A Capital Connection: Deemed Dividend Reinvestment Plans

by | Jan 18, 2003 | POLITICS

I haven’t been much of a fan of the proposal to eliminate taxes on dividend income. But a new wrinkle in the Bush administration’s tax plan is making a believer out of me. What our growth-challenged economy needs most right now is a cut in capital-gains taxes, to spur new investment and new risk-taking — […]

I haven’t been much of a fan of the proposal to eliminate taxes on dividend income. But a new wrinkle in the Bush administration’s tax plan is making a believer out of me. What our growth-challenged economy needs most right now is a cut in capital-gains taxes, to spur new investment and new risk-taking — and this new wrinkle is a clever way of transforming dividend tax relief into just that.

As described in internal policy documents circulating the White House and Treasury Department, the Bush tax plan will include a provision for “deemed dividend reinvestment plans,” or DDRIPs. The name is a little confusing — the provision would not create a new kind of shareholder account or stock purchase plan. Rather, a DDRIP would be a notional “account” — an accounting category on the books of a public company — to record the value of retained earnings that have been subject to corporate income taxes. When a shareholder sells stock, any per-share growth in the company’s DDRIP account would be deemed dividend — and dividends would now be tax-free — thus reducing the amount of capital gains subject to taxation.

Suppose you buy a stock at $100. Over the next year, the company makes $2 per share in earnings, after paying corporate taxes. At the end of the year, you sell the stock at $110. Instead of paying capital-gains taxes on your whole $10 gain, you get to exclude the $2 in earnings — just as though it had been paid out in the form of a dividend. You only pay capital-gains taxes on $8 instead of $10 — effectively, it’s a 20% reduction in capital-gains taxes.

In terms of its effect on economic growth, the capital-gains tax is the cruelest tax of all. It is a direct penalty on capital — and capital, in the end, is the one and only source of real economic growth. Tax capital, and you get less growth.

Dividend tax relief in isolation would have done little to remove this penalty on capital. But now it looks like we have a capital-gains tax cut on the table.

There are many details that remain to be worked out, including deciding whether to start DDRIP accounts at zero, or to grandfather in some number of years of past-taxed retained earnings. It is also not clear how the tax advantage of DDRIPs would accrue to a shareholder who realizes a capital loss, or for whom the change in basis due to DDRIPs converts what otherwise would have been a capital gain into an effective capital loss. And most important, it isn’t law yet.

One surprise that may help it become law is the fact that, for many years at least, the DDRIPs provision may be a revenue gainer for the U.S. Treasury compared with dividend tax elimination in isolation. According to a Treasury official I spoke to, the DDRIPs provision can be expected to defer dividend tax elimination to whatever time in the future a stockholder decides to sell his stock. Without DDRIPs, companies might be moved to pay out retained earnings as dividends immediately — thus accelerating any tax revenue losses to the Treasury from dividend tax elimination.

But all that said, if these proposals do become law, we could be looking at the most exciting pro-growth tax policy since the Reagan years. And after three miserable years of the worst bear market in a generation, and after 15 years of wandering in the tax-policy wilderness, it may just be morning in America again.

Don Luskin is Chief Investment Officer for Trend Macrolytics, an economics research and consulting service providing exclusive market-focused, real-time analysis to the institutional investment community. You can visit the weblog of his forthcoming book ‘The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid’ at www.poorandstupid.com. He is also a contributing writer to SmartMoney.com.

The views expressed represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors & publishers of Capitalism Magazine.

Capitalism Magazine often publishes articles we disagree with because we believe the article provides information, or a contrasting point of view, that may be of value to our readers.

Related articles

Small Reforms to Improve the US Medical System

Small Reforms to Improve the US Medical System

None of these eight reforms rub hard on ideological wounds. They can all be pursued without touching existing entitlement systems and legacy welfare provision. They would amount to the first major steps toward creating parallel systems of experimentation, all within the framework of the existing system. It seems like they should earn bipartisan support. 

Congress Must Cut and Reform Medicaid

Congress Must Cut and Reform Medicaid

Because of Medicaid’s matching grant system, states have no incentive to cut wasteful or fraudulent Medicaid outlays and every incentive to increase both.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pin It on Pinterest