks have ideas of how government works in theory, but when reality is different they choose to ignore reality. I encourage them to look at the four major periods where rates were cut during the Kennedy, Reagan, Bush, and Trump administrations.

Review the records of federal government revenues after the tax rates are adjusted down, and anyone can see that revenues escalate significantly during all four periods. The political left wants to spend oodles on government programs that largely waste money. If reduced tax rates produced more revenue, they should get behind the idea. Empirical evidence does count for something.

If a policy produces more tax revenue, can someone characterize it as a “tax cut”? It is a rate adjustment, not a tax cut.

A recent study from the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, authored by Rachel Moore, Brandon Pecoraro, and David Splinter, examined previous studies of the Laffer curve. It found that Laffer’s theory was even better than was previously suggested by those studies. Many previous studies used tax bases either too broad or too narrow, and the new study draws attention to those flaws.

“Prior studies, however, largely overlook the Laffer curve’s shape, rely on simplified tax functions, and often omit shifting across business types and tax interactions,” the authors write. “We show that modeling distinct tax bases more accurately and incorporating these interactions lowers the revenue-maximizing top tax rate and the associated revenue gains, yielding ‘flat’ Laffer curves.”

When I asked Laffer about the new paper, he stated, “This paper is a huge step in the right direction, and the research is very impressive. But, in the long-term context of settling the academic debate, there is much further to go.”

“It’s long been true that the U.S. government could collect all of the revenue it currently collects with two flat rate taxes of approximately 12% each: one on unadjusted gross personal income and the other on value added at the corporate level—no deductions, no credits,” he continued. “Any tax rates beyond this level are, based on research, in the prohibitive range of the so-called Laffer curve.” 

“When looking at the world, incentive rates should always be used when deriving behavioral issues, not tax rates per se. The question always to ask is: Where is the tradeoff between giving money to people who don’t work and cutting tax rates on people who do work?”

Simply put, the prior studies of the Laffer curve used imprecise tax assumptions. Using more accurate current tax information produces even surer results that benefits decrease when income tax rates are raised. Increased tax rates are less beneficial for creation of tax revenues than previously thought.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.

We Want an Independent Fed, Not One With Trump Derangement Syndrome or Foreign Influence

Trump’s Debt Diet Is Working

‘Historic Relief for Americans’: Trump to Showcase Economy in State of the Union Address

Read the first chapter of The Woketopus right now for FREE

Today, even with President Trump’s victory, leftist elites have their tentacles in every aspect of our government.

The Daily Signal’s own Tyler O’Neil exposes this leftist cabal in his new book, The Woketopus: The Dark Money Cabal Manipulating the Federal Government.

In this book, O’Neil reveals how the Left’s NGO apparatus pursues its woke agenda, maneuvering like an octopus by circumventing Congress and entrenching its interests in the federal government.

You can read the first chapter of this new book for FREE in this eBook, The Woketopus: Chapter One using the secure link below.

The Tony Kinnett Cast

The Daily Signal Podcast

© 2025 The Daily Signal Media Group, Inc. All rights reserved.

We use cookies on our website. By using our website, you consent to cookies.  Learn More .  

© The Daily Signal