[Analytical Perspectives]
[Federal Receipts and Collections]
[3. Federal Receipts]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[[Page 45]]

                                     

                                     

========================================================================

                    FEDERAL RECEIPTS AND COLLECTIONS

========================================================================

   

[[Page 47]]

 
                          3.  FEDERAL RECEIPTS

  Receipts (budget and off-budget) are taxes and other collections from 
the public that result from the exercise of the Federal Government's 
sovereign or governmental powers. The difference between receipts and 
outlays determines the surplus or deficit.
  The Federal Government also collects income from the public from 
market-oriented activities. Collections from these activities, which are 
subtracted from gross outlays, rather than added to taxes and other 
governmental receipts, are discussed in the following chapter.

  Growth in receipts.--Total receipts in 2001 are estimated to be 
$2,019.0 billion, an increase of $62.8 billion or 3.2 percent relative 
to 2000. This increase is largely due to assumed increases in incomes 
resulting from both real economic growth and inflation. Receipts are 
projected to grow at an average annual rate of 3.8 percent between 2001 
and 2005, rising to $2,340.9 billion.
  As a share of GDP, receipts are projected to decline from 20.4 percent 
in 2000 to 19.4 percent in 2005.

                                     

                                                         Table 3-1.  RECEIPTS BY SOURCE--SUMMARY
                                                                (In billions of dollars)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Estimate
                        Source                           1999 actual -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          2000          2001          2002          2003          2004          2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individual income taxes...............................      879.5         951.6         972.4         995.2       1,025.6       1,066.1       1,116.8
Corporation income taxes..............................      184.7         192.4         194.8         195.4         195.7         200.0         205.9
Social insurance and retirement receipts..............      611.8         650.0         682.1         712.2         741.7         771.3         815.3
  (On-budget).........................................     (167.4)       (173.3)       (182.2)       (189.9)       (197.4)       (204.7)       (216.7)
  (Off-budget)........................................     (444.5)       (476.8)       (499.9)       (522.2)       (544.2)       (566.7)       (598.6)
Excise taxes..........................................       70.4          68.4          76.7          79.8          80.8          81.8          83.4
Estate and gift taxes.................................       27.8          30.5          32.3          34.9          36.3          38.7          37.0
Customs duties........................................       18.3          20.9          20.9          22.6          24.3          25.7          27.9
Miscellaneous receipts................................       34.9          42.5          39.9          41.2          43.2          52.6          54.5
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total receipts....................................    1,827.5       1,956.3       2,019.0       2,081.2       2,147.5       2,236.1       2,340.9
      (On-budget).....................................   (1,383.0)     (1,479.5)     (1,519.1)     (1,559.0)     (1,603.2)     (1,669.4)     (1,742.3)
      (Off-budget)....................................     (444.5)       (476.8)       (499.9)       (522.2)       (544.2)       (566.7)       (598.6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                     

             Table 3-2.  EFFECT ON RECEIPTS OF CHANGES IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY TAXABLE EARNINGS BASE
                                            (In billions of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Estimate
                                                          ------------------------------------------------------
                                                              2001       2002       2003       2004       2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social security (OASDI) taxable earnings base increases:.
  $76,200 to $80,100 on Jan. 1, 2001.....................        1.8        4.8        5.2        5.7        6.3
  $80,100 to $83,700 on Jan. 1, 2002.....................  .........        1.6        4.3        4.7        5.2
  $83,700 to $87,300 on Jan. 1, 2003.....................  .........  .........        1.6        4.3        4.7
  $87,300 to $90,600 on Jan. 1, 2004.....................  .........  .........  .........        1.5        4.0
  $90,600 to $93,900 on Jan. 1, 2005.....................  .........  .........  .........  .........        1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 48]]

                           ENACTED LEGISLATION

  Several laws were enacted in 1999 that have an effect on governmental 
receipts. The major legislative changes affecting receipts are described 
below.

  To Extend the Tax Benefits Available With Respect to Services 
Performed in a Combat Zone to Services Performed in the Federal Republic 
of Yugoslavia (Serbia/Montenegro) and Certain Other Areas, and for Other 
Purposes.--This Act, which was signed by President Clinton on April 19, 
1999, provides the same tax relief to military personnel participating 
in Operation Allied Force as that provided as a consequence of the 
Executive Order that designates the Kosovo area of operations as a 
combat zone. In addition, this Act extends the tax filing and payment 
deadlines provided as a consequence of the Executive Order to military 
personnel outside the United States who are deployed outside their duty 
station as part of Operation Allied Force.
  Under the Executive Order, which was issued by President Clinton on 
April 13, 1999, the Kosovo area of operations, including the above 
airspace, encompasses The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia/
Montenegro), Albania, the Adriatic Sea, and the Ionian Sea above the 
39th parallel. The tax benefits provided military personnel serving in 
those areas include extension of deadlines for filing and paying taxes; 
exemption of military pay earned while serving in the combat zone 
(subject to a dollar limit for commissioned officers) from withholding 
and income tax; and, exemption of toll telephone calls originating in 
the combat zone from the telephone excise tax.

  Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 1999--This Act 
makes miscellaneous technical and clerical corrections to U.S. trade 
laws, corrects obsolete references, and authorizes the temporary 
suspension or refund of tariffs on over 120 categories of imported 
items. These items include 13 inch televisions, chemicals (some of which 
are used to develop cancer and AIDS-fighting drugs), textile printing 
machines, weaving machines, manufacturing equipment, certain rocket 
engines, and a number of pigments and dyes. The Act also extends tariff 
credits for wages paid in the production of watches in the Virgin 
Islands to the production of fine jewelry. The receipt losses associated 
with the tariff refunds and suspensions are offset by a provision that 
clarifies the tax treatment of certain corporate restructuring 
transactions, which is described below.
   Restrict basis creation through section 357(c).--A transferor 
generally is required to recognize gain on a transfer of property in 
certain tax-free exchanges to the extent that the sum of the liabilities 
assumed, plus those to which the transferred property is subject, 
exceeds the transferor's basis in the property. This gain recognition to 
the transferor generally increases the basis of the transferred property 
in the hands of the transferee. However, if a recourse liability is 
secured by multiple assets, prior law was unclear as to whether a 
transfer of one asset, where the transferor remains liable, is a 
transfer of property ``subject to'' the liability. Similar issues exist 
with respect to nonrecourse liabilities. Under this provision, the 
distinction between the assumption of a liability and the acquisition of 
an asset subject to a liability generally is eliminated. Except as 
provided in regulations, a recourse liability is treated as assumed to 
the extent that the transferee has agreed and is expected to satisfy the 
liability (whether or not the transferor has been relieved of the 
liability). Except as provided in regulations, a nonrecourse liability 
is treated as assumed by the transferee of any asset subject to the 
liability. However, the amount of nonrecourse liability treated as 
assumed is reduced by the amount of the liability that an owner of other 
assets not transferred to the transferee and also subject to the 
liability has agreed with the transferee to satisfy, and is expected to 
satisfy, up to the fair market value of such other assets. The 
transferor's recognition of gain as a result of assumption of liability 
shall not increase the transferee's basis in the transferred asset to an 
amount in excess of its fair market value. Moreover, if no person is 
subject to U.S. tax on gain recognized as the result of the assumption 
of a nonrecourse liability, then the transferee's basis in the 
transferred assets is increased only to the extent such basis would be 
increased if the transferee had assumed only a ratable portion of the 
liability, based on the relative fair market value of all assets subject 
to such nonrecourse liability. The Treasury Department has authority to 
prescribe regulations necessary to carry out the purposes of the 
provision, and to apply the treatment set forth in this provision where 
appropriate elsewhere in the Internal Revenue Code. This provision 
applies to transfers made after October 18, 1998.

  Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2000.--This Act, which was 
signed by President Clinton on November 30, 1999, makes progress on 
several important fronts: it puts education first, makes America a safer 
place, strengthens our effort to preserve natural areas and protect our 
environment, and strengthens America's leadership role in the world. 
Although most of the provisions in this Act affect Federal spending 
programs, a transfer from the surplus funds of the Federal Reserve 
System to the Treasury of $3.752 billion in FY 2000 affects governmental 
receipts.
  Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999.--This Act, 
which was signed by President Clinton on December 17, 1999, ensures that 
individuals with disabilities have a greater opportunity to participate 
in the workforce and in the American Dream and extends important tax 
provisions. Despite these accomplishments, the President is disappointed 
that this Act includes a provision for a special allowance adjustment 
for student loans, that it delays the implementation of a proposed 
Department of Health

[[Page 49]]

and Human Services final rule on the distribution of human organs for 
transplantation, and that the revenue losses are not fully offset. The 
major provisions of this Act affecting governmental receipts are 
described below.

                     Expired and Expiring Provisions

   Extend minimum tax relief for individuals.--Certain nonrefundable 
personal tax credits (dependent care credit, credit for the elderly and 
disabled, adoption credit, child tax credit, credit for interest on 
certain home mortgages, HOPE Scholarship and Lifetime Learning credit, 
and the D.C. homebuyer's credit) are provided under current law. 
Generally, these credits are allowed only to the extent that the 
individual's regular income tax liability exceeds the individual's 
tentative minimum tax. An additional child tax credit is provided under 
current law to families with three or more qualifying children. This 
credit, which may be offset against social security payroll tax 
liability (provided that liability exceeds the amount of the earned 
income credit), is reduced by the amount of the individual's minimum tax 
liability (that is, the amount by which the individual's tentative 
minimum tax exceeds the individual's regular tax liability). For taxable 
year 1998, prior law allowed nonrefundable personal tax credits to 
offset regular income tax liability in full (as opposed to only the 
amount by which the regular tax liability exceeded the tentative minimum 
tax). In addition, for taxable year 1998, the additional child credit 
provided to families with three or more qualifying children was not 
reduced by the amount of the individual's minimum tax liability. This 
Act extends the provision that allows the nonrefundable personal tax 
credits to offset regular income tax liability in full to taxable years 
beginning in 1999. For taxable years beginning in 2000 and 2001 the 
nonrefundable personal credits may offset both the regular tax and the 
minimum tax. In addition, for taxable years beginning in 1999, 2000, and 
2001, the additional child credit provided to families with three or 
more qualifying children will not be reduced by the amount of the 
individual's minimum tax liability.
  Extend and modify research and experimentation tax credit.--The 20-
percent tax credit for certain research and experimentation expenditures 
is extended to apply to qualifying expenditures paid or incurred during 
the period July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2004. In addition, effective 
for taxable years beginning after June 30, 1999, the credit rate 
applicable under the alternative incremental research credit is 
increased by one percentage point per step, and the definition of 
qualified research is expanded to include research undertaken in Puerto 
Rico and possessions of the United States. Under this Act, credits 
attributable to the period beginning on July 1, 1999 and ending on 
September 30, 2000 may not be taken into account in determining any 
amount required to be paid for any purpose under the Internal Revenue 
Code prior to October 1, 2000. On or after October 1, 2000, such credits 
may be taken into account through the filing of an amended return, an 
application for expedited refund, an adjustment of estimated taxes, or 
other means that are allowed by the Internal Revenue Code. Similarly, 
research credits that are attributable to the period beginning on 
October 1, 2000 and ending on September 30, 2001 may not be taken into 
account in determining any amount required to be paid for any purpose 
under the Internal Revenue Code prior to October 1, 2001.
  Extend exceptions provided under subpart F for certain active 
financing income.--Under the Subpart F rules, certain U.S. shareholders 
of a controlled foreign corporation (CFC) are subject to U.S. tax 
currently on certain income earned by the CFC, whether or not such 
income is distributed to the shareholders. The income subject to current 
inclusion under the subpart F rules includes ``foreign personal holding 
company income'' and insurance income. The U.S. 10-percent shareholders 
of a CFC also are subject to current inclusion with respect to their 
shares of the CFC's foreign base company services income (income derived 
from services performed for a related person outside the country in 
which the CFC is organized). For taxable years beginning in 1998 and 
1999, certain income derived in the active conduct of a banking, 
financing, insurance, or similar business is excepted from the Subpart F 
rules regarding the taxation of foreign personal holding company income 
and foreign base company services income. This Act extends the exception 
for two years, with very minor modifications, to apply to taxable years 
beginning in 2000 and 2001.
  Extend suspension of net income limitation on percentage depletion 
from marginal oil and gas wells.--Taxpayers are allowed to recover their 
investment in oil and gas wells through depletion deductions. For 
certain properties, deductions may be determined using the percentage 
depletion method; however, in any year, the amount deducted generally 
may not exceed 100 percent of the net income from the property. For 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 1997 and before January 1, 
2000, domestic oil and gas production from ``marginal'' properties is 
exempt from the 100-percent of net income limitation. This Act extends 
the exemption to apply to taxable years beginning after December 1, 1999 
and before January 1, 2002.
  Extend the work opportunity tax credit.--The work opportunity tax 
credit provides an incentive for employers to hire individuals from 
certain targeted groups. The credit equals a percentage of qualified 
wages paid during the first year of the individual's employment with the 
employer. The credit percentage is 25 percent for employment of at least 
120 hours but less than 400 hours and 40 percent for employment of 400 
or more hours. This Act extends the credit to apply to individuals who 
begin work on or after July 1, 1999 and before January 1, 2002.
  Extend the welfare-to-work tax credit.--The welfare-to-work tax credit 
enables employers to claim a tax credit on the first $20,000 of eligible 
wages paid to certain long-term family assistance recipients. The credit 
is 35 percent of the first $10,000 of eligible wages

[[Page 50]]

in the first year of employment and 50 percent of the first $10,000 of 
eligible wages in the second year of employment. Under this Act the 
credit is extended to apply to individuals who begin work on or after 
July 1, 1999 and before January 1, 2002.
  Extend exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance.--
Certain amounts paid by an employer for educational assistance provided 
to an employee are excluded from the employee's gross income for income 
and payroll tax purposes. The exclusion is limited to $5,250 of 
educational assistance with respect to an individual during a calendar 
year and applies whether or not the education is job-related. The 
exclusion, which is limited to undergraduate courses, is extended to 
apply to courses beginning after May 31, 2000 and before January 1, 
2002.
   Extend and modify wind and biomass tax credit and expand eligible 
biomass sources.--Taxpayers are provided a 1.5-cent-per-kilowatt-hour 
tax credit, adjusted for inflation after 1992, for electricity produced 
from wind or ``closed-loop'' biomass. Under prior law, the credit 
applies to electricity produced by a facility placed in service before 
July 1, 1999, and is allowable for production during the 10-year period 
after a facility is originally placed in service. This Act extends the 
credit to apply to facilities placed in service after June 30, 1999 and 
before January 1, 2002. Electricity produced at a wind facility placed 
in service during this period does not qualify for the credit, however, 
if it is sold pursuant to a pre-1987 contract that has not been modified 
to limit the purchaser's obligation to acquire electricity at above-
market prices. The Act also expands the credit to apply to poultry waste 
facilities placed in service after December 31, 1999 and before January 
1, 2002.
  Extend Generalized System of Preferences (GSP).--Under GSP, duty-free 
access is provided to over 4,000 items from eligible developing 
countries that meet certain worker rights, intellectual property 
protection, and other criteria. This program, which had expired after 
June 30, 1999, is extended through September 30, 2001. Refunds of any 
duty paid between June 30, 1999 and December 17, 1999 are provided upon 
request of the importer.
  Extend authority to issue Qualified Zone Academy Bonds.--The Taxpayer 
Relief Act of 1997 (TRA97) included a provision that allows State and 
local governments to issue ``qualified zone academy bonds,'' the 
interest on which is effectively paid by the Federal government in the 
form of an annual income tax credit. The proceeds of the bonds must be 
used for teacher training, purchases of equipment, curricular 
development, and rehabilitation and repairs at certain public school 
facilities. Under TRA97, a nationwide total of $400 million of qualified 
zone academy bonds was authorized to be issued in each of calendar years 
1998 and 1999. Effective December 17, 1999, an additional $400 million 
of qualified zone academy bonds is authorized to be issued in each of 
calendar years 2000 and 2001. In addition, unused authority arising in 
1998 and 1999 may be carried forward for up to three years and unused 
authority arising in 2000 and 2001 may be carried forward for up to two 
years.
  Extend tax credit for first-time D.C. homebuyers.--The tax credit (up 
to $5,000) provided for the first-time purchase of a principal residence 
in the District of Columbia, which was scheduled to expire after 
December 31, 2000, is extended to apply to residences purchased on or 
before December 31, 2001.
  Extend expensing of brownfields remediation costs.--Taxpayers can 
elect to treat certain environmental remediation expenditures that would 
otherwise be chargeable to capital account as deductible in the year 
paid or incurred. The ability to deduct such expenditures is extended 
for one year, to apply to expenditures paid or incurred before January 
1, 2002.

                        Time-Sensitive Provisions

  Prohibit disclosure of advanced pricing agreements (APAs) and APA 
background files.--Returns and return information, as defined by the 
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), are confidential and cannot be disclosed 
unless authorized by the Internal Revenue Code. In contrast, written 
determinations issued by the IRS generally are available for public 
inspection. The APA program is an alternative dispute resolution program 
conducted by the IRS, which resolves international transfer pricing 
issues prior to the filing of the corporate tax return. To resolve such 
issues, the taxpayer submits detailed and confidential financial 
information, business plans and projections to the IRS for 
consideration. This Act confirms that APAs and related background 
information are confidential return information and not written 
determinations available for public inspection. Effective December 17, 
1999, APAs or related background files are prohibited from being 
released to the public, regardless of whether the APA was executed 
before or after that date. The Treasury Department also is required to 
produce an annual report that contains general and statistical 
information about the APA program, and general descriptions of the APAs 
concluded during the year.
  Provide authority to postpone certain tax-related deadlines by reason 
of year 2000 (Y2K) failures.--The Secretary of the Treasury is permitted 
to postpone, on a taxpayer-by-taxpayer basis, certain tax-related 
deadlines for a period of up to 90 days, if he determines that the 
taxpayer has been affected by an actual Y2K related failure. In order to 
be eligible for relief, the taxpayer must have made a good faith, 
reasonable effort to avoid any Y2K related failures.
  Expand list of taxable vaccines.--Under prior law an excise tax of 
$.75 per dose is levied on the following vaccines: diphtheria, 
pertussis, tetanus, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, HIB (haemophilus 
influenza type B), hepatitis B, rotavirus gastroenteritis, and varicella 
(chickenpox). This Act adds any conjugate vaccine against streptococcus 
pneumoniae to the list of taxable vaccines, effective for vaccines sold 
by a manufacturer or importer after December 17, 1999.

[[Page 51]]

  Delay requirement that registered motor fuels terminals offer dyed 
fuel as a condition of registration.--With limited exceptions, excise 
taxes are imposed on all highway motor fuels when they are removed from 
a registered terminal facility, unless the fuel is indelibly dyed and is 
destined for a nontaxable use. Terminal facilities are not permitted to 
receive and store nontaxed motor fuels unless they are registered with 
the IRS. Prior law requires that effective July 1, 2000, in order to be 
registered, a terminal must offer for sale both dyed and undyed fuel 
(the ``dyed-fuel mandate''). Under this Act the effective date of the 
dyed-fuel mandate is postponed until January 1, 2002.
   Provide that Federal production payments to farmers are taxable in 
the year received. --A taxpayer generally is required to include an item 
in income no later than the time of its actual or constructive receipt, 
unless such amount properly is accounted for in a different period under 
the taxpayer's method of accounting. If a taxpayer has an unrestricted 
right to demand the payment of an amount, the taxpayer is in 
constructive receipt of that amount whether or not the taxpayer makes 
the demand and actually receives the payment. Under production 
flexibility contracts entered into between certain eligible owners and 
producers and the Secretary of Agriculture, as provided in the Federal 
Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (FAIR Act), annual 
payments are made at specific times during the Federal government's 
fiscal year. One-half of each annual payment is to be made on either 
December 15 or January 15 of the fiscal year, at the option of the 
recipient; the remaining one-half is to be paid no later than September 
30 of the fiscal year. The option to receive the payment on December 15 
potentially results in the constructive receipt (and thus potential 
inclusion in income) of one-half of the annual payment at that time, 
even if the option to receive the amount on January 15 is elected. For 
fiscal year 1999, as provided under The Emergency Farm Financial Relief 
Act of 1998, all payments are to be paid at such time or times during 
the fiscal year as the recipient may specify. This option to receive all 
of the 1999 payment in calendar year 1998 potentially results in 
constructive receipt (and thus potential inclusion in income) in that 
year, whether or not the amounts are actually received. The Omnibus 
Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, 
provided that effective for production flexibility contract payments 
made in taxable years ending after December 31, 1995, the time a 
production flexibility contract payment is to be included in income is 
to be determined without regard to the options granted for payment. 
Effective December 17, 1999, this Act provides that any unexercised 
option to accelerate the receipt of any payment under a production 
flexibility contract that is payable under the FAIR Act is to be 
disregarded in determining the taxable year in which such payment is 
properly included in gross income. Options to accelerate payments that 
are enacted in the future are covered by this rule, providing the 
payment to which they relate is mandated by the Fair Act as in effect on 
the date of enactment of this Act.

                        Revenue Offset Provisions

  Modify estimated tax requirements of individuals.--An individual 
taxpayer generally is subject to an addition to tax for any underpayment 
of estimated tax. An individual generally does not have an underpayment 
of estimated tax if timely estimated tax payments are made at least 
equal to: (1) 100 percent of the tax shown on the return of the 
individual for the preceding tax year (the ``100 percent of last year's 
liability safe harbor'') or (2) 90 percent of the tax shown on the 
return for the current year. For any individual with an adjusted gross 
income (AGI) of more than $150,000 as shown on the return for the 
preceding taxable year, the 100 percent of last year's liability safe 
harbor generally is modified to be a 110 percent of last year's 
liability safe harbor. However, under prior law, the 110 percent of last 
year's liability safe harbor for individuals with AGI of more than 
$150,000 was modified for taxable years beginning in 1999 through 2002, 
as follows: for taxable years beginning in 1999 the safe harbor is 105 
percent; for taxable years beginning in 2000 and 2001 the safe harbor is 
106 percent, and for taxable years beginning in 2002, the safe harbor is 
112 percent. Under this Act the estimated tax safe harbor for 
individuals with AGI of more than $150,000 is modified as follows: for 
taxable years beginning in 2000 the safe harbor is 108.6 percent and for 
taxable years beginning in 2001 the safe harbor is 110.0 percent.
   Clarify the tax treatment of income and losses on derivatives.--
Capital gain treatment applies to gain on the sale or exchange of a 
capital asset. Gain or loss on other assets (stock in trade or other 
types of inventory, property used in a trade or business that is real 
property or subject to depreciation, accounts or notes receivable 
acquired in the ordinary course of a trade or business, certain 
copyrights, and U.S. government publications) generally is considered 
ordinary. This Act adds three categories to the list of assets the gain 
or loss on which is considered ordinary for Federal income tax purposes: 
commodities derivatives held by commodities derivatives dealers, hedging 
transactions, and supplies of a type regularly consumed by the taxpayer 
in the ordinary course of a taxpayer's trade or business. In defining a 
hedging transaction, the Act replaces the ``risk reduction'' standard 
with a ``risk management'' standard with respect to ordinary property 
held or certain liabilities incurred, and provides that the definition 
of a hedging transaction includes a transaction entered into primarily 
to mange such other risks as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe 
in regulations. These changes are effective for any instrument held, 
acquired or entered into; any transaction entered into; and any supplies 
held or acquired on or after December 17, 1999.
  Expand reporting of cancellation of indebtedness income.--Gross income 
generally includes income from the discharge of indebtedness. If a bank, 
thrift institu

[[Page 52]]

tion, or credit union discharges $600 or more of any indebtedness of a 
debtor, the institution must report such discharge to the debtor and the 
IRS. This Act extends these reporting requirements to additional 
entities involved in the trade or business of lending (such as finance 
companies and credit card companies, whether or not they are affiliated 
with a financial institution), effective for discharges of indebtedness 
occurring after December 31, 1999.
  Limit conversion of character of income from constructive ownership 
transactions with respect to partnership interests.--A pass-thru entity, 
such as a partnership, generally is not subject to Federal income tax. 
Instead, each owner includes his/her share of a pass-thru entity's 
income, gain, deduction or credit in his/her own taxable income. The 
character of the income generally is determined at the entity level and 
flows through to the owners. A taxpayer can enter into a derivatives 
transaction that is designed to give the taxpayer the economic 
equivalent of an ownership interest in a partnership but that is not 
itself a current ownership interest in the partnership. These so-called 
``constructive ownership'' transactions purportedly allow taxpayers to 
defer income and to convert ordinary income and short-term capital gain 
into long-term capital gain. This Act treats long-term capital gain 
recognized from a constructive ownership transaction as ordinary income 
to the extent the long-term capital gain recognized from the transaction 
exceeds the long-term capital gain that could have been recognized had 
the taxpayer invested in the partnership interest directly. In addition, 
an interest charge is imposed on the amount of gain that is treated as 
ordinary income. These changes are effective with respect to 
transactions entered into on or after July 12, 1999. Generally any 
contract, option or any other arrangement that is entered into or 
exercised on or after that date, which extends or otherwise modifies the 
terms of a transaction entered into prior to such date, will be treated 
as a transaction entered into on or after July 12, 1999.
  Extend and modify qualified transfers of excess pension assets used 
for retiree health benefits.--A pension plan may provide medical 
benefits to retired employees through a section 401(h) account that is a 
part of the pension plan. Qualified transfers of excess assets of a 
defined benefit pension plan (other than a multiemployer plan) to a 
section 401(h) account are permitted, subject to amount and frequency 
limitations, use requirements, deduction limitations, and vesting and 
minimum benefit requirements. This Act extends the ability of employers 
to transfer excess defined benefit pension plan assets to 401(h) 
accounts through December 31, 2005. In addition, effective with respect 
to qualified transfers made after December 17, 1999, the minimum benefit 
requirement is replaced with a minimum cost requirement.
  Modify installment method for accrual basis taxpayers.--Generally, an 
accrual method requires a taxpayer to recognize income when all events 
have occurred that fix the right to its receipt and its amount can be 
determined with reasonable accuracy. The installment method of 
accounting provides an exception to these general recognition principles 
by allowing a taxpayer to defer recognition of income from the 
disposition of certain property until payment is received. To the extent 
that an installment obligation is pledged as security for any 
indebtedness, the net proceeds of the secured indebtedness are treated 
as a payment on such obligation, thereby triggering the recognition of 
income. This Act generally prohibits the use of the installment method 
of accounting for dispositions of property that would otherwise be 
reported for Federal income tax purposes using an accrual method of 
accounting. The present-law exceptions regarding the availability of the 
installment method for use by cash method taxpayers, for dispositions of 
property used or produced in the trade or business of farming, and for 
dispositions of timeshares or residential lots are not affected by this 
change. This Act also modifies the pledge rule to provide that entering 
into any arrangement that gives the taxpayer the right to satisfy an 
obligation with an installment note will be treated in the same manner 
as the direct pledge of the installment note. These changes are 
effective with respect to sales or other dispositions entered into on or 
after December 17, 1999.
  Deny charitable contribution deduction for transfers associated with 
split-dollar insurance arrangements.--A taxpayer who itemizes deductions 
generally is allowed to deduct charitable contributions paid during the 
taxable year. The amount of the deduction allowable for a taxable year 
with respect to any charitable contribution depends on the type of 
property contributed, the type of organization to which the property is 
contributed, and the income of the taxpayer. In general, to be 
deductible as a charitable contribution, a payment to charity must be a 
gift made without receipt of adequate consideration and with donative 
intent. Under a charitable split-dollar insurance arrangement, a 
taxpayer typically transfers funds to a charity with the understanding 
that the charity will use the funds to pay premiums on a cash value life 
insurance policy that benefits both the charity and members of the 
transferor's family, either directly or indirectly through a family 
trust or partnership. This Act eliminates such abuses of the charitable 
contributions deduction by denying a charitable contribution deduction 
for any transfer to a charity in connection with a charitable split-
dollar insurance transaction. Specifically, the denial of the deduction 
applies if, in connection with the transfer, the charity directly or 
indirectly pays, or has previously paid, any premium on any ``personal 
benefit contract'' with respect to the transferor, or there is an 
understanding or expectation that any person will directly or indirectly 
pay any premium on any ``personal benefit contract'' with respect to the 
transferor. A personal benefit contract with respect to the transferor 
is any life insurance, annuity, or endowment contract for whom the 
direct or indirect beneficiary under the contract is the transferor, any 
member of the transferor's family

[[Page 53]]

or any other person (other than a charitable organization) designated by 
the transferor. The Act also imposes an excise tax on any participating 
charity equal to the amount of any premiums paid by the charity on such 
a ``personal benefit contract'' in connection with a charitable split-
dollar insurance transaction. The deduction is denied for any transfers 
after February 8, 1999 and the excise tax applies to premiums paid after 
December 17, 1999.
  Require basis adjustments when a partnership distributes certain stock 
to a corporate partner.--Under prior law, generally no gain or loss was 
recognized on the receipt by a corporation of property distributed in 
complete liquidation of a subsidiary corporation in which it owned 80-
percent of the stock. The basis of property received by the distributee 
in such a liquidation was the same as it was in the hands of the 
subsidiary. This Act provides for a reduction in basis of the assets of 
a corporation if stock in that corporation is distributed by the 
partnership to a corporate partner that, as a result of the distribution 
and related transactions, owns 80 percent or more of the stock of such 
corporation. The amount of the reduction generally equals the amount of 
the excess of the partnership's adjusted basis in the stock of the 
distributed corporation immediately before the distribution, over the 
corporate partner's basis in that stock immediately after the 
distribution, subject to certain limitations. The corporate partner must 
recognize long-term capital gain to the extent the amount of the basis 
reduction exceeds the basis of the property of the distributed 
corporation. This change generally is effective for distributions made 
after July 14, 1999, except that in the case of a corporation that is a 
partner in a partnership on July 14, 1999, the provision is effective 
for distributions by that partnership to the corporation after December 
17, 1999 (or, for a corporation that so elects, distributions after June 
30, 2001).
  Modify rules relating to real estate investment trusts (REITs).--REITs 
generally are restricted to owning passive investments in real estate 
and certain securities. Under prior law, no single corporation could 
account for more than five percent of the total value of a REIT's 
assets, and a REIT could not own more than 10-percent of the outstanding 
voting securities of any issuer. Through the use of non-voting preferred 
stock and multiple subsidiaries, up to 25 percent of the value of a 
REIT's assets could consist of subsidiaries that conduct otherwise 
impermissible activities. Under this Act, the 10-percent vote test is 
changed to a 10-percent ``vote or value'' test, meaning that a REIT 
cannot own more than 10 percent of the outstanding voting securities or 
more than 10 percent of the total value of securities of a single 
issuer. In addition, taxable REIT subsidiaries owned by a REIT cannot 
represent more than 20 percent of the value of a REIT's assets. For 
purposes of the 10-percent value test, securities are generally defined 
to exclude safe harbor debt owned by a REIT. In addition, an exception 
to the limitation on ownership of securities of a single issuer applies 
in the case of a ``taxable REIT subsidiary'' that meets certain 
requirements. The Act also provides rules for the operation of hotels 
and health care facilities; defines ``independent contractor'' for 
certain purposes; modifies REIT distribution requirements to conform to 
the rules for regulated investment companies (RICs); modifies earnings 
and profits rules for RICs and REITs; and replaces the prior law 
adjusted basis comparison with a fair market comparison, in determining 
whether certain rents from personal property exceed a 15-percent limit. 
These provisions generally are effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 2000, with transition for certain REIT holdings and 
leases in effect on July 12, 1999.
  Modify estimated tax rules for closely held REITs.--If a person has a 
direct interest or a partnership interest in income-producing assets 
that produce income throughout the year, that person's estimated tax 
payments generally must reflect the quarterly amounts expected from the 
asset. However, a dividend distribution of earnings from a REIT is 
considered for estimated tax purposes when the dividend is paid. To take 
advantage of this deferral of estimated taxes, some corporations have 
established closely held REITS that may make a single distribution for 
the year, timed such that it need not be taken into account under the 
estimated tax rules as early as would be the case if the assets were 
directly held by the controlling entity. Effective for estimated tax 
payments due on or after November 15, 1999, with respect to a closely 
held REIT, this Act provides that any person owning at least 10 percent 
of the vote or value of the REIT is required to accelerate the 
recognition of year-end dividends attributable to the closely held REIT.

                            Other Provisions

  Simplify foster child definition under the earned income tax credit 
(EITC).--This Act clarifies the definition of foster child for purposes 
of claiming the EITC. Effective for taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 1999, the foster child must be the taxpayer's sibling (or a 
descendant of the taxpayer's sibling), or be placed in the taxpayer's 
home by an agency of a State or one of its political subdivisions or a 
tax-exempt child placement agency licensed by a State.
  Allow members of the clergy to revoke exemption from Social Security 
and Medicare coverage.--Under current law, ministers of a church who are 
opposed to participating in the Social Security and Medicare programs on 
religious principles may reject coverage by filing with the IRS before 
the tax filing date for their second year of work in the ministry. This 
Act provides an opportunity for members of the clergy to revoke their 
exemptions from Social Security and Medicare coverage during a 2-year 
period beginning January 1, 2000.

[[Page 54]]

                        ADMINISTRATION PROPOSALS

   The President's plan targets tax relief to provide assistance in 
obtaining higher education for working families, to relieve poverty and 
revitalize lower-income communities, and to make health care more 
affordable. The President's plan also provides relief from the marriage 
penalty and provides child-care assistance, promotes retirement savings, 
provides relief from the alternative minimum tax and other 
simplifications of the tax laws, encourages philanthropy, and offers 
assistance in bridging the digital divide. The President's plan also 
contains measures that will curtail the proliferation of corporate tax 
shelters, restrict the use of overseas tax havens, and close other 
loopholes and tax subsidies.

                           PROVIDE TAX RELIEF

                    Expand Educational Opportunities

  Provide College Opportunity tax cut--Under current law, individuals 
may claim a Lifetime Learning credit equal to 20 percent of qualified 
tuition and related expenses up to $5,000 (increasing to $10,000 in 
2003) incurred during the year for post-secondary education for the 
taxpayer, the taxpayer's spouse, or one or more dependents. The credit 
phases out for taxpayers filing joint returns with modified AGI from 
$80,000 to $100,000, and $40,000 to $50,000 for single taxpayers. The 
phase-out ranges will be adjusted for inflation occurring after 2000. To 
further assist taxpayers in obtaining post-secondary education 
throughout their lifetimes, the Administration proposes that the 
Lifetime Learning credit rate be increased to 28 percent. In addition, 
the phase-out range for the credit would be increased to $100,000 to 
$120,000 of modified AGI for joint returns and $50,000 to $60,000 of 
modified AGI for single taxpayers. To guarantee that all eligible 
taxpayers receive the full value of this education assistance, taxpayers 
may elect to deduct qualified tuition and related expenses instead of 
claiming the credit.
  Provide incentives for public school construction and modernization.--
The Administration proposes to institute a new program of Federal tax 
assistance for public elementary and secondary school construction or 
rehabilitation. Under the proposal, State and local governments 
(including U.S. possessions) would be able to issue up to $22 billion of 
``qualified school modernization bonds,'' $11 billion in each of 2001 
and 2002. In addition, $200 million of qualified school modernization 
bonds in each of 2001 and 2002 would be allocated for the construction 
and renovation of Bureau of Indian Affairs funded schools. Holders of 
these bonds would receive annual Federal income tax credits, set 
according to market interest rates by the Treasury Department, in lieu 
of interest. Issuers would be responsible for repayment of principal. 
These qualified school modernization bonds would be similar to qualified 
zone academy bonds (QZABs), created by TRA97 and extended by the Ticket 
to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999. QZABs allow bonds 
to be issued for certain public schools with the interest on the bonds 
effectively paid by the Federal government in the form of an annual 
income tax credit. The proceeds of these bonds can be used for teacher 
training, purchases of equipment, curricular development, and 
rehabilitation and repair of the school facilities. The Administration 
proposes to authorize the issuance of additional QZABs of $1.0 billion 
in 2001 and $1.4 billion in 2002, and to allow the proceeds of these 
bonds also to be used for school construction.
  Expand exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance to 
include graduate education.--Certain amounts paid by an employer for 
educational assistance provided to an employee currently are excluded 
from the employee's gross income for income and payroll tax purposes. 
The exclusion is limited to $5,250 of educational assistance with 
respect to an individual during a calendar year and applies whether or 
not the education is job-related. The exclusion currently is limited to 
undergraduate courses beginning before January 1, 2002. The exclusion 
previously applied to graduate courses that began before July 1, 1996. 
The Administration proposes to reinstate the exclusion for graduate 
education for courses beginning on or after July 1, 2000 and before 
January 1, 2002.
  Eliminate 60-month limit on student loan interest deduction.--Current 
law provides an income tax deduction for certain interest paid on a 
qualified education loan during the first 60 months that interest 
payments are required, effective for interest due and paid after 
December 31, 1997. The maximum deduction available is $2,500 for years 
after 2000 (for years 1998, 1999 and 2000, the limits are $1,000, $1,500 
and $2,000, respectively) and the deduction is phased out for taxpayers 
with AGI between $40,000 and $55,000 (between $60,000 and $75,000 for 
joint filers). The 60-month limitation under current law adds 
significant complexity and administrative burdens for taxpayers, 
lenders, loan servicing agencies, and the IRS. Thus, to simplify the 
calculation of deductible interest payments, reduce administrative 
burdens, and provide longer-term relief to low- and middle-income 
taxpayers with large educational debt, the Administration proposes to 
eliminate the 60-month limitation. This proposal would be effective for 
interest due and paid on qualified education loans after December 31, 
2000.
  Eliminate tax when forgiving student loans subject to income 
contingent repayment.--Students who borrow money to pay for 
postsecondary education through the Federal government's Direct Loan 
program may elect income contingent repayment of the loan. If they elect 
this option, their loan repayments are adjusted in accordance with their 
income. If after the borrower makes repayments for a twenty-five year pe

[[Page 55]]

riod any loan balance remains, it is forgiven. The Administration 
proposes to eliminate any Federal income tax the borrower may otherwise 
owe as a result of the forgiveness of the loan balance. The proposal 
would be effective for loan cancellations after December 31, 2000.
  Provide tax relief for participants in certain Federal education 
programs.--Present law provides tax-free treatment for certain 
scholarship and fellowship grants used to pay qualified tuition and 
related expenses, but not to the extent that any grant represents 
compensation for services. In addition, tax-free treatment is provided 
for certain discharges of student loans on condition that the individual 
works for a certain period of time in certain professions for any of a 
broad class of employers. To extend tax-free treatment to education 
awards under certain Federal programs, the Administration proposes to 
amend current law to provide that any amounts received by an individual 
under the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Scholarship Program or 
the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship and Financial Assistance 
Program are ``qualified scholarships'' excludable from income, without 
regard to the recipient's future service obligation. In addition, the 
proposal would provide an exclusion from income for any repayment or 
cancellation of a student loan under the NHSC Scholarship Program, the 
Americorps Education Award Program, or the Armed Forces Health 
Professions Loan Repayment Program. The exclusion would apply only to 
the extent that the student incurred qualified tuition and related 
expenses for which no education credit was claimed during academic 
periods when the student loans were incurred. The proposal would be 
effective for awards received after December 31, 2000.

            Provide Poverty Relief and Revitalize Communities

  Increase and simplify the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC).--Low- and 
moderate-income workers may be eligible for the EITC. For every dollar a 
low-income worker earns up to a limit, between 7 and 40 cents are 
provided as a tax credit. The applicable credit rate depends on the 
presence and number of children in the worker's family. Above $13,030 
($5,930 if the taxpayer does not reside with children), the size of the 
tax credit is gradually phased out. Although the EITC lifts millions out 
of poverty each year, poverty among children living in larger families 
remains at unacceptably high levels. Because the credit initially 
increases as income rises, the EITC rewards marriage for very low-income 
workers. But the EITC also causes marriage penalties among two-earner 
couples whose income falls in or above the credit's phase-out range. 
Further, while the EITC has been shown, on net, to increase work effort, 
phasing out the credit results in high marginal tax rates for recipients 
in the phase-out range. To address these problems, the Administration 
proposes that the credit rate be increased from 40 percent to 45 percent 
for families with three or more children. If both spouses work and earn 
at least $725, the credit would begin to phase out at $14,480 ($7,380 if 
the couple does not reside with children). For taxpayers with two or 
more children, the phase-out rate would be reduced from 21.06 percent to 
19.06 percent.
  Under current law, nontaxable earned income, such as 401(k) 
contributions, is included in earned income for purposes of calculating 
the EITC. To encourage retirement savings, simplify the calculation of 
earned income, and improve compliance, the Administration is proposing 
that these nontaxable forms of income would no longer count toward 
eligibility for the EITC. The proposal would be effective for taxable 
years beginning after December 31, 1999.
  A proposed technical correction would clarify that taxpayers are 
eligible to receive the small credit for workers without qualifying 
children, if they cannot claim the credit for workers with children 
because their child does not have a social security number. The proposed 
change will also clarify that taxpayers may not receive any credit (even 
the small credit for workers without qualifying children), if their 
child is not taken into account because another taxpayer who may claim 
the child has higher modified AGI.

  Increase and index low-income housing tax credit per-capita cap.--Low-
income housing tax credits provide an incentive to build and make 
available affordable rental housing units to households with low 
incomes. The amount of the first-year credits that can be awarded in 
each State is currently limited to $1.25 per capita. That limit has not 
been changed since it was established in 1986. The Administration 
proposes to increase the annual State limitation to $1.75 per capita 
effective for calendar year 2001 and to index that amount for inflation, 
beginning with calendar year 2002. The proposed increases in this cap 
will permit additional new and rehabilitated low-income housing to be 
provided while still encouraging State housing agencies to award the 
credits to projects that best meet specific needs.
  Provide New Markets Tax Credit.--Businesses located in low-income 
urban and rural communities often lack access to sufficient equity 
capital. To help attract new capital to these businesses, taxpayers 
would be allowed a credit against Federal income taxes for certain 
investments made to acquire stock or other equity interests in a 
community development investment entity selected by the Treasury 
Department to receive a credit allocation. Selected community 
development investment entities would be required to use the investment 
proceeds to provide capital to businesses located in low-income 
communities. During the period 2001-2005, the Treasury Department would 
authorize selected community development investment entities to issue 
$15 billion of new stock or equity interests with respect to which 
credits could be claimed. The credit would be allowed for each year 
during the five-year period after the stock or equity interest is 
acquired

[[Page 56]]

from the selected community development investment entity, and the 
credit amount that could be claimed for each of the five years would 
equal six percent of the amount paid to acquire the stock or equity 
interest from the community development investment entity. The credit 
would be subject to current-law general business credit rules, and would 
be available for qualified investments made after December 31, 2000.
  Expand Empowerment Zone (EZ) tax incentives and authorize additional 
EZs.--The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA93) authorized 
a Federal demonstration project in which nine EZs and 95 empowerment 
communities were designated in a competitive application process. Among 
other benefits, businesses located in the nine original EZs are eligible 
for four Federal tax incentives: an employment wage credit; an 
additional $20,000 per year of section 179 expensing; a new category of 
tax-exempt private activity bonds; and ``brownfields'' expensing for 
certain environmental remediation expenses. The Taxpayer Relief Act of 
1997 (TRA97) authorized the designation of two additional EZs, which 
generally are eligible for the same tax incentives that are available 
within the EZs authorized by OBRA93. In addition, TRA97 authorized the 
designation of another 20 EZs (so-called ``Round II EZs'') that are 
eligible for the same tax incentives (other than the employment wage 
credit) available in the 11 other EZs. To date, the EZ program has 
promoted significant economic development, but these communities still 
do not fully share in the nation's general prosperity. Therefore, the 
Administration proposes that the EZ program be extended and strengthened 
by making the employment wage credit available in all existing 31 EZs 
through 2009. Furthermore, the Administration proposes that, beginning 
in 2001, an additional $35,000 (rather than $20,000) per year of section 
179 expensing be allowed in all EZs, and that enhanced tax-exempt 
financing benefits for private business activities be available in all 
EZs. (As described below, the Administration's budget proposes a 
permanent extension of the ``brownfields'' expensing for EZs and other 
targeted areas.) Finally, the Administration proposes that an additional 
10 EZs be designated as of January 1, 2002. Businesses located within 
these 10 new EZs will be eligible for the full range of tax incentives 
available in the other EZs.
  Provide Better America Bonds to improve the environment.--Under 
current law, State and local governments may issue tax-exempt bonds to 
finance purely public environmental projects. Certain other 
environmental projects may also be financed with tax-exempt bonds, but 
are subject to an overall cap on private-purpose tax-exempt bonds. The 
subsidy provided with tax-exempt bonds may not provide a deep enough 
subsidy to induce State and local governments to undertake beneficial 
environmental infrastructure projects. The Administration proposes to 
allow State and local governments (including U.S. possessions and Indian 
tribal governments) to issue tax credit bonds (similar to existing 
Qualified Zone Academy Bonds) to finance projects to protect open spaces 
or otherwise to improve the environment. Significant public benefits 
would be provided by creating more livable urban and rural environments; 
creating forest preserves near urban areas; protecting water quality; 
rehabilitating land that has been degraded by toxic or other wastes or 
destruction of its ground cover; improving parks; and reestablishing 
wetlands. A total of $2.15 billion of bond authority would be authorized 
for each of the five years beginning in 2001. The Environmental 
Protection Agency, in consultation with other agencies, would allocate 
the bond authority based on competitive applications. The bonds would 
have a maximum maturity of 15 years and the bond issuer effectively 
would receive an interest-free loan for the term of the bonds. During 
that interval, bond holders would receive Federal income tax credits in 
lieu of interest.
  Permanently extend the expensing of brownfields remediation costs.--
Under TRA97, taxpayers can elect to treat certain environmental 
remediation expenditures that would otherwise be chargeable to capital 
accounts as deductible in the year paid or incurred. The provision does 
not apply to expenditures paid or incurred after December 31, 2001. The 
Administration proposes that the provision be made permanent.
  Expand tax incentives for specialized small business investment 
companies (SSBICs).--Current law provides certain tax incentives for 
investment in SSBICs. The Administration proposes to enhance the tax 
incentives for SSBICs. First, the existing provision allowing a tax-free 
rollover of the proceeds of a sale of publicly-traded securities into an 
investment in a SSBIC would be modified to extend the rollover period to 
180 days, to allow investment in the preferred stock of a SSBIC, to 
eliminate the annual caps on the SSBIC rollover gain exclusion, and to 
increase the lifetime caps to $750,000 per individual and $2,000,000 per 
corporation. Second, the proposal would allow a SSBIC to convert from a 
corporation to a partnership within 180 days of enactment without giving 
rise to tax at either the corporate or shareholder level, but the 
partnership would remain subject to an entity-level tax upon ceasing 
activity as a SSBIC or at any time that it disposes of assets that it 
holds at the time of conversion on the amount of ``built-in'' gains 
inherent in such assets at the time of conversion. Third, the proposal 
would make it easier for a SSBIC to meet the qualifying income, 
distribution of income, and diversification of assets tests to qualify 
as a tax-favored regulated investment company. Finally, in the case of a 
direct or indirect sale of SSBIC stock that qualifies for treatment 
under section 1202, the proposal would raise the exclusion of gain from 
50 percent to 60 percent. The tax-free rollover and section 1202 
provisions would be effective for sales occurring after the date of 
enactment. The regulated investment company provisions would be 
effective for taxable years beginning on or after the date of enactment.

[[Page 57]]

                        Bridge the Digital Divide

  Encourage sponsorship of qualified zone academies and technology 
centers.--Under current law, State and local governments can issue 
qualified zone academy bonds to fund improvements in certain ``qualified 
zone academies'' which provide elementary or secondary education. To 
encourage corporations to become sponsors of such academies and 
technology centers, a tax credit would be provided equal to 50 percent 
of the amount of corporate sponsorship payments made to a qualified zone 
academy, or a public library or community technology center, located in 
(or adjacent to) a designated empowerment zone or enterprise community. 
The credit would be available for corporate cash contributions, but only 
if a credit allocation has been made with respect to the contribution by 
the local governmental agency with responsibility for implementing the 
strategic plan of the empowerment zone or enterprise community. Up to $8 
million of credits could be allocated with respect to each of the 
existing 31 empowerment zones (and each of the 10 additional empowerment 
zones proposed to be designated under the Administration's budget); and 
up to $2 million of credits could be allocated with respect to each of 
the designated enterprise communities. The credit would be subject to 
the current-law general business credit rules, and would be effective 
for sponsorship payments made after December 31, 2000.
  Extend and expand enhanced deduction for corporate donations of 
computers.--The current-law enhanced deduction for contributions of 
computer technology and equipment for elementary or secondary school 
purposes is scheduled to expire for taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 2000. The Administration proposes extending this provision 
through June 30, 2004. In addition, to promote access of all persons to 
computer technology and training, the enhanced deduction would be 
expanded to apply to contributions of computer equipment to a public 
library or community technology center located in a designated 
empowerment zone or enterprise community, or in a census tract with a 
poverty rate of 20 percent or more.
  Provide tax credit for workplace literacy, basic education, and basic 
computer skills training.--Under current law, employers may deduct the 
costs of providing workplace literacy, basic education, and basic 
computer skill programs to employees, but no tax credits are allowed for 
any employer-provided education. As a result, employers lack sufficient 
incentive to provide basic education programs, the benefits of which are 
more difficult for employers to capture through increased productivity 
than the benefits of job-specific education. The Administration proposes 
to allow employers who provide certain workplace literacy, English 
literacy, basic education, or basic computer training for their eligible 
employees to claim a credit against Federal income taxes equal to 20 
percent of the employer's qualified expenses, up to a maximum credit of 
$1,050 per participating employee. Qualified education would be limited 
to basic instruction at or below the level of a high school degree, 
English literacy instruction, or basic computer skills. Eligible 
employees in basic education or computer training generally would not 
have received a high school degree or its equivalent. Instruction would 
be provided either by the employer, with curriculum approved by the 
State Adult Education Authority, or by local education agencies or other 
providers certified by the Department of Education. The credit would be 
available for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.

                     Make Health Care More Affordable

   Assist taxpayers with long-term care needs.--Current law provides a 
tax deduction for certain long-term care expenses. However, the 
deduction does not assist with all long-term care expenses, especially 
the costs of informal family caregiving. The Administration proposes to 
provide a new long-term care tax credit of $3,000. The credit could be 
claimed by a taxpayer for himself or herself or for a spouse or 
dependent with long-term care needs. To qualify for the credit, an 
individual with long-term care needs must be certified by a licensed 
physician as being unable for at least six months to perform at least 
three activities of daily living without substantial assistance from 
another individual due to loss of functional capacity. An individual may 
also qualify if he or she requires substantial supervision to be 
protected from threats to his or her own health and safety due to severe 
cognitive impairment and has difficulty with one or more activities of 
daily living or certain other age-appropriate activities. For purposes 
of the proposed credit, the current-law dependency tests would be 
liberalized, raising the gross income limit and allowing taxpayers to 
use a residency test rather than a support test. The credit would be 
phased out in combination with the child credit and the disabled worker 
credit for taxpayers with AGI in excess of the following thresholds: 
$110,000 for married taxpayers filing a joint return, $75,000 for a 
single taxpayer or head of household, and $55,000 for married taxpayers 
filing a separate return. The credit would be phased in at $1,000 in 
2001, $1,500 in 2002, $2,000 in 2003, $2,500 in 2004, and $3,000 in 2005 
and subsequent years.
   Encourage COBRA continuation coverage.--Current law provides a tax 
preference for employer-provided group health plans, but not for 
individually purchased health insurance coverage except to the extent 
that medical expenses exceed 7.5 percent of AGI or the individual has 
self-employment income. The Administration proposes to make health 
insurance more affordable for workers in transition and for retiring 
workers by providing a nonrefundable tax credit for the purchase of 
COBRA coverage. Individuals would receive a 25-percent tax credit for 
their own contributions towards COBRA coverage. The proposal would be 
effec

[[Page 58]]

tive for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2001.
   Provide tax credit for Medicare buy-in program.--The Administration 
proposes to make health insurance more affordable for older workers, 
retirees and displaced workers by providing a 25-percent nonrefundable 
tax credit for individuals purchasing health insurance through a newly 
created Medicare buy-in program. Under a separate proposal, all 
individuals at least sixty-two years of age and under sixty-five years 
of age, and workers displaced from their jobs who are at least fifty-
five years of age and under sixty-two years of age, would be eligible to 
buy into Medicare. Taxpayers would be eligible for a credit of 25 
percent of premiums paid under the Medicare buy-in program prior to age 
sixty-five. The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 2001.
   Provide tax relief for workers with disabilities.--Under current law, 
disabled taxpayers may claim an itemized deduction for impairment-
related work expenses. The Administration proposes to allow disabled 
workers to claim a $1,000 credit. This credit would help compensate 
people with disabilities for both formal and informal costs associated 
with work (e.g., personal assistance to get ready for work or special 
transportation). In order to be considered a worker with disabilities, a 
taxpayer must submit a licensed physician's certification that the 
taxpayer has been unable for at least 12 months to perform at least one 
activity of daily living without substantial assistance from another 
individual. A severely disabled worker could potentially qualify for 
both the proposed long-term care and disabled worker tax credits. The 
credit would be phased out in combination with the child credit and the 
proposed long-term care credit for taxpayers with AGI in excess of the 
following thresholds: $110,000 for married taxpayers filing a joint 
return, $75,000 for a single taxpayer or head of household, and $55,000 
for married taxpayers filing a separate return. The proposal would be 
effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.
  Provide tax relief to encourage small business health plans.--Small 
businesses generally face higher costs in establishing and operating 
health plans than do larger employers. Health benefit purchasing 
coalitions provide an opportunity for small businesses to offer a 
greater choice of health plans to their workers and to purchase health 
insurance at a reduced cost. The formation of these coalitions, however, 
has been hindered by limited access to capital. The Administration 
proposes to establish a temporary, special tax rule in order to 
facilitate the formation of health benefit purchasing coalitions. The 
special rule would facilitate private foundation grants and loans to 
fund initial operating expenses of qualified coalitions by treating such 
grants and loans as being made for exclusively charitable purposes. The 
special foundation rule would apply to grants and loans made prior to 
January 1, 2009 for initial operating expenses incurred prior to January 
1, 2011. In addition, in order to encourage the use of qualified 
coalitions by small businesses, the Administration proposes a temporary 
tax credit for small employers that currently do not provide health 
insurance to their workforces. The credit would equal 20 percent of 
small employer contributions to employee health plans purchased through 
a qualified coalition. The credit would be available to employers with 
at least two, but not more than 50 employees, counting only employees 
with annual compensation of at least $10,000 in the prior calendar year. 
The maximum per policy credit amount would be $400 per year for 
individual coverage and $1,000 per year for family coverage. The credit 
would be allowed with respect to employer contributions made during the 
first 24 months that the employer purchases health insurance through a 
qualified coalition, and would be subject to the overall limitations of 
the general business credit. The proposed credit would be effective for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000 for health plans 
established before January 1, 2009.
  Encourage development of vaccines for targeted diseases.---The 
proposed tax credit would encourage development of new vaccines for 
diseases that occur primarily in developing countries by providing a 
market for successful vaccines. The proposal would provide a credit 
against Federal income taxes for sales of a qualifying vaccine to a 
qualifying organization. The credit would equal 100 percent of the 
amount paid by the qualifying organization. A qualifying organization 
would be a nonprofit organization that purchases and distributes 
vaccines for developing countries. A qualifying vaccine would be a 
vaccine for targeted diseases that receives FDA approval as a new drug 
after the date of enactment. The targeted diseases would include 
malaria, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, and certain other infectious diseases. 
The credit would be available only if a credit allocation has been made 
with respect to the sale of a qualifying vaccine to a qualifying 
organization by the U.S. Agency for International Development (AID). For 
the period 2002 - 2010, AID would be allowed to designate up to $1 
billion of sales as eligible for the credit ($100 million per year for 
2002 through 2006 and $125 million per year for 2007 through 2010). 
Unallocated amounts for any year would be carried over and available for 
allocation in the ten following years.

             Strengthen Families and Improve Work Incentives

  Provide marriage penalty relief and increase standard deduction.--
Under current law, the standard deduction for single filers is estimated 
to be $4,500 in 2001. For married couples who file joint individual 
returns, the standard deduction will be $7,550, which is less than the 
combined amount for two single individuals. To reduce marriage 
penalties, the Administration proposes to increase the standard 
deduction for two-earner couples to double the amount of the standard

[[Page 59]]

deduction for single filers. The increase would be phased in evenly over 
five years. When fully phased in, the increase (at 2001 levels) would be 
$1,450. In addition, beginning in 2005, the Administration proposes to 
increase the standard deduction by $250 for single filers, $350 for 
heads of household, and $500 for joint filers.
  Increase, expand, and simplify child and dependent care tax credit.--
Under current law, taxpayers may receive a nonrefundable tax credit for 
a percentage of certain child care expenses they pay in order to work. 
The credit rate is phased down from 30 percent of expenses (for 
taxpayers with AGI of $10,000 or less) to 20 percent (for taxpayers with 
AGI above $28,000). The Administration believes that the maximum credit 
rate is too low. Moreover, because it is nonrefundable, many families 
who have significant child care costs and relatively low incomes are not 
eligible for the maximum credit. To alleviate the burden of child care 
costs for these families, the Administration proposes to make the credit 
refundable. Under the proposal, the maximum credit rate would be 
increased from 30 percent to 40 percent in 2003, and to 50 percent in 
2005 and subsequent years. The credit would become refundable in 2003. 
Eligibility for the maximum credit rate would be extended to taxpayers 
with AGI of $30,000 or less. The credit rate would be reduced by one 
percentage point for every $1,000 of AGI above $30,000 but would not be 
less than 20 percent.
  Under current law, no additional tax assistance under the child and 
dependent care tax credit is provided to families with infants, who 
require intense and sustained care. Furthermore, parents who themselves 
care for their infants, instead of incurring out-of-pocket child care 
expenses, receive no benefit under the child and dependent care tax 
credit. In order to provide assistance to these families, the 
Administration proposes to supplement the credit with an additional, 
nonrefundable credit for all taxpayers with children under the age of 
one, whether or not they incur out-of-pocket child care expenses. The 
amount of additional credit would be the applicable credit rate 
multiplied by $500 for a child under the age of one ($1,000 for two or 
more children under the age of one).
  The Administration also proposes to simplify eligibility for the 
credit by eliminating a complicated household maintenance test. Certain 
credit parameters would be indexed. The proposal would be effective for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.

  Provide tax incentives for employer-provided child-care facilities.--
The Administration proposes to provide taxpayers a credit equal to 25 
percent of expenses incurred to build or acquire a child care facility 
for employee use, or to provide child care services to children of 
employees directly or through a third party. Taxpayers also would be 
entitled to a credit equal to 10 percent of expenses incurred to provide 
employees with child care resource and referral services. A taxpayer's 
credit could not exceed $150,000 in a single year. Any deduction the 
taxpayer would otherwise be entitled to take for the expenses would be 
reduced by the amount of the credit. Similarly, the taxpayer's basis in 
a facility would be reduced to the extent that a credit is claimed for 
expenses of constructing or acquiring the facility. The credit would be 
effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.

     Promote Expanded Retirement Savings, Security, and Portability

  The Administration proposes further expansions of retirement savings 
incentives, including initiatives that would expand retirement plan 
coverage and other workplace-based savings opportunities, particularly 
for moderate- and lower-income workers not currently covered by 
employer-sponsored plans. Many of the new provisions are focused on 
employees of small businesses, a group that currently has low pension 
coverage. Other proposals enhance the fairness of plans by improving 
existing retirement plans for employers of all sizes, increase 
retirement security for women, promote portability, expand workers' and 
spouses' rights to know about their retirement benefits, and simplify 
pension rules. These provisions generally are effective for taxable 
years beginning after 2000.

                      Encourage Retirement Savings

  The Administration proposes two major initiatives designed to 
encourage retirement savings for moderate- and lower-income workers.

  Establish Retirement Savings Accounts.--Current law tax incentives to 
save through Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and pensions provide 
little impetus to saving by moderate- and lower-income workers. The 
Administration's proposal would create Retirement Savings Accounts, in 
which participants' voluntary contributions are matched by employers or 
financial institutions. The match will be provided in the form of a tax 
credit. Participation by financial institutions and taxpayers would be 
voluntary. Financial institutions could also claim a $10 tax credit to 
defray the administrative costs of establishing each new account.
  Under the proposal, eligible taxpayers would qualify for a match. 
Participants would make voluntary contributions to an account at a 
participating financial institution or employer-sponsored qualified 
retirement plan. Workers would receive a basic match of as much as 100 
percent for up to $1,000 in contributions ($500 from 2002 to 2004). They 
would also qualify for a supplemental match of up to $100 for the first 
$100 contributed to the account.
  The basic match phases down to 20 percent for taxpayers with AGI in 
the following ranges: between $25,000 and $50,000 ($20,000 and $40,000 
from 2002 to 2004) for married taxpayers filing a joint return, $18,750 
to $37,500 ($15,000 to $30,000 from 2002 to 2004) for taxpayers filing a 
head-of-household return, and $12,500 to $25,000 ($10,000 to $20,000 
from 2002 to 2004) for single taxpayers. The supplemental match phases 
out over the same income ranges. The 20 per

[[Page 60]]

cent basic match is available for taxpayers with AGI up to $80,000 
($40,000 from 2002 to 2004) on joint returns, $60,000 ($30,000 from 2002 
to 2004) on head-of-household returns and $40,000 ($20,000 from 2002 to 
2004) on single returns.
  Taxpayers with at least $5,000 in earnings (which could be joint 
earnings for married taxpayers filing a joint return) and aged 25 to 60 
would be eligible for the match. Withdrawals for certain special 
purposes would be permitted after five years; withdrawals for other 
purposes would not be permitted until retirement. The tax treatment 
would be similar to that afforded deductible IRAs or contributions to 
employer pensions: contributions would be excludable from income, 
earnings would not be taxed, but withdrawals would be included in 
taxable income.
  The credits would be effective for tax years beginning after December 
31, 2001.

  Provide small business tax credit for automatic contributions for non-
highly compensated employees.--Small employers could claim a 
nonrefundable tax credit equal to 50 percent of qualifying contributions 
made on behalf of non-highly compensated employees. Qualifying 
contributions are nonelective contributions to defined contribution 
plans of at least one percent of pay and nonelective or matching 
contributions of up to an additional two percent of pay (for a total of 
three percent of pay). Alternatively, qualifying contributions could be 
benefits accrued under a non-integrated defined benefit plan if 
equivalent to a three-percent non-elective contribution (in accordance 
with regulations that could provide simplified methods for defined 
benefit plans to qualify for the credit). Contributions must be vested 
at least as fast as either a three-year cliff or five-year graded 
schedule, must be subject to withdrawal restrictions, and must be 
allocated in proportion to pay. Credits claimed for subsequently 
forfeited contributions would be subject to recapture at a rate of 35 
percent. An employer could claim the credit for three years. The credit 
would be effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2001 and 
ending on or before December 31, 2009.

         Expand Pension Coverage for Employees of Small Business

  The Administration proposes a number of other incentives to encourage 
the adoption of retirement plans by small employers, generally those 
that have 100 or fewer employees with $5,000 or more of compensation in 
the preceding year.

  Provide tax credit for plan start up and administrative expenses.--The 
Administration proposes a three-year tax credit for the administrative 
and retirement education expenses of any small business that sets up a 
new qualified defined benefit or defined contribution plan (including a 
401(k) plan), savings incentive match plan for employees (SIMPLE), 
simplified employee pension (SEP), or payroll deduction IRA arrangement. 
The credit would cover 50 percent of the first $2,000 in administrative 
and retirement education expenses for the plan or arrangement for the 
first year of the plan and 50 percent of the first $1,000 of such 
expenses for each of the second and third years. The tax credit would 
help promote new plan sponsorship by targeting a tax benefit to 
employers adopting new plans or payroll deduction IRA arrangements, 
providing a marketing tool to financial institutions and advisors 
promoting new plan adoption, and increasing awareness of retirement 
savings options. The credit would be available for plans established 
after 1998 and before 2010.
  Provide for payroll deduction IRAs.--Employers could offer employees 
the opportunity to make IRA contributions on a pre-tax basis through 
payroll deduction. Providing employees an exclusion from income (in lieu 
of a deduction) is designed to increase saving among workers in 
businesses that do not offer a retirement plan. Signing up for payroll 
deduction is easy for an employee. In addition, saving is facilitated 
because it becomes automatic as salary reduction contributions continue 
each paycheck after an employee's initial election. Peer group 
participation may also encourage employees to save more. Finally, the 
favorable tax treatment of salary reductions would encourage 
participation.
  Provide for the SMART plan.--In addition to tax credits for qualified 
retirement plans, the Administration is proposing a new small business 
defined benefit type plan (the ``SMART'' plan) for calendar years 
beginning after 2000. The SMART plan combines certain key features of 
defined benefit plans and defined contribution plans: guaranteed minimum 
retirement benefits, an option for payments over the course of an 
employee's retirement years, and Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 
insurance, together with individual account balances that can benefit 
from favorable investment returns and have enhanced portability.
  Enhance the 401(k) SIMPLE plan.--The Administration proposes expanding 
the small business 401(k) SIMPLE plan and making it significantly more 
flexible without sacrificing fairness in the allocation of contributions 
to moderate- and lower-wage employees. The proposal would make three 
major changes to the existing 401(k) SIMPLE plan nonelective 
contribution alternative. First, non-highly compensated employees would 
be permitted to contribute up to $10,500 a year. Second, the employer's 
options under a 401(k) SIMPLE plan would be expanded: instead of being 
required to make a two-percent nonelective employer contribution (with a 
$6,000 employee contribution limit), employers could opt to make a one-
percent, two-percent, three-percent or higher nonelective employer 
contribution (subject to the requirement that all eligible employees 
receive the same rate of nonelective contribution). The one-percent 
401(k) SIMPLE plan would allow highly compensated employees to 
contribute up to $3,000 to the plan if the employer made a non-
integrated, fully vested, with

[[Page 61]]

drawal-restricted one-percent automatic contribution on behalf of all 
employees. The proposal would not change the current-law two-percent 
401(k) SIMPLE plan, with its $6,000 contribution limit, except to 
restrict application of the $6,000 limit to highly compensated 
employees, allowing others to contribute up to $10,500. In addition, as 
is the case under current law with the 401(k) nonelective safe harbor, 
an employer could make a three-percent (or greater) nonelective 
contribution, permitting all employees, including highly compensated 
ones, to contribute up to $10,500. Third, employers would have the 
flexibility to wait until as late as December 1 of the year for which 
the contribution is made to assess their financial situation for the 
year and decide on the level of their nonelective contribution.
  Eliminate IRS user fees for small business plan determination 
letters.--The Administration proposes the elimination of user fees for 
requests made after the date of enactment for an initial determination 
letter from the IRS for a qualified retirement plan maintained by a 
small business. To obtain the relief, the request must be made during 
the first five plan years.
  Permit certain S corporation shareholders and partners to borrow from 
plans.--S corporation shareholders and partners owning less than 20 
percent of the business would be able to borrow from the employer's 
qualified retirement plan in which they participate under the same rules 
that apply to all qualified plan participants for loans first made or 
refinanced after 2000.

                    Enhance Fairness in Pension Plans

  The Administration proposes modifications to the vesting rules, the 
contribution and deduction limits, and the 401(k) safe harbor plan rules 
to enhance the fairness of pensions to moderate- and lower-income 
workers.

  Accelerate vesting for qualified plans.--The Administration proposes 
accelerating the current-law five-year (or seven-year graded) allowable 
vesting schedule for qualified retirement plans. Given the mobile nature 
of today's workforce, particularly of working women, there is a 
significant risk that many participants will leave employment before 
fully vesting in their retirement benefits. Under the proposal, plans 
would be required to provide that an employee would be fully vested 
after completing three years of service or would vest in annual 20 
percent increments beginning after one year of service. In addition, 
time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) of up to 12 weeks 
of unpaid leave to care for a new child, to care for a family member who 
has a serious health condition, or because the worker has a serious 
health condition would be included in service for determining retirement 
plan vesting and eligibility to participate in the plan.
  Modify contribution and annual addition limitations.--The deduction 
limits for profit sharing plans and the percentage-of-pay limitations of 
defined contribution plans would be liberalized to ensure that non-
highly compensated employees' benefits are not inappropriately limited. 
The general 15-percent deduction limit for stock bonus and profit 
sharing plans would be increased by the amount of elective contributions 
on behalf of non-highly compensated employees participating in the plan 
that exceed, in the aggregate, 15 percent of compensation otherwise paid 
or accrued on behalf of such non-highly compensated employees. For 
purposes of determining the employer's deduction under the combined plan 
limit that applies when an employer has both a pension plan and a stock 
bonus or profit sharing plan in which the same employee participates, 
elective contributions on behalf of non-highly compensated employees 
would be disregarded. In addition, the 15-percent-of-compensation 
deduction limit would be further liberalized by treating certain salary 
reduction amounts as compensation in determining the deduction limits. 
The proposal also would increase the maximum allowable annual addition 
for defined contribution plans from 25 percent to 35 percent of 
compensation.
  Expand coverage of non-highly compensated employees under 401(k) safe 
harbor plans.--The Administration would modify the section 401(k) 
matching formula safe harbor by requiring that, in addition to the 
matching contribution, either (1) the employer make a contribution of 
one percent of compensation for each eligible non-highly compensated 
employee, regardless of whether the employee makes elective 
contributions, or (2) the plan provide for current and newly hired 
employees to be automatically enrolled in the 401(k) plan at a three-
percent contribution rate (where employees can elect other rates, 
including zero contribution). The proposal would also permit nonelective 
contributions to replace matching contributions in the 401(k) matching 
formula safe harbor.
  Simplify the definition of highly compensated employee.--The 
Administration proposes to simplify the definition of highly compensated 
employee by eliminating the top-paid group election. Under the 
simplified definition, an employee would be treated as highly 
compensated if the employee (1) was a five-percent owner at any time 
during the year or the preceding year, or (2) had compensation in excess 
of $80,000 (as adjusted) for the preceding year.
  Clarify the division of Section 457 assets upon divorce.--To make 
consistent the treatment of retirement benefits upon divorce, the 
Administration proposes to extend to section 457(b) plans the qualified 
domestic relations order (QDRO) regime that applies to distributions 
from a qualified plan made to a spouse, former spouse or alternate 
payee. Accordingly, the proposal would not tax the employee on 
distributions from a section 457(b) plan made to an alternate payee 
pursuant to a QDRO and also clarifies that a section 457(b)

[[Page 62]]

plan will not be treated as violating the restrictions on distributions 
when it honors the terms of a QDRO.
  Offer joint and 75-percent survivor annuity option.--Current law 
requires certain pension plans to offer to pay pension benefits as a 
joint and survivor annuity; frequently, the benefit for the surviving 
spouse is reduced to 50 percent of the monthly benefit paid when both 
spouses were alive. Under the proposal, plans that are subject to the 
joint and survivor annuity rules would be required to offer an option 
that pays a survivor benefit equal to at least 75 percent of the benefit 
the couple received while both were alive. This option would be 
especially helpful to women because they tend to live longer than men 
and because many aged widows have incomes below the poverty level.

                 Promote Retirement Savings Portability

  The Administration proposes significant changes to promote the 
portability and encourage the preservation of retirement savings.

  Encourage pension asset preservation by default rollover to IRA.--The 
direct rollover rules would be modified to encourage preservation of 
retirement assets by making a direct rollover the default option for 
eligible rollover distributions from a qualified retirement plan, 
section 403(b) annuity or governmental section 457(b) plan. The new rule 
would apply where a participant is entitled to an eligible rollover 
distribution from a qualified retirement plan, 403(b) annuity or 
governmental section 457(b) plan, the distribution is greater than 
$1,000, and the distribution is subject to non-consensual cashout under 
the plan (i.e, does not exceed $5,000 or is made after normal retirement 
age). In these circumstances, the distribution would be required to be 
directly rolled over to an eligible retirement plan (including an IRA), 
unless the participant affirmatively elects to receive the distribution 
in cash. For convenience, the rollover IRA could be designated when the 
employee becomes a participant in the plan; alternatively, it could be 
designated at termination of employment. If the participant fails to 
designate a rollover plan or IRA and does not affirmatively elect to 
receive the distribution in cash, then involuntary cashout amounts could 
be transferred to an IRA designated by the payor (for the benefit of the 
participant) or, at the election of the plan sponsor, retained in the 
plan.
  Expand permitted rollovers of employer-provided retirement savings.--
Under current law, rollovers are not allowed between qualified 
retirement plans, section 403(b) tax-sheltered annuities and 
governmental section 457(b) plans. The Administration proposes that an 
eligible rollover distribution from a qualified retirement plan, a 
section 403(b) tax-sheltered annuity, or a governmental section 457(b) 
plan could be rolled over to a traditional IRA, a qualified retirement 
plan, a section 403(b) annuity, or a governmental section 457(b) plan. 
Amounts distributed from a governmental section 457(b) plan would be 
subject to the early withdrawal tax to the extent the distribution 
consists of amounts attributable to rollovers from another type of plan. 
A governmental section 457(b) plan would be required to separately 
account for such amounts. To facilitate the preservation of the 
retirement savings of participants in governmental section 457(b) plans 
and to rationalize the treatment of different types of broad-based 
retirement plans, the Administration also proposes to extend the direct 
rollover and withholding rules to governmental section 457(b) plans. 
These plans, like qualified plans, would be required to provide written 
notification to participants regarding eligible rollover distributions 
(but would not be required to accept rollovers). Finally, the proposal 
would allow eligible rollover distributions to be rolled over from a 
qualified trust sponsored by a previous employer to a Federal employee's 
Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) account.
  Permit consolidation of retirement savings.--The Administration's 
proposal would allow individuals to consolidate their IRA funds and 
their workplace retirement savings in a single fund. Individuals who 
have IRAs with deductible IRA contributions would be permitted to 
transfer funds from their IRAs to their qualified defined contribution 
retirement plan, 403(b) tax-sheltered annuity or governmental section 
457(b) plan, provided that the retirement plan trustee could qualify as 
an IRA trustee. In addition, the proposal would allow individuals to 
roll over after-tax IRA or employer plan contributions to their new 
employer's defined contribution plan or to an IRA if the plan or IRA 
provider agrees to track and report the after-tax portion of the 
rollover for the individual. Finally, surviving spouses would be 
permitted to roll over distributions to a qualified plan, 403(b) annuity 
or governmental section 457(b) plan.
  Allow purchase of service credits in governmental defined benefit 
plans.--Employees of State and local governments, particularly teachers, 
often move between states and school districts in the course of their 
careers. Under State law, they often can purchase service credits in 
their State defined benefit pension plans for time spent in another 
state or district and earn a pension reflecting a full career of 
employment in the state in which they conclude their career. Under 
current law, these employees cannot make a tax-free transfer of the 
money they have saved in their 403(b) plan or governmental 457(b) plan 
to purchase these credits and often lack other resources to use for this 
purpose. Under the proposal, State and local government employees would 
be able to use funds from these retirement savings plans to purchase 
service credits through a direct transfer without first having to take a 
taxable distribution of these amounts.
  Allow immediate participation in Federal Thrift Savings Plan (TSP).--
Under the Administration's proposal, all waiting periods for Federal 
employees' participation in TSP (including matching and nonelective

[[Page 63]]

contributions) would be eliminated for new hires and rehires.

                        Improve Pension Security

  The Administration proposes a number of changes to improve pension 
security in defined benefit plans.

  Modify pension plan deduction rules.--For defined benefit plans, the 
change in the full funding limitation based on current liability would 
be phased in more quickly, so that this limitation would be 170 percent 
of current liability for years beginning after December 31, 2003. In 
addition, the ten-percent excise tax on nondeductible contributions 
would not apply to the extent a contribution is nondeductible solely as 
a result of the current liability full funding limit. The special 
deduction rule for terminating plans would be modified so that, at plan 
termination, all contributions needed to satisfy the plan's liabilities 
would be immediately deductible. In the case of a plan with fewer than 
100 participants, liabilities attributable to recent benefit increases 
for highly compensated employees would be disregarded for this purpose.
  Simplify full funding limitation for multiemployer plans.--The limit 
on deductible contributions based on a specified percentage of current 
liability would be eliminated for multiemployer defined benefit plans. 
Therefore, the annual deduction for contributions to such a plan would 
be limited to the amount by which the plan's accrued liability exceeds 
the value of the plan's assets.
  Modify defined benefit limit rules for multiemployer plans.--Defined 
benefit limits applicable to multiemployer defined benefit plans would 
be modified to eliminate the 100-percent-of-compensation limit (but not 
the $135,000 limit) for such plans. In addition, the special early 
retirement provisions for determining the defined benefit limit that 
currently apply to defined benefit plans sponsored by governments, tax-
exempt organizations and merchant marine would be expanded to include 
multiemployer plans. Finally, the rule requiring aggregation of benefits 
provided from a single employer for purposes of the defined benefit 
limit would be modified so as not to require aggregation of a 
multiemployer defined benefit plan and a single employer defined benefit 
plan for purposes of the 100-percent-of-compensation limit.

                  Increase Disclosure and Right to Know

  The Administration proposes to improve disclosure to workers and their 
spouses.

  Improve disclosure for plan amendments that significantly reduce 
future benefit accruals.--The Administration's proposal would strengthen 
the existing disclosure requirements that apply when a pension plan is 
amended to significantly reduce the rate of future benefit accrual. The 
proposal would require that the notice summarize the important terms of 
the amendment, including identification of the effective date of the 
amendment, a statement that the amendment is expected to significantly 
reduce the rate of future benefit accrual, a general description of how 
the amendment significantly reduces the rate of future benefit accrual, 
and a description of the class or classes of participants to whom the 
amendment applies. Participants must receive the notice at least 45 days 
before the effective date of the plan amendment. If the plan has at 
least 100 active participants, the plan administrator would also be 
required to provide affected participants an enhanced advance notice of 
the amendment that describes, and illustrates using specific examples, 
the impact of the amendment on representative affected participants; to 
make available the formulas and factors used in those examples in order 
to permit similar calculations to be made; and to make available a 
follow-up individualized benefit statement estimating the participant's 
projected retirement benefits. Regulations could exempt certain 
amendments, such as amendments that do not make a fundamental change in 
a plan's formula.
  Pension ``right-to-know'' proposals.--The Administration's proposal 
would enhance workers' and spouses' rights to know about their pension 
benefits by, among other things, requiring that the same explanation of 
a pension plan's survivor benefits that is provided to a participant be 
provided to the participant's spouse.

        Provide AMT Relief for Families and Simplify the Tax Laws

  Provide adjustments for personal exemptions and the standard deduction 
in the individual alternative minimum tax (AMT).--The Administration is 
concerned that the AMT imposes financial and compliance burdens upon 
taxpayers that have few preference items and were not the originally 
intended targets. In particular, the Administration is concerned that 
the individual AMT may act to erode the benefits of dependent personal 
exemptions and standard deductions that are intended to provide relief 
for middle-income taxpayers--especially those with larger families. For 
example, under current law, a couple with five children and $70,000 of 
income that claims the standard deduction would be subject to the AMT in 
2000. In response, the Administration proposes to phase out the tax 
preference status of dependent exemptions under the AMT; that is, when 
fully phased in, claiming children as personal exemptions on a tax 
return would not cause a taxpayer to be subject to the AMT. For tax 
years 2000 through 2007, only the first two dependent exemptions would 
be AMT preference items; in 2008 and 2009, only the first exemption 
would be a preference; in 2010 and thereafter, dependent exemptions 
would no longer be treated as an AMT preference. The Administration also 
proposes to allow taxpayers who claim the standard deduction for regular 
income tax purposes to claim the same standard deduction for AMT 
purposes for tax years 2000 and 2001. That provi

[[Page 64]]

sion would complement the provision enacted in 1999 that allows the use 
of personal credits against the AMT through 2001.
  Simplify and increase standard deduction for dependent filers.--
Currently, the standard deduction for tax filers who can be claimed as 
dependents by another taxpayer is the smaller of the standard deduction 
for single taxpayers ($4,400 for tax year 2000) or the special standard 
deduction for dependent filers. The special standard deduction is the 
larger of (1) $700 (for tax year 2000) or (2) the individual's earned 
income plus $250 (for tax year 2000). The current provision requires 
dependents to file a tax return if they have at least $250 of interest 
and dividends from their savings and their earnings plus income from 
savings is at least $700. To simplify the standard deduction and 
increase it for dependent filers, the Administration proposes that, 
beginning in 2000, the standard deduction for dependent filers would be 
the individual's earned income plus $700 (indexed after 2000), but not 
more than the regular standard deduction. This proposal would reduce the 
number of dependent filers required to file a tax return by 400,000 and 
simplify filing for other dependents with earned income.
  Replace support test with residency test (limited to children).--Under 
current law, taxpayers must provide over half the support of individuals 
claimed as dependents on their tax return. Under the proposal, taxpayers 
would be allowed to claim their children as dependents by meeting a 
residency test instead of a support test. If the child is 18 or younger 
(23 or younger if a full-time student) and is the taxpayer's son, 
daughter, stepchild, or grandchild, then the support test may be waived 
if the taxpayer lives with the child for over half the year. A twelve-
month test would apply to foster children. If more than one taxpayer 
could claim the child as a dependent under the proposed rule, the 
taxpayer with the highest AGI would be entitled to the dependency 
exemption. The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 2000.
  Index maximum exclusion for capital gains on sale of principal 
residence.--Under current law, taxpayers can generally exclude up to 
$250,000 ($500,000 for married taxpayers filing joint returns) of gain 
on the sale of a principal residence. To be eligible for the full 
exclusion, the taxpayer must have owned the residence and occupied it as 
a principal residence for at least two of the five years preceding the 
sale. A taxpayer may claim the deduction only once in any two-year 
period. Under the proposal, the maximum exclusion amounts would be 
indexed for inflation effective January 1, 2001. The proposal will 
prevent inflation from subjecting more taxpayers to tax when they sell 
their homes, and will prevent more taxpayers from having to maintain 
complex records regarding the cost of their homes.
  Provide tax credit to encourage electronic filing of individual income 
tax returns.--Under current law, tax return preparation costs of 
individuals, including any costs of electronic filing, may be deducted 
only by taxpayers who itemize deductions and then only to the extent 
that such costs, in combination with most other miscellaneous itemized 
deductions, exceed two percent of AGI. The proposal would provide a 
temporary, refundable tax credit for the electronic filing of individual 
income tax returns. The credit would be for tax years 2001 through 2006 
and would be $10 for each electronically filed return, and $5 for each 
TeleFile return (which are filed by entering information through the 
keypads of telephones). The credit would encourage taxpayers to try 
electronic return or Telefile submission, which reduces taxpayer errors 
and the need for subsequent contacts between the taxpayer and the IRS 
and which permits taxpayers to receive their tax refunds faster. The 
credit would help the IRS achieve the goal set in the 1998 IRS 
Restructuring and Reform Act of having 80 percent of 2006 returns filed 
electronically. No later than tax year 2002, the IRS would be required 
to offer one or more options to the public, through contract 
arrangements with the private sector, for preparing and filing 
individual income tax returns over the Internet at no cost to the 
taxpayer.
  Clarify the tax treatment of disabled workers in a sheltered 
workshop.--The Administration's proposal would provide a limited 
exclusion from the definition of ``employment'' for certain services 
rendered by disabled individuals in a sheltered workshop program 
effective the date of enactment. The exclusion would be limited to 
service (1) performed for a period of no more than 18 months under a 
minimum wage exemption certificate issued by the Department of Labor and 
(2) provided in a sheltered workshop operated by a section 501(c)(3) 
organization or a State or local government. However, organizations 
could voluntarily agree to provide coverage, pursuant to an agreement 
with the Social Security Administration. Corresponding changes would be 
made to the Social Security Act.
  Simplify, retarget and expand expensing for small business.--In place 
of depreciation, a taxpayer with a sufficiently small amount of annual 
investment may elect to deduct up to $20,000 of the cost of qualifying 
property (generally depreciable tangible property) placed in service in 
taxable year 2000. The deductible amount rises to $24,000 in 2001 and 
2002, and to $25,000 in 2003 and subsequent taxable years. The 
Administration proposes to increase the amount of investment that can be 
expensed to $25,000 in taxable year 2001; thereafter, this amount would 
be increased for inflation in increments of $1,000. In addition, the 
Administration proposes certain modifications to better target the 
applicability of expensing, to allow the deduction to be claimed at the 
entity level for flow-through businesses, and to make certain computer 
software eligible for expensing.

[[Page 65]]

  Provide optional Self-employment Contributions Act (SECA) 
computations.--Self-employed individuals currently may elect to increase 
their self-employment income for purposes of obtaining social security 
coverage. Current law provides more liberal treatment for farmers as 
compared to other self-employed individuals. The Administration proposes 
to extend the favorable treatment currently accorded to farmers to other 
self-employed individuals. The proposal would be effective for taxable 
years beginning after December 31, 2000.
  Clarify rules relating to certain disclaimers.--Under current law, if 
a person refuses to accept (disclaims) a gift or bequest prior to 
accepting the transfer (or any of its benefits), the transfer to the 
disclaiming person generally is ignored for Federal transfer tax 
purposes. Current law is unclear as to whether certain transfer-type 
disclaimers benefit from rules applicable to other disclaimers under the 
estate and gift tax. Current law is also silent as to the income tax 
consequences of a disclaimer. The Administration proposes to extend to 
transfer-type disclaimers the rule permitting disclaimer of an undivided 
interest in property as well as the rule permitting a spouse to disclaim 
an interest that will pass to a trust for the spouse's benefit. The 
proposal also clarifies that disclaimers are effective for income tax 
purposes. The proposal would apply to disclaimers made after the date of 
enactment.
  Simplify the foreign tax credit limitation for dividends from 10/50 
companies.--TRA97 modified the regime applicable to indirect foreign tax 
credits generated by dividends from so-called 10/50 companies. 
Specifically, the Act retained the prior law ``separate basket'' 
approach with respect to pre-2003 distributions by such companies, 
adopted a ``single basket'' approach with respect to post-2002 
distributions by such companies of their pre-2003 earnings, and adopted 
a ``look-through'' approach with respect to post-2002 distributions by 
such companies of their post-2002 earnings. The application of the three 
approaches results in significant additional complexity. The proposal 
would simplify the application of the foreign tax credit limitation 
significantly by applying a look-through approach immediately to 
dividends paid by 10/50 companies, regardless of the year in which the 
earnings and profits out of which the dividends are paid were 
accumulated (including pre-2003 years). The proposal would be effective 
for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999.
  Provide interest treatment for dividends paid by certain regulated 
investment companies to foreign persons.--Under current law, foreign 
investors in U.S. bond and money-market mutual funds are effectively 
subject to withholding tax on interest income and short term capital 
gains derived through such funds. Foreign investors that hold U.S. debt 
obligations directly generally are not subject to U.S. taxation on such 
interest income and gains. This proposal would eliminate the discrepancy 
between these two classes of foreign investors by eliminating the U.S. 
withholding tax on distributions from U.S. mutual funds that hold 
substantially all of their assets in cash or U.S. debt securities (or 
foreign debt securities that are not subject to withholding tax under 
foreign law). The proposal is designed to enhance the ability of U.S. 
mutual funds to attract foreign investors and to eliminate complications 
now associated with the structuring of vehicles for foreign investment 
in U.S. debt securities. The proposal would be effective for mutual fund 
taxable years beginning after the date of enactment.
  Expand declaratory judgment remedy for noncharitable organizations 
seeking determinations of tax-exempt status. --Under current law, 
organizations seeking tax-exempt status as charities are allowed to seek 
a declaratory judgment as to their tax status if their application is 
denied or delayed by the IRS. A noncharity (an organization not 
described in section 501(c)(3)) that applies to the IRS for recognition 
of its tax-exempt status faces potential tax liability if its 
application ultimately is denied by the IRS. This creates uncertainty 
for the noncharity, particularly when the IRS determination is delayed 
for a significant period of time. To reduce this uncertainty, the 
declaratory judgment procedure available to charities under current-law 
section 7428 would be expanded, so that if the application of any 
organization seeking tax-exempt status under section 501(c) is pending 
with the IRS for more than 270 days, and the organization has exhausted 
all administrative remedies available within the IRS, then the 
organization could seek a declaratory judgment as to its tax-exempt 
status from the United States Tax Court. The proposal would be effective 
for applications for recognition of tax-exempt status filed after 
December 31, 2000.
  Simplify the active trade or business requirement for tax-free spin-
offs.--In order to satisfy the active trade or business requirement for 
tax-free spin-offs, split-offs, and split-ups, the distributing 
corporation and the controlled corporation both must be engaged in the 
active conduct of a trade or business. If a corporation is not itself 
active, it may satisfy the active trade or business test indirectly, but 
only if substantially all of its assets consist of stock and securities 
of a controlled corporation that is engaged in an active trade or 
business. Because the substantially all standard is much higher than 
that required if the corporation is active itself, a taxpayer often must 
engage in pre-distribution restructurings that it otherwise would not 
have undertaken. There is no clear policy reason that the standards for 
meeting the active trade or business requirement should differ depending 
upon whether a corporation is considered to be active on a direct or 
indirect basis. Therefore, the Administration proposes to simplify the 
requirement by removing the substantially all test and generally 
allowing an affiliated group to satisfy the active trade or business 
requirement as long as the affiliated group, taken as a whole, is 
considered active. This proposal would be effective for transactions 
after the date of enactment.

[[Page 66]]

  Modify translation of foreign withholding taxes by accrual basis 
taxpayers.--Under current law, taxpayers who take foreign income taxes 
into account when accrued generally are required to translate such taxes 
into dollars by using the average exchange rate for the taxable year to 
which such taxes relate. This rule was intended to be a simplification 
measure that would reduce the need for accrual basis taxpayers to 
redetermine the amount of foreign tax credits claimed with respect to 
foreign taxes accrued prior to the date of payment. This rule may not 
clearly reflect income, however, in the case of foreign withholding 
taxes paid by an accrual basis taxpayer, because such taxes are never 
accrued prior to the date the tax is paid (regardless of the taxpayer's 
method of accounting). Moreover, certain taxpayers that receive income 
subject to withholding taxes (such as regulated investment companies 
with a taxable year that differs from the calendar year) may find it 
impossible to comply with current law. The proposal would provide that 
foreign withholding taxes are to be translated at the spot rate on the 
date of payment, regardless of the method of accounting of the taxpayer. 
The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment.
  Eliminate duplicate penalties for failure to file annual reports.--
Employer penalties for failure to file an annual report would be 
simplified by eliminating the Internal Revenue Code penalties for a plan 
to which ERISA applies. Certain other ERISA reporting penalties would be 
modified or eliminated.
  Clarify foreign tax credit rules to provide the circumstances under 
which a domestic corporation that owns a foreign corporation through a 
partnership will be eligible for the deemed-paid credit.--A domestic 
corporation that is a U.S. shareholder of a controlled foreign 
corporation (CFC) can claim deemed-paid foreign tax credits with respect 
to foreign taxes paid by the CFC on the subpart F income that the U.S. 
shareholder currently includes in income to the same extent that it 
would be so allowed if the subpart F inclusion were treated as an actual 
dividend distribution. To be eligible for the deemed-paid credit on an 
actual dividend distribution, a domestic corporation must own 10% or 
more of the voting stock of the foreign corporation from which it 
receives the dividend. Under current law, it is not clear how to apply 
the deemed-paid foreign tax credit rules when a foreign corporation is 
owned through a partnership. The proposal would provide that the deemed-
paid credit is available to a domestic corporation that, through a 
partnership, owns 10% or more of the voting stock of a foreign 
corporation from which it receives its proportionate share of dividend 
income. This rule would apply to both foreign and U.S. partnerships. For 
purposes of this provision, a foreign partnership would be treated as a 
tier under the rule that allows the deemed-paid credit only with respect 
to taxes paid by foreign corporations that are not below the sixth tier.

                         Encourage Philanthropy

  Allow deduction for charitable contributions by non-itemizing 
taxpayers.--To provide an incentive for taxpayers who use the standard 
deduction to make large charitable contributions, the Administration 
proposes a deduction for substantial charitable contributions made by 
taxpayers who do not itemize their deductions. Under current law, 
individual taxpayers who itemize their deductions generally may claim a 
deduction (subject to certain percentage limitations) for contributions 
made to qualified charitable organizations. However, individual 
taxpayers who elect the standard deduction (so-called ``non-itemizers'') 
may not claim a deduction for charitable contributions, although the 
standard deduction theoretically includes an allowance for moderate 
amounts of charitable giving. The proposal would allow taxpayers who are 
non-itemizers to deduct 50 percent of their charitable contributions in 
excess of $1,000 ($2,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly) for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000 and before January 1, 
2006. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2005, non-itemizers 
would be allowed to deduct 50 percent of their charitable contributions 
in excess of $500 ($1,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly).
  Simplify and reduce the excise tax on foundation investment income.--
Under current law, private foundations generally are subject to a two-
percent excise tax on their net investment income. In some cases, the 
excise tax rate is reduced to one percent, provided that current-year 
grantmaking by the foundation is determined under a complex formula to 
not fall below the average level of the foundation's grantmaking in the 
five preceding taxable years (with certain adjustments). This complex 
formula creates a perverse incentive for foundations not to 
significantly increase their grantmaking for charitable purposes in any 
particular year, because if a foundation does so, it becomes more 
difficult for the foundation to qualify for the reduced one-percent 
excise tax rate in subsequent years. Accordingly, the Administration 
proposes that the excise tax on private foundation investment income be 
simplified by reducing the general two-percent excise tax rate to a 
1.25-percent excise tax rate that would apply in all cases. The complex 
formula for determining whether a foundation is maintaining its historic 
level of charitable grantmaking, and the special excise tax rate 
available to only some foundations, would be repealed. Thus, private 
foundations would not suffer adverse excise tax consequences if they 
respond to charitable needs by significantly increasing their 
grantmaking in a particular year. The proposal would be effective for 
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.
  Increase limit on charitable donations of appreciated property.--Under 
current law, charitable contributions made by individuals who do not 
claim the standard deduction are deductible for income tax purposes, up 
to certain limits depending on the type of

[[Page 67]]

property donated and whether the donee organization qualifies as a 
public charity or private foundation. Contributions made by an 
individual to a public charity generally are deductible in an amount not 
exceeding 50 percent of the individual's AGI for the current year (with 
any remaining amount carried over for up to five taxable years). In the 
case of contributions made by an individual to a private foundation, a 
30-percent AGI limitation generally applies. However, in the case of 
donated stock and other non-cash contributions, a 30-percent AGI 
limitation applies to gifts to public charities, and a 20-percent AGI 
limitation applies to gifts to private foundations. These special 
contribution limits for non-cash gifts create unnecessary complexity and 
could discourage gifts of valuable or unique property to charitable 
organizations. Therefore, the Administration proposes that the special 
contribution limits for non-cash gifts be repealed, effective for 
contributions made after December 31, 2000.
  Clarify public charity status of donor advised funds.---In recent 
years, there has been an explosive growth in so-called ``donor advised 
funds'' maintained by charitable corporations. These funds generally 
permit a donor to claim a current charitable contribution deduction for 
amounts contributed to a charity and to provide ongoing advice regarding 
the investment or distribution of such amounts, which are maintained by 
the charity in a separate fund or account. In the absence of clear 
guidelines, donor advised funds potentially may be used to provide 
donors with the benefits normally associated with private foundations 
(such as control over grantmaking), without the regulatory safeguards 
that apply to private foundations. Therefore, the Administration 
proposes that current-law rules be clarified so that a charitable 
corporation which, as its primary activity, operates donor advised funds 
may qualify as a publicly supported organization only if: (1) there is 
no material restriction or condition that prevents the corporation from 
freely and effectively employing the contributed assets in furtherance 
of its exempt purposes; (2) distributions from donor advised funds are 
made only to public charities (or private operating foundations); and 
(3) the corporation distributes annually for charitable purposes an 
amount equal to at least five percent of the fair market value of the 
corporation's aggregate investment assets. The proposal also would 
clarify that, for purposes of the section 4958 excise tax on certain 
excess benefit transactions, a person who provides advice with respect 
to a particular donor advised fund maintained by a public charity is 
treated as having substantial influence with respect to that particular 
fund.

          Promote Energy Efficiency and Improve the Environment

                                Buildings

  Provide tax credit for energy-efficient building equipment.--No income 
tax credit is provided currently for investment in energy-efficient 
building equipment. The Administration proposes to provide a new tax 
credit for the purchase of certain highly efficient building equipment 
technologies, including fuel cells, electric heat pump water heaters, 
and natural gas heat pumps. The credit would equal 20 percent of the 
amount of qualified investment, subject to caps of $500 per kilowatt for 
fuel cells, $500 per unit for electric heat pump water heaters, and 
$1,000 per unit for natural gas heat pumps. The credit would be 
available for the four-year period beginning January 1, 2001 and ending 
December 31, 2004.
  Provide tax credit for new energy-efficient homes.--No income tax 
credit is provided currently for investment in energy-efficient homes. 
The Administration proposes to provide a tax credit to taxpayers who 
purchase, as a principal residence, certain newly constructed homes that 
are highly energy efficient. The credit would equal $1,000 or $2,000 
depending upon the home's energy efficiency. The $1,000 credit would be 
available for homes purchased between January 1, 2001 and December 31, 
2003 that reduce energy usage by at least 30 percent relative to the 
standard under the 1998 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). 
The $2,000 credit would be available for homes purchased between January 
1, 2001 and December 31, 2005 that reduce energy usage by at least 50 
percent relative to the IECC standard.

                             Transportation

  Extend electric vehicle tax credit and provide tax credit for hybrid 
vehicles.--Under current law, a 10-percent tax credit up to $4,000 is 
provided for the cost of a qualified electric vehicle. The full amount 
of the credit is available for purchases prior to 2002. The credit 
begins to phase down in 2002 and is not available after 2004. The 
Administration proposes to extend the present $4,000 credit through 2006 
and to allow the full amount of the credit to be available for qualified 
electric vehicles through 2006. The Administration also proposes to 
provide a tax credit of up to $3,000 for purchases of a qualified hybrid 
vehicle after December 31, 2002 and before January 1, 2007. A qualified 
hybrid vehicle is a road vehicle that can draw propulsion energy from 
both of the following on-board sources of stored energy: a consumable 
fuel and a rechargeable battery. The amount of the credit would depend 
upon the vehicle's design performance. The credit would be available for 
all qualifying light vehicles including cars, minivans, sport utility 
vehicles, and light trucks.

                                Industry

  Provide 15-year depreciable life for distributed power property.--
Distributed power technologies can be more energy efficient and generate 
fewer greenhouse gases than conventional generation methods. To promote 
the use of these technologies, the Administration proposes to simplify 
and rationalize the current system for assigning cost recovery periods 
to certain depre

[[Page 68]]

ciable property by assigning a single 15-year recovery period to 
qualifying distributed power property. Distributed power property would 
include depreciable assets used by a taxpayer to produce electricity for 
use in a nonresidential or residential building that is used in the 
taxpayer's trade or business. Such property also would include 
depreciable assets used to generate electricity for primary use in an 
industrial manufacturer's process or plant activity, provided such 
assets had a rated total capacity in excess of 500 kilowatts. Qualifying 
property could be used to produce thermal energy or mechanical power for 
use in a heating or cooling application. However, at least 40 percent of 
the total useful energy produced in a commercial or residential setting 
must consist of electrical power. When used in an industrial setting, at 
least 40 percent of produced energy must be used in the taxpayer's 
manufacturing process or plant activity. In addition, a taxpayer would 
be required to have a reasonable expectation that no more than 50 
percent of the produced electricity would be sold to, or used by, 
unrelated persons. The proposal would apply to assets placed in service 
after the date of enactment.

                          Clean Energy Sources

  Extend and modify the tax credit for producing electricity from 
certain sources.--Current law provides taxpayers a 1.5-cent-per-
kilowatt-hour tax credit, adjusted for inflation after 1992, for 
electricity produced from wind or ``closed-loop'' biomass. The 
electricity must be sold to an unrelated third party and the credit 
applies to the first 10 years of production. The current credit applies 
only to facilities placed in service before January 1, 2002, after which 
it expires. The Administration proposes to extend the current credit for 
wind and closed-loop biomass for two and one-half years, to facilities 
placed in service before July 1, 2004, and to expand eligible biomass to 
include certain biomass from forest-related resources, agricultural 
sources and other sources for facilities placed in service after 
December 31, 2000 and before January 1, 2006. Biomass facilities that 
were placed in service before July 1, 1999 would be eligible for a 
credit of 1.0 cent per kilowatt hour for electricity produced from the 
newly eligible sources from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2003. A 
0.5-cent-per-kilowatt-hour tax credit would also be allowed for cofiring 
biomass in coal plants from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2005. 
In addition, electricity produced from methane from certain facilities 
would be eligible for the following credits: (1) 1.5 cent per kilowatt 
hour for methane produced from landfills not subject to EPA's 1996 New 
Source Performance Standards/Emissions Guidelines (NSPS/EG), or (2) 1.0 
cent per kilowatt hour for methane produced from landfills subject to 
NSPS/EG. The credit would apply to facilities placed in service after 
December 31, 2000 and before January 1, 2006.
  Provide tax credit for solar energy systems.--Current law provides a 
10-percent business energy investment tax credit for qualifying 
equipment that uses solar energy to generate electricity, to heat or 
cool, to provide hot water for use in a structure, or to provide solar 
process heat. The Administration proposes a new tax credit for 
purchasers of roof-top photovoltaic systems and solar water heating 
systems located on or adjacent to the building for uses other than 
heating swimming pools. The proposed credit would be equal to 15 percent 
of qualified investment up to a maximum of $1,000 for solar water 
heating systems and $2,000 for rooftop photovoltaic systems. The credit 
would apply only to equipment placed in service after December 31, 2000 
and before January 1, 2006 for solar water heating systems, and after 
December 31, 2000 and before January 1, 2008 for rooftop photovoltaic 
systems. (Taxpayers would choose between the proposed tax credit and the 
current-law tax credit for each investment.)

                        Electricity Restructuring

  Revise tax-exempt bond rules for electric power facilities.--To 
encourage restructuring the nation's electric power industry so that 
consumers benefit from competition, rules relating to the use of tax-
exempt bonds to finance electric power facilities would be modified. To 
encourage public power systems to implement retail competition, 
outstanding bonds issued to finance transmission facilities would 
continue their tax-exempt status if private use resulted from allowing 
nondiscriminatory open access to those facilities. Outstanding bonds 
issued to finance generation or distribution facilities would continue 
their tax-exempt status if the issuer implements retail competition. To 
support fair competition within the restructured industry, interest on 
newly issued bonds to finance electric generation or transmission 
facilities would not be exempt. Distribution facilities could continue 
to be financed with tax-exempt bonds. These changes would be effective 
upon enactment.
  Modify taxation of contributions to nuclear decommissioning funds.--
Under current law, deductible contributions to nuclear decommissioning 
funds are limited to the amount included in the taxpayer's cost of 
service for ratemaking purposes. For deregulated utilities, this 
limitation may result in the denial of any deduction for contributions 
to a nuclear decommissioning fund. The Administration proposes to repeal 
the limitation for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000. As 
under current law, deductible contributions would not be permitted to 
exceed the amount the IRS determines to be necessary to provide for 
level funding of an amount equal to the taxpayer's decommissioning 
costs.

                  Modify International Trade Provisions

  Extend and modify Puerto Rico economic-activity tax credit.--The 
Puerto Rico and possessions tax credit was repealed in 1996. However, 
both the income-based credit and the economic-activity-based credit 
remain available for certain business operations con

[[Page 69]]

ducted in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2006, subject to 
base-period caps. To provide a more efficient tax incentive for the 
economic development of Puerto Rico and to continue the shift from an 
income-based credit to an economic-activity-based credit that was begun 
in 1993, the proposal would modify the phase-out of the economic-
activity-based credit for Puerto Rico by (1) opening it to newly 
established business operations during the phase-out period, effective 
for taxable years beginning after December 31, 1999, and (2) extending 
the phase-out period through taxable years beginning before January 1, 
2009.
  Extend the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) and modify other 
trade provisions.--Under GSP, duty-free access is provided to over 4,000 
items from eligible developing countries that meet certain worker 
rights, intellectual property protection, and other criteria. The 
Administration proposes to extend the program, which expires after 
September 30, 2001, through June 30, 2004. The Administration also is 
proposing to: (1) enhance trade benefits, through December 31, 2010, for 
subsaharan African countries undertaking strong economic reforms; (2) 
grant, through September 30, 2004, duty-free treatment to certain 
imports from the Southeast Europe countries and territories of Albania, 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic 
of Macedonia, Romania, Slovenia, Kosovo and Montenegro; and (3) provide, 
through December 31, 2004, expanded trade benefits mainly on textiles 
and apparel to Caribbean Basin countries that meet new eligibility 
criteria. These proposals will help Caribbean Basin countries prepare 
for a future free trade agreement with the United States and respond to 
the effects of Hurricanes George and Mitch, and will help the countries 
of Southeast Europe rebuild and reintegrate their economies and work 
toward achieving lasting political stability in the region.
  Levy tariff on certain textiles and apparel products produced in the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI).--The Administration 
is proposing a tariff on textile and apparel products that are produced 
in the CNMI without certain percentages of workers who are U.S. 
citizens, nationals or permanent residents or citizens of the Pacific 
island nations freely associated with the U.S.

                        Miscellaneous Provisions

  Make first $2,000 of severance pay exempt from income tax.--Under 
current law, payments received by a terminated employee are taxable as 
compensation. The Administration proposes to allow an individual to 
exclude up to $2,000 of severance pay from income when certain 
conditions are met. First, the severance must result from a reduction in 
force by the employer. Second, the individual must not obtain a job 
within six months of separation with compensation at least equal to 95 
percent of his or her prior compensation. Third, the total severance 
payments received by the employee must not exceed $75,000. The exclusion 
would be effective for severance pay received in taxable years beginning 
after December 31, 2000 and before January 1, 2004.
  Exempt Holocaust reparations from Federal income tax.--The Internal 
Revenue Code defines gross income as ``gross income from whatever source 
derived,'' except for certain items specifically exempt or excluded by 
statute. Although the United States - Federal Republic of Germany Income 
Tax Convention and a series of rulings issued by the IRS provide that 
certain Holocaust-related reparations are exempt from Federal income 
tax, there is no explicit statutory exception from gross income for 
amounts received by Holocaust victims or their heirs. In recent years, 
several countries and companies within those countries have acknowledged 
that they have not made adequate compensation or restitution to victims 
or their heirs for the deprivations inflicted upon them during the Nazi 
Holocaust, and have agreed to establish funds or to make direct payments 
of cash or property to such individuals. To provide clarity and relief 
for Holocaust victims and their families, the Administration proposes a 
statutory exemption from gross income for any amount received by an 
individual or heir of an individual from Holocaust-related funds and 
settlements, including in compensation for or recovery of property 
confiscated in connection with the Holocaust. The proposal would be 
effective for amounts received on or after January 1, 2000. No inference 
is intended as to the tax treatment of amounts received prior to that 
date.

     ELIMINATE UNWARRANTED BENEFITS AND ADOPT OTHER REVENUE MEASURES

  The President's plan closes tax shelters and other loopholes, curtails 
unwarranted corporate tax subsidies, improves tax compliance and adopts 
other revenue measures.

          Limit Benefits of Corporate Tax Shelter Transactions

  The Administration continues to be concerned about the use and 
proliferation of corporate tax shelters and their effect upon both the 
corporate tax base and the integrity of the tax system as a whole. The 
primary goals of corporate tax shelters are to manufacture tax benefits 
that can be used to offset unrelated income of the taxpayer or to create 
tax-favored or tax-exempt economic income.
  The growing use of corporate tax shelters was further described by the 
Treasury Department in its White Paper entitled, The Problem of 
Corporate Tax Shelters: Discussion, Analysis and Legislative Proposals, 
issued in July 1999. The paper concludes that corporate tax shelters are 
best addressed by increasing disclosure of corporate tax shelter 
activities, increasing and strengthening the substantial understatement 
penalty, codifying the judicially-created economic substance doctrine, 
and providing consequences to all parties to the transaction

[[Page 70]]

(e.g., promoters, advisors, and tax-indifferent, accommodating parties.)
  The Administration proposes several general remedies to curb the 
growth of corporate tax shelters that focus on these four themes. In 
addition, the Administration proposes to modify the treatment of certain 
specific transactions that provide sheltering potential. No inference is 
intended as to the treatment of any of these transactions under current 
law.

  Increase disclosure of certain transactions.--Greater disclosure of 
corporate tax shelter transactions will discourage some corporations 
from engaging in such activity and would aid the IRS in identifying 
questionable transactions and enforcing current law. The Administration 
proposes to require disclosure of certain reportable transactions. 
Disclosure would be required if a transaction possesses certain 
objective characteristics common to corporate tax shelter transactions. 
Disclosure would be made on a short form or statement that provides the 
essence of the transaction, is filed with the IRS National Office and 
with the tax return by the due date of the return, and is signed by a 
corporate officer with the appropriate knowledge of the transaction. 
Significant monetary and procedural remedies would be imposed upon 
failure to provide the required disclosure. The proposal would be 
effective for transactions entered into after the date of first 
committee action.
  Modify substantial understatement penalty for corporate tax 
shelters.--The current 20-percent substantial understatement penalty 
imposed on corporate tax shelter items can be avoided if the corporate 
taxpayer had reasonable cause for the tax treatment of the item and 
acted in good faith. In order to change the cost-benefit analysis of 
entering a corporate tax shelter, the Administration proposes to 
increase the substantial understatement penalty on corporate tax shelter 
items to 40 percent. In order to encourage disclosure, the penalty will 
be reduced to 20 percent if the corporate taxpayer provides the 
requisite disclosure of the transaction. The 20-percent penalty for 
disclosed transactions could be avoided by a showing that the taxpayer 
reasonably believed that it had a strong chance of sustaining its tax 
position and acted in good faith. The proposal would be effective for 
transactions entered into after the date of first committee action.
  Codify the economic substance doctrine.--The ``economic substance'' 
doctrine is a longstanding, judicially-created standard providing that 
in order for a transaction to be respected for tax purposes, it must be 
imbued with economic substance. The economic substance doctrine requires 
an analysis and balancing of the claimed tax benefits from a transaction 
with the pre-tax profit of the transaction. The Administration proposes 
codifying the economic substance standard. Under the proposal, a 
transaction will not be respected for tax purposes if the present value 
of the expected economic profit from the transaction is insignificant 
compared to the present value of the expected tax benefits. Similar 
rules would apply to financing transactions. The proposal would apply to 
transactions entered into on or after the date of first committee 
action.
  Tax income from corporate tax shelters involving tax-indifferent 
parties.--The Federal income tax system has many participants who are 
indifferent to tax consequences (e.g., foreign persons, tax-exempt 
organizations, and Native American tribal organizations). Many corporate 
tax shelters rely on tax-indifferent participants who absorb taxable 
income generated by the shelters so that corresponding losses or 
deductions can be allocated to taxable participants. The proposal would 
provide that any income received by a tax-indifferent person with 
respect to a corporate tax shelter would be taxable to the extent the 
person is trading on its special tax status. The proposal would be 
effective for transactions entered into on or after the date of first 
committee action.
  Impose a penalty excise tax on certain fees received by promoters and 
advisors..--Users of corporate tax shelters often pay large fees to 
promoters and advisors with respect to the shelter transactions. The 
proposal would impose a 25-percent penalty excise tax on fees received 
in connection with the promotion of corporate tax shelters and the 
rendering of certain tax advice related to corporate tax shelters. The 
proposal would be effective for payments made on or after the date of 
first committee action.
  Require accrual of income on forward sale of corporate stock.--There 
is little substantive difference between a corporate issuer's current 
sale of its stock for deferred payment and an issuer's forward sale of 
the same stock. In both cases, a portion of the deferred payment 
compensates the issuer for the time-value of money during the term of 
the contract. Under current law, the issuer must recognize the time-
value element of the deferred payment as interest if the transaction is 
a current sale for deferred payment but not if the transaction is a 
forward contract. Under the proposal, the issuer would be required to 
recognize the time-value element of the forward contract as well. The 
proposal would be effective for forward contracts entered into after the 
date of first committee action.
  Modify treatment of ESOP as S corporation shareholder.--Pursuant to 
provisions enacted in 1996 and 1997, an employee stock ownership plan 
(ESOP) may be a shareholder of an S corporation and the ESOP's share of 
the income of the S corporation is not subject to tax until distributed 
to the plan beneficiaries. The Administration proposes to require ESOPs 
that are not broad based to pay tax on S corporation income (including 
capital gains on the sale of stock) as the income is earned and to allow 
the ESOP a deduction for distributions of such income to plan 
beneficiaries. The deduction would apply only to the extent 
distributions exceed all prior undistributed amounts

[[Page 71]]

that were previously not subject to unrelated business income tax. The 
proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning on or after the 
date of first committee action. In addition, the proposal would be 
effective for acquisitions of S corporation stock by an ESOP after such 
date and for S corporation elections made on or after such date.
  Limit dividend treatment for payments on certain self-amortizing 
stock.--Under current law, distributions of property by a corporation to 
its shareholders are treated as dividends to the extent of the current 
or accumulated earnings and profits of the corporation. The Treasury 
Department previously became aware of certain abusive transactions 
involving so-called ``fast-pay'' stock. Under a typical fast-pay 
arrangement, a corporation that is subject to tax only at the 
shareholder level (a conduit entity) issues preferred stock to one class 
of investors and common stock to a second class of investors. The 
preferred stock is economically self-amortizing because the 
distributions made with respect to the stock (although treated entirely 
as dividends under current law) represent in part a return of the 
investors' investment and in part a return on their investment. While 
The Treasury Department has issued regulations that recharacterize a 
fast-pay arrangement involving certain domestic conduit entities, 
legislation limiting the dividend characterization on self-amortizing 
stock (including self-amortizing stock issued by foreign conduit 
entities) may be a more comprehensive solution. The proposal would 
provide that, in the case of a distribution with respect to self-
amortizing stock issued by a conduit entity (including a foreign conduit 
entity), the amount treated as a dividend shall not exceed the amount of 
the distribution that would have been characterized as interest had the 
self-amortizing stock been a debt instrument. The proposal would be 
effective for distributions with respect to self-amortizing stock made 
after the date of enactment.
  Prevent serial liquidation of U.S. subsidiaries of foreign 
corporations.--When a domestic corporation distributes a dividend to a 
foreign corporation, it is subject to U.S. withholding tax. In contrast, 
if a domestic corporation distributes earnings in a subsidiary 
liquidation under section 332, the foreign shareholder generally is not 
subject to any withholding tax. Relying on section 332, some foreign 
corporations have used holding companies to avoid the withholding tax. 
They establish U.S. holding companies to receive tax-free dividends from 
operating subsidiaries, and then liquidate the holding companies, 
thereby avoiding the withholding tax. Subsequently, they re-establish 
the holding companies to receive future dividends. The proposal would 
impose withholding tax on any distribution made to a foreign corporation 
in complete liquidation of a U.S. holding company if the holding company 
was in existence for less than 5 years. The proposal would also achieve 
a similar result with respect to serial terminations of U.S. branches. 
The proposal would be effective for liquidations and terminations 
occurring on or after the date of enactment.
  Prevent capital gains avoidance through basis shift transactions 
involving foreign shareholders.--A distribution in redemption of stock 
generally is treated as a dividend if it does not result in a meaningful 
reduction in the shareholder's proportionate interest in the 
distributing corporation, measured with reference to certain 
constructive ownership rules, including option attribution. If an amount 
received in redemption of stock is treated as a distribution of a 
dividend, the basis of the remaining stock generally is increased to 
reflect the basis of the redeemed stock. The basis of the remaining 
stock is not increased, however, to the extent that the basis of the 
redeemed stock was reduced or eliminated pursuant to the extraordinary 
dividend rules. In certain circumstances, these rules require a 
corporate shareholder to reduce the basis of stock with respect to which 
a dividend is received by the nontaxed portion of the dividend, which 
generally equals the amount of the dividend that is offset by the 
dividends received deduction. To prevent taxpayers from attempting to 
offset capital gains by generating artificial capital losses through 
basis shift transactions involving foreign shareholders, the 
Administration proposes to treat the portion of a dividend that is not 
subject to current U.S. tax as a nontaxed portion. Similar rules would 
apply in the event that the foreign shareholder is not a corporation. 
The proposal would be effective for distributions on or after the date 
of first committee action.
  Prevent mismatching of deductions and income inclusions in 
transactions with related foreign persons.--Current law provides that if 
any debt instrument having original issue discount (OID) is held by a 
related foreign person, any portion of such OID shall not be allowable 
as a deduction to the issuer until paid. Section 267 and the regulations 
thereunder apply similar rules to other expenses and interest owed to 
related foreign persons. These general rules are modified, however, so 
that a deduction is allowed when the OID is includible in the income of 
a foreign personal holding company (FPHC), controlled foreign Department 
corporation (CFC), or passive foreign investment company (PFIC). The 
Treasury Department has learned of certain structured transactions 
(involving both U.S. payors and U.S.-owned foreign payors) designed to 
allow taxpayers inappropriately to take advantage of the current rules 
by accruing deductions to related FPHCs, CFCs or PFICs, without the U.S. 
owners of such related entities taking into account for U.S. tax 
purposes an amount of income appropriate to the accrual. This results in 
an improper mismatch of deductions and income. The proposal would 
provide that deductions for amounts accrued but unpaid to related 
foreign CFCs, PFICs or FPHCs would be allowable only to the extent the 
amounts accrued by the payor are, for U.S. tax purposes, reflected in 
the income of the direct or indirect U.S. owners of the related foreign

[[Page 72]]

person. The proposal would contain an exception for certain short term 
transactions entered into in the ordinary course of business. The 
Secretary of Treasury would be granted regulatory authority to provide 
exceptions from these rules. The proposal would be effective for amounts 
accrued on or after the date of first committee action.
  Prevent duplication or acceleration of loss through assumption of 
certain liabilities.--Generally, if as part of a transaction in which 
one or more persons contribute property in exchange for the stock of a 
corporation that they control immediately thereafter, the corporation 
also assumes a liability of a transferor, the transferor's basis in the 
stock of the controlled corporation is reduced by the amount of the 
liability assumed. To facilitate the incorporation of certain businesses 
that have liabilities that have not yet given rise to a deduction, 
special rules apply to provide that the assumption of such liabilities 
does not reduce the transferor's basis in the stock of the controlled 
corporation. Relying on these special rules and other authority, some 
taxpayers have attempted to accelerate or duplicate deductions for 
certain losses by separating liabilities from the associated business or 
assets, contributing them to a corporation, and selling stock in that 
corporation at a purported loss. The Administration proposes that if the 
basis of stock received by a transferor as part of a tax-free exchange 
with a controlled corporation exceeds its fair market value, then the 
basis of the stock received would be reduced (but not below the fair 
market value) by the amount of a fixed or contingent liability that is 
assumed by the controlled corporation and that did not otherwise reduce 
the transferor's basis in the corporation's stock. Except as provided by 
the Secretary of Treasury , the proposal would not apply where the trade 
or business or substantially all the assets associated with the 
liability are also transferred to the controlled corporation. 
Regulations would be issued to prevent the acceleration or duplication 
of losses through the assumption of liabilities in transactions 
involving partnerships, and may also be issued to modify the rules of 
this proposal as applied to S corporations. The proposal and the 
regulations addressing transactions involving partnerships would be 
effective for assumptions of liability on or after October 19, 1999. 
Regulations addressing transactions involving S corporations would be 
effective on or after October 19, 1999, or such later date as may be 
prescribed by such rules.
  Amend 80/20 company rules.--Interest or dividends paid by a so-called 
``80/20 company'' generally are partially or fully exempt from U.S. 
withholding tax. A U.S. corporation is treated as an 80/20 company if at 
least 80 percent of the gross income of the corporation for the three-
year period preceding the year of the payment is foreign source income 
attributable to the active conduct of a foreign trade or business (or 
the foreign business of a subsidiary). Certain foreign multinationals 
improperly seek to exploit the rules applicable to 80/20 companies in 
order to avoid U.S. withholding tax liability on earnings of U.S. 
subsidiaries that are distributed abroad. The proposal would prevent 
taxpayers from avoiding withholding tax through manipulations of these 
rules. The proposal would limit the amount of interest and dividends 
exempt from withholding to the amount of foreign active business income 
received by the U.S. corporation during the 3-year testing period. The 
proposal would apply to interest or dividends paid or accrued more than 
30 days after the date of enactment.
  Modify corporate-owned life insurance (COLI) rules.--In general, 
interest on indebtedness with respect to life insurance, endowment or 
annuity contracts is not deductible unless the insurance contract 
insures the life of a ``key person'' of a business. In addition, 
interest deductions of a business generally are reduced under a 
proration rule if the business owns or is a direct or indirect 
beneficiary with respect to certain insurance contracts. The COLI 
proration rules generally do not apply if the contract covers an 
individual who is a 20-percent owner of the business or is an officer, 
director, or employee of such business. These exceptions still permit 
leveraged businesses to fund significant amounts of deductible interest 
and other expenses with tax-exempt or tax-deferred inside buildup on 
contracts insuring employees, officers, directors, and shareholders. The 
Administration proposes to repeal the exception under the COLI proration 
rules for contracts insuring employees, officers or directors (other 
than certain contracts insuring 20-percent owners) of the business. The 
proposal also would conform the key person exception for disallowed 
interest deductions attributable to indebtedness with respect to life 
insurance contracts to the modified 20-percent owner exception in the 
COLI proration rules. The proposal would be effective for taxable years 
beginning after date of enactment.
  Require lessors of tax-exempt-use property to include service contract 
options in lease term.--Under current law, a lessor of tax-exempt-use 
property is allowed depreciation deductions computed on a straight-line 
basis over a period of not less than 125 percent of the term of the 
lease. The existing depreciation rules do not consider service 
contracts, which can be structured to resemble leases. In recent years, 
lessors have attempted to accelerate depreciation deductions by 
structuring transactions that have a relatively short lease followed by 
a service contract. The proposal would require lessors to include the 
term of service contracts in the lease term for purposes of determining 
the depreciation period. The proposal would be effective for leases 
entered into after the date of enactment.

                           Financial Products

  Require banks to accrue interest on short-term obligations.--Under 
current law, a bank (regardless of its accounting method) must accrue as 
ordinary income interest, including original issue discount, on

[[Page 73]]

short-term obligations. Some court cases have held that banks that use 
the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting do not have to 
accrue stated interest and original issue discount on short-term loans 
made in the ordinary course of the bank's business. The Administration 
believes it is inappropriate to treat these short-term loans differently 
than other short-term obligations held by the bank. The Administration's 
proposal would clarify that banks must accrue interest and original 
issue discount on all short-term obligations, including loans made in 
the ordinary course of the bank's business, regardless of the banks' 
overall accounting method. The proposal would be effective for 
obligations acquired (including originated) on or after the date of 
enactment. No inference is intended regarding the current-law treatment 
of these transactions.
  Require current accrual of market discount by accrual method 
taxpayers.--Under current law, a taxpayer that holds a debt instrument 
with market discount is not required to include the discount in income 
as it accrues, even if the taxpayer uses an accrual method of 
accounting. Under the proposal, a taxpayer that uses an accrual method 
of accounting would be required to include market discount in income as 
it accrues. The proposal would also cap the amount of market discount on 
distressed debt instruments. The proposal would be effective for debt 
instruments acquired on or after the date of enactment.
  Modify and clarify certain rules relating to debt-for-debt 
exchanges.--Under current law, an issuer can inappropriately accelerate 
interest deductions by refinancing a debt instrument in a debt-for-debt 
exchange at a time when the issuer's cost of borrowing has declined. The 
proposal would spread the issuer's net deduction for bond repurchase 
premium in a debt-for-debt exchange over the term of the new debt 
instrument using constant yield principles. In addition, the proposal 
would modify the measurement of the net income or deduction in debt-for-
debt exchanges involving contingent payment debt instruments. Finally, 
the proposal would modify the measurement of taxable boot to the holder 
in debt-for-debt exchanges that are part of corporate reorganizations. 
The proposal would apply to debt-for-debt exchanges occurring on or 
after the date of enactment.
   Modify and clarify the straddle rules.--A ``straddle'' is the holding 
of two or more offsetting positions with respect to actively-traded 
personal property. If a taxpayer enters into a straddle, the taxpayer 
must defer the recognition of loss from the ``loss leg'' of the straddle 
until the taxpayer recognizes the offsetting gain from the ``gain leg'' 
of the straddle. Further, the taxpayer must capitalize the net interest 
and carrying charges properly attributable to the straddle. The proposal 
would modify and clarify a number of provisions under the straddle 
rules. In particular, to match the timing of straddle losses with 
related gains, the proposal would provide that loss realized on one leg 
of a straddle would be capitalized into the other leg of the straddle. 
This capitalization would operate as an ordering rule eliminating the 
need for an identification rule when the legs are of different sizes. In 
addition, to ensure that the loss on a straddle leg is properly 
measured, the proposal would require taxpayers that physically settle 
certain derivatives contracts to determine the amount of the loss 
subject to deferral under the straddle rules immediately before the 
physical settlement. The proposal would also repeal the current-law 
exception from the straddle rules for certain offsetting positions in 
stock. Finally, the proposal would clarify that a debt instrument issued 
by a taxpayer may itself be a leg in a straddle and would clarify the 
situations in which interest and carrying charges are considered 
properly allocable to a straddle and, therefore, must be capitalized. 
The proposal would be effective for certain losses incurred and certain 
straddles entered into on or after the date of first committee action.
  Provide generalized rules for all stripping transactions.--Under 
current law, it may be possible to separate the right to receive income 
from the ownership of underlying income-producing property (other than 
debt). In many cases, the tax treatment of income-stripping transactions 
does not clearly reflect the parties' economic income from the 
transactions. As a result, it is possible for taxpayers to structure 
income-stripping transactions that exploit deficiencies of current law. 
The proposal would eliminate these planning opportunities by treating 
income-stripping transactions as loans. Under this approach, the owner 
of the property would be required to account for income from the 
property in the period in which it was earned. The proposal would be 
effective for income-stripping transactions entered into after the date 
of first committee action.
  Require ordinary treatment for certain dealers of commodities and 
equity options.--Under current law, certain dealers of commodities and 
equity options treat the income from their day-to-day trading or dealing 
activities as giving rise to capital gain. Dealers of other property 
typically treat the income from their day-to-day dealing activities as 
giving rise to ordinary income. The proposal would require commodities 
and equity-option dealers to treat the income from their day-to-day 
activities as giving rise to ordinary income, not capital gain. The 
proposal would be effective for tax years beginning after the date of 
enactment.
  Prohibit tax deferral on contributions of appreciated property to swap 
funds.--A swap fund is an investment partnership that is designed to 
allow taxpayers holding large blocks of appreciated stock to diversify 
their stock investments without recognizing gain and paying tax. 
Typically, a fund is established into which wealthy individuals transfer 
their stock. In exchange for the transferred stock, these individuals 
receive an interest in the fund. Under current law, these individuals do 
not have to recognize gain if more than 20 percent of the fund's assets 
are comprised of non-

[[Page 74]]

marketable securities. The proposal would prohibit the deferral of gain 
where the fund is a passive investment vehicle. The proposal would be 
effective for transfers occurring on or after the date of enactment.

                          Corporate Provisions

  Conform control test for tax-free incorporations, distributions, and 
reorganizations.--For tax-free incorporations, tax-free distributions, 
and reorganizations, ``control'' is defined as the ownership of 80 
percent of the voting stock and 80 percent of the number of shares of 
all other classes of stock of the corporation. This test is easily 
manipulated by allocating voting power among the shares of a 
corporation, allowing corporations to retain control of a corporation 
but sell a significant amount of the value of the corporation. In 
contrast, the necessary ``ownership'' for tax-free liquidations, 
qualified stock purchases, and affiliation is at least 80 percent of the 
total voting power of the corporation's stock and at least 80 percent of 
the total value of the corporation's stock. The Administration proposes 
to conform the control requirement for tax-free incorporations, 
distributions, and reorganizations with that used for determining 
affiliation. This proposal is effective for transactions on or after the 
date of enactment.
  Treat receipt of tracking stock in certain distributions and exchanges 
as the receipt of property.--``Tracking stock'' is an economic interest 
that is intended to relate to and track the economic performance of one 
or more separate assets of the issuer, and gives its holder a right to 
share in the earnings or value of less than all of the corporate 
issuer's earnings or assets. Tracking stock issued by a corporation 
represents an economic interest different than non-tracking stock of the 
issuer. Under the proposal, the receipt of tracking stock in a 
distribution made by a corporation with respect to its stock and 
tracking stock received in exchange for other stock in the issuing 
corporation would be treated as the receipt of property by the 
shareholders. Under this proposal, the Secretary of Treasury would have 
authority to treat tracking stock as nonstock (debt, a notional 
principal contract, etc.) or as stock of another entity as appropriate 
to prevent avoidance. No inference is intended regarding the tax 
treatment of tracking stock under current law. This proposal is 
effective for tracking stock issued on or after the date of enactment.
  Require consistent treatment and provide basis allocation rules for 
transfers of intangibles in certain nonrecognition transactions.--No 
gain or loss will be recognized if one or more persons transfer property 
to a controlled corporation (or partnership) solely in exchange for 
stock in the corporation (or a partnership interest). Where there is a 
transfer of less than ``all substantial rights'' to use property, the 
Internal Revenue Service's position is that such transfer will not 
qualify as a tax-free exchange. However, the Claims Court rejected the 
Service's position in E.I. Du Pont de Nemours and Co. v. U.S.,  holding 
that any transfer of something of value could be a ``transfer'' of 
``property.'' The inconsistency between the positions has resulted in 
whipsaw of the government. The Administration proposes to provide that a 
transfer of an interest in intangible property constituting less than 
all of the substantial rights of the transferor will not fail to qualify 
for tax-free treatment solely because the transferor does not transfer 
all rights, title and interest in an intangible asset, and the 
transferor must allocate the basis of the intangible between the 
retained rights and the transferred rights based upon respective fair 
market values. Consistent reporting by the transferor and the transferee 
would be required. This proposal is effective for transfers after the 
date of enactment.
  Modify tax treatment of certain reorganizations involving portfolio 
stock.--If a target corporation owns stock in the acquiring corporation 
and wants to combine with the acquiring corporation in a downstream 
reorganization, the target corporation transfers its assets to the 
acquiring corporation and the shareholders of the target corporation 
receive stock of the acquiring corporation in exchange for their target 
corporation stock. Alternatively, if the acquiring corporation owns 
stock in the target corporation, the target corporation can merge 
upstream, transfer its assets upstream, or merge sideways into a 
subsidiary of the acquiring corporation with the other shareholders of 
target receiving acquiring corporation stock. Under current law, all of 
these reorganizations qualify for tax-free treatment. Under the 
proposal, where a target corporation holds less than 20 percent of the 
stock of an acquiring corporation and the target corporation combines 
with the acquiring corporation in a reorganization in which the 
acquiring corporation is the survivor, the target corporation must 
recognize gain, but not loss, as if it distributed the acquiring 
corporation stock that it held immediately prior to the reorganization. 
Alternatively, where an acquiring corporation owns less than 20 percent 
of a target corporation and the target corporation combines with the 
acquiring corporation or a subsidiary of the acquiring corporation, the 
acquiring corporation must recognize gain, but not loss, as if it had 
sold its target corporation stock immediately before the reorganization. 
Nonrecognition treatment would continue to apply to other assets 
transferred by the target corporation and to the target corporation 
shareholders. This proposal is effective for transactions on or after 
the date of enactment.
  Modify definition of nonqualified preferred stock.--Subject to certain 
exceptions, in otherwise tax-free transactions, the receipt of 
nonqualified preferred stock is treated as money or other property and, 
thus, gain may be recognized. Under current law, nonqualified preferred 
stock is defined as stock which is ``limited and preferred as to 
dividends and does not participate in corporate growth to any 
significant extent.'' Taxpayers may be taking positions that are in

[[Page 75]]

consistent with the policy of the nonqualified preferred stock 
provisions (i.e., nonrecognition treatment is inappropriate where 
taxpayers receive relatively secure instruments in exchange for 
relatively risky instruments), by including illusory participation 
rights or including terms that taxpayers argue create an ``unlimited'' 
dividend. The proposal would clarify the definition of preferred stock 
to eliminate taxpayer arguments that stock issued is nominally 
participating or unlimited as to dividends. The proposal would apply to 
transactions that occur after the date of first committee action.
  Modify estimated tax provision for deemed asset sales--Taxpayers can 
make an election to treat certain sales of stock as sales of assets. 
This election may be made up to 8 1/2 months after the stock sale. 
Taxpayers may be taking the position that they do not have to pay any 
estimated taxes until after the 8 1/2 month period has expired and rely 
on current law as providing that there will be no penalty for 
nonpayment. The proposal would clarify the estimated tax provisions to 
require that estimated taxes be paid based upon gain from either the 
stock sale or the deemed asset sale. The proposal would apply to 
transactions that occur after the date of first committee action.
  Modify treatment of transfers to creditors in divisive 
reorganizations.--In order to separate businesses in a tax-free spin-
off, a corporation (distributing) will not recognize gain or loss on the 
contribution of property to a controlled corporation solely in exchange 
for stock or securities of the controlled corporation. Under current 
law, if the distributing corporation also receives other property or 
money, it will not recognize gain as long as it distributes the property 
or money to its creditors in connection with the reorganization. The 
amount of property or money that may be distributed to creditors without 
gain to the distributing corporation is unlimited. Thus, taxpayers may 
avoid gain that otherwise would be recognized if liabilities are assumed 
by the controlled corporation that exceed the basis of assets 
contributed. The proposal would limit the amount of property or money 
that the distributing corporation can distribute to creditors without 
gain to the amount of basis of the assets contributed to the controlled 
corporation in the reorganization. In addition, the proposal would 
provide that acquisitive reorganizations would no longer be subject to 
gain recognition where liabilities are assumed in excess of the basis of 
assets transferred. The proposal would be effective for transactions on 
or after the date of enactment.

                              Passthroughs

  Provide mandatory basis adjustments for partners that have a 
significant net built-in loss in partnership property.--Currently, a 
partner's share of basis in partnership property is adjusted in the case 
of a distribution of partnership property or a sale of a partnership 
interest only if the partnership has a special election in effect. The 
electivity of these provisions has created numerous opportunities for 
abuse by taxpayers. Accordingly, the Administration proposes that the 
basis adjustment rules would be made mandatory with respect to any 
partner (treating related persons as one person), whose share of net 
built-in loss in partnership property is equal to the greater of 
$250,000 or ten percent of the partner's total share of partnership 
assets (measured by reference to fair market value). In calculating the 
ten-percent threshold, property acquired by the partnership with a 
principal purpose of allowing a partner or partners to avoid the 
limitation would be disregarded. The proposal would be effective for 
distributions and transfers of partnership interest after the date of 
enactment.
  Modify treatment of closely held REITs.--When originally enacted, the 
real estate investment trust (REIT) legislation was intended to provide 
a tax-favored vehicle through which small investors could invest in a 
professionally managed real estate portfolio. REITs are intended to be 
widely held entities, and certain requirements of the REIT rules are 
designed to ensure this result. Among other requirements, in order for 
an entity to qualify for REIT status, the beneficial ownership of the 
entity must be held by 100 or more persons. In addition, a REIT cannot 
be closely held, which generally means that no more than 50 percent of 
the value of the REIT's stock can be owned by five or fewer individuals 
during the last half of the taxable year. Certain attribution rules 
apply in making this determination. The Administration is aware of a 
number of tax avoidance transactions involving the use of closely held 
REITs. In order to meet the 100 or more shareholder requirement, the 
REIT generally issues common stock, which is held by one shareholder, 
and a separate class of non-voting preferred stock with a relatively 
nominal value, which is held by 99 ``friendly'' shareholders. The 
closely held limitation does not disqualify the REITs that are utilizing 
this ownership structure because the majority shareholders of these 
REITs are not individuals. The Administration proposes to impose as an 
additional requirement for REIT qualification that no person can own 
stock of a REIT possessing 50 percent or more of the total combined 
voting power of all classes of voting stock or 50 percent or more of the 
total value of all shares of all classes of stock. For purposes of 
determining a person's stock ownership, rules similar to current-law 
rules would apply and stapled entities would be treated as one person. 
The proposal would be effective for entities electing REIT status for 
taxable years beginning on or after the date of first committee action.
  Apply regulated investment company (RIC) excise tax to undistributed 
profits of REITs.--As a result of legislation passed in 1999, a REIT, 
like a RIC, is only required to distribute 90 percent of its REIT 
taxable income in order to maintain REIT status. A RIC is subject to a 
four-percent excise tax on the excess of the required distribution for a 
calendar year over the distributed amount for such calendar year.

[[Page 76]]

The required distribution is equal to the sum of 98 percent of the RIC's 
ordinary income for the calendar year and 98 percent of the RIC's 
capital gain net income for the one-year period ending on October 31 of 
such calendar year. REITs are subject to a similar rule, except that the 
required distribution is equal to the sum of 85 percent of the REIT's 
ordinary income for the calendar year and 95 percent of the REIT's 
capital gain net income for such calendar year. In order to conform the 
treatment of REITs and RICs, the Administration proposes to modify the 
definition of required distribution for REITs, requiring a distribution 
of 98 percent of ordinary and capital gain income in order to avoid the 
four-percent excise tax. The proposal would be effective for calendar 
years beginning after December 31, 2000.
  Allow RICs a dividends paid deduction for redemptions only in cases 
where the redemption represents a contraction in the RIC.--Under current 
law, a RIC is allowed a dividends paid deduction for dividends paid to 
shareholders. If a RIC redeems a shareholder's stock, the RIC can 
generally treat a portion of the redemption payment as a dividend for 
purpose of computing the dividends paid deduction. In situations where 
the redemption represents a contraction in the size of the RIC, this 
treatment ensures that the remaining shareholders of the RIC are taxed 
on no more than their pro rata share of the RIC's income. In situations 
where the redemption is accompanied by near simultaneous investments in 
the RIC by other investors, the RIC is in essentially the same position 
it would be in had the redeeming shareholder sold its shares in the RIC 
directly to the new investors. In this case, it is inappropriate to give 
the RIC a dividends paid deduction for the redemption. The proposal, 
therefore, allows a RIC to claim a dividends paid deduction with respect 
to a redemption only if the redemption represents a net contraction in 
the size of the RIC. The proposal would be effective for taxable years 
beginning after the date of enactment.
  Require Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits (REMICs) to be 
secondarily liable for the tax liability of REMIC residual interest 
holders.--A REMIC is a statutory pass-through vehicle designed to 
facilitate the securitization of mortgages. A REMIC holds mortgages and 
issues one or more classes of debt instruments, called REMIC regular 
interests, that are entitled to the cash flows from the underlying 
mortgages. A REMIC also issues a REMIC residual interest. The holder of 
the REMIC residual interest must include in income the taxable income of 
the REMIC. In many cases, when it is issued the REMIC residual interest 
has a negative value because the reasonably anticipated net tax 
liability associated with holding the residual is greater than the value 
of the cash flows on the residual. Many holders of REMIC residual 
interests do not pay their tax liabilities when due. To ensure that the 
tax on REMIC residuals is paid when due, the proposal would require a 
REMIC to be secondarily liable for the tax liability of its residual 
interest. Under the proposal, if the tax on the residual was not paid 
when due, the REMIC would be required to pay the tax. Similar rules 
would apply with respect to Financial Asset Securitization Investment 
Trusts (FASITs). The proposal would be effective for REMICs and FASITs 
created after the date of enactment.

                             Tax Accounting

  Deny change in method treatment to tax-free formations.--Generally, a 
taxpayer that desires to change its method of accounting must obtain the 
consent of the IRS Commissioner. In addition, in certain reorganization 
transactions a corporation acquiring assets generally is required to use 
the method of accounting used for those assets by the distributor or 
transferor corporation. Under current law, this carryover rule does not 
apply to tax-free contributions to a corporation or to a partnership. 
Consequently, taxpayers who transfer assets to a subsidiary or a 
partnership in such transactions may avail themselves of a new method of 
accounting without obtaining the consent of the IRS Commissioner. The 
Administration proposes to expand the transactions to which the 
carryover of method of accounting rules and the regulations thereunder 
apply to include tax-free contributions to corporations or partnerships, 
effective for transfers on or after the date of enactment.
  Deny deduction for punitive damages.--The current deductibility of 
most punitive damage payments undermines the role of such damages in 
discouraging and penalizing certain undesirable actions or activities. 
The Administration proposes to disallow any deduction for punitive 
damages paid or incurred by the taxpayer, whether upon a judgment or in 
settlement of a claim. Where the liability for punitive damages is 
covered by insurance, such damages paid or incurred by the insurer would 
be included in the gross income of the insured person. The insurer would 
be required to report such payments to the insured person and to the 
IRS. The proposal would apply to damages paid or incurred on or after 
the date of enactment.
  Repeal lower-of-cost-or-market inventory accounting method.--Taxpayers 
required to maintain inventories are permitted to use a variety of 
methods to determine the cost of their ending inventories, including the 
last-in, first-out (LIFO) method, the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method, 
and the retail method. Taxpayers not using a LIFO method may determine 
the carrying values of their inventories by applying the lower-of-cost-
or-market (LCM) method or by writing down the cost of goods that are 
unsalable at normal prices or unusable in the normal way because of 
damage, imperfection or other similar causes (subnormal goods method). 
The allowance of write-downs under the LCM and subnormal goods methods 
is essentially a one-way mark-to-market method that understates taxable 
income. The Administration proposes to repeal the

[[Page 77]]

LCM and subnormal goods methods effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment.
  Disallow interest on debt allocable to tax-exempt obligations.--No 
income tax deduction is allowed for interest on debt used directly or 
indirectly to acquire or hold investments that produce tax-exempt 
income. The determination of whether debt is used to acquire or hold 
tax-exempt investments differs depending on the holder of the 
instrument. For banks and a limited class of other financial 
institutions, debt generally is treated as financing all of the 
taxpayer's assets proportionately. Securities dealers are not included 
in the definition of ``financial institution,'' and under a special rule 
are subject to a disallowance of a much smaller portion of their 
interest deduction. For other financial intermediaries, such as finance 
companies, that are also not included in the narrow definition of 
``financial institutions,'' deductions are disallowed only when 
indebtedness is incurred or continued for the purpose of purchasing or 
carrying tax-exempt investments. These taxpayers are therefore able to 
reduce their tax liabilities inappropriately through the double Federal 
tax benefits of interest expense deductions and tax-exempt interest 
income, notwithstanding that they operate similarly to banks. Effective 
for taxable years beginning after the date of enactment, with respect to 
obligations acquired on or after the date of first committee action, the 
Administration proposes that all financial intermediaries, other than 
insurance companies (which are subject to a separate regime), be treated 
the same as banks are treated under current law with regard to 
deductions for interest on debt used directly or indirectly to acquire 
or hold tax-exempt obligations.
  Require capitalization of mutual fund commissions.--An expenditure 
that results in significant future benefits generally must be 
capitalized in order to match the expenditure with the revenues of the 
taxable period to which it is properly attributable. Under current 
securities law, a distributor of mutual fund shares may be compensated 
by the fund over a period of years or by the investors on redemption 
with respect to ``Class B'' shares it distributes. However, the 
distributor typically will pay an up-front commission to a broker to 
sell Class B shares to an investor. In order to more accurately match 
the income and expenses of mutual fund distributors, the Administration 
proposes that commissions paid to a broker by a distributor would be 
capitalized and recovered over six years (the period investors would 
have to hold shares without incurring a fee on redemption). The proposal 
would be effective for commissions paid or incurred in taxable years 
ending after the date of enactment. No inference is intended with 
respect to the treatment of distributor's commissions under current law.

                              Cost Recovery

  Provide consistent amortization periods for intangibles.--Under 
current law, start-up and organizational expenditures are amortized at 
the election of the taxpayer over a period of not less than five years. 
Current law requires certain acquired intangible assets (goodwill, 
trademarks, franchises, patents, etc.) to be amortized over 15 years. 
The Administration believes that, to encourage the formation of new 
businesses, a fixed amount of start-up and organizational expenditures 
should be currently deductible. Thus, the proposal would allow a 
taxpayer to elect to deduct up to $5,000 each of start-up or 
organizational expenditures. However, for each taxpayer, the $5,000 
amount is reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the 
cumulative cost of start-up or organizational expenditures exceeds 
$50,000. Start-up and organizational expenditures not currently 
deductible would be amortized over a 15-year period consistent with the 
amortization period for acquired intangible assets. The proposal 
generally would be effective for start-up and organizational 
expenditures incurred in taxable years beginning on or after the date of 
enactment.
  Clarify recovery period of utility grading costs. --A taxpayer is 
allowed as a depreciation deduction a reasonable allowance for the 
exhaustion, wear and tear, and obsolescence of property that is used in 
a trade or business or held for the production of income. For most 
tangible property placed in service after 1986, the amount of the 
depreciation deduction is determined under the modified accelerated cost 
recovery system (MACRS) using a statutorily prescribed depreciation 
method, recovery period, and placed in service convention. The recovery 
period may be determined by reference to the statutory recovery period 
or to the list of class lives provided by the Treasury Department. 
Electric and gas utility clearing and grading costs incurred to extend 
distribution lines and pipelines have not been assigned a class life. By 
default, such assets have a seven-year recovery period under MACRS. The 
Administration believes that applying the default rule to electric and 
gas utility clearing and grading costs is inappropriate. For example, 
the electric utility transmission and distribution lines and the gas 
utility trunk pipelines benefitted by the clearing and grading costs 
have MACRS recovery periods of 20 years and 15 years, respectively. The 
proposal would assign depreciable electric and gas utility clearing and 
grading costs incurred to locate transmission and distribution lines and 
pipelines to the class life assigned to the benefitted assets, giving 
these costs a recovery period of 20 years and 15 years, respectively. 
The proposal would be effective for electric and gas utility clearing 
and grading costs incurred on or after the date of enactment.
  Apply rules generally applicable to acquisitions of intangible assets 
to acquisitions of professional sports franchises.--In general, the 
purchase price allocated to most intangible assets (including franchise 
rights) acquired in connection with the acquisition of a trade or 
business must be capitalized and amortized over a 15-year period. These 
rules were enacted in 1993 to minimize disputes regarding the proper 
treatment

[[Page 78]]

of acquired intangible assets. Special rules apply to intangible assets 
acquired in connection with a professional sports franchise. The 15-year 
amortization rules do not apply and special allocation rules apply to 
the purchase price. In order to provide consistent treatment among 
different trades or businesses and to minimize disputes regarding 
intangible assets acquired in connection with a professional sports 
franchise, the Administration proposes to repeal the special rules 
applicable to professional sports franchise acquisitions and apply the 
rules generally applicable to most intangible assets. The proposal would 
be effective for acquisitions after the date of enactment.

                                Insurance

  Require recapture of policyholder surplus accounts.--Between 1959 and 
1984, stock life insurance companies deferred tax on a portion of their 
profits. These untaxed profits were added to a policyholders surplus 
account (PSA). In 1984, Congress precluded life insurance companies from 
continuing to defer tax on future profits through PSAs. However, 
companies were permitted to continue to defer tax on their existing 
PSAs, and to pay tax on the previously untaxed profits in the PSAs only 
in certain circumstances. There is no remaining justification for 
allowing these companies to continue to defer tax on profits they earned 
between 1959 and 1984. Most pre-1984 policies have terminated, because 
pre-1984 policyholders have surrendered their pre-1984 contracts for 
cash, ceased paying premiums on those contracts, or died. The 
Administration proposes that companies generally would be required to 
include in their gross income over five years their PSA balances as of 
the beginning of the first taxable year starting after the date of 
enactment.
  Modify rules for capitalizing policy acquisition costs of life 
insurance companies.--Under current law, insurance companies capitalize 
varying percentages of their net premiums for certain types of insurance 
contracts, and generally amortize these amounts over 10 years (5 years 
for small companies). These capitalized amounts are intended to serve as 
proxies for each company's commissions and other policy acquisition 
expenses. However, data reported by insurance companies to State 
insurance regulators each year indicate that the insurance industry is 
capitalizing substantially less than its actual policy acquisition 
costs, which results in a mismatch of income and deductions. The 
Administration proposes that insurance companies be required to 
capitalize modified percentages of their net premiums for certain lines 
of business. This change would be treated as a change in the insurance 
company's method of accounting. The modified percentages would more 
accurately reflect the ratio of actual policy acquisition expenses to 
premiums and the typical useful lives of the contracts. To ensure that 
companies never are required to capitalize more under this proxy 
approach than they would capitalize under normal tax accounting rules, 
companies that have low policy acquisition costs generally would be 
permitted to capitalize their actual policy acquisition costs.
  Increase the proration percentage for property casualty (P&C) 
insurance companies.--In computing their underwriting income, P&C 
insurance companies deduct reserves for losses and loss expenses 
incurred. These loss reserves are funded in part with the company's 
investment income. In 1986, Congress reduced the reserve deductions of 
P&C insurance companies by 15 percent of the tax-exempt interest or the 
deductible portion of certain dividends received. In 1997, Congress 
expanded the 15-percent proration rule to apply to the inside buildup on 
certain insurance contracts. The existing 15-percent proration rule 
still enables P&C insurance companies to fund a substantial portion of 
their deductible reserves with tax-exempt or tax-deferred income. Other 
financial intermediaries, such as life insurance companies, banks and 
brokerage firms, are subject to more stringent proration rules that 
substantially reduce or eliminate their ability to use tax-exempt or 
tax-deferred investments to fund currently deductible reserves or to 
deduct interest expense. Effective for taxable years beginning after the 
date of enactment, with respect to investments acquired on or after the 
date of first committee action, the Administration proposes to increase 
the proration percentage to 25 percent.
  Modify rules that apply to sales of life insurance contracts.--The 
sale of a life insurance contract insuring a person who is neither 
terminally nor chronically ill results in taxable income to the seller 
equal to the difference between the sales price and the seller's basis 
in the contract. Buyers generally are not required to report information 
to the IRS on these transactions. The buyer, who receives the death 
benefit when the insured dies, generally is liable for tax on his profit 
from the transaction under the ``transfer for value'' rules. However, 
the life insurance company generally is not required to report the death 
benefit payment. Moreover, the rule that the buyer's profits are taxable 
can be circumvented. The proposal would modify the transfer for value 
rules so they could no longer be circumvented. The proposal also would 
modify the reporting rules to require the buyer of a life insurance 
contract with a large death benefit to report information on the sale to 
the IRS, to the issuer of the life insurance contract, and to the seller 
of the life insurance contract. In addition, the proposal would modify 
the reporting rules to require that payment of death benefits under such 
previously-sold contracts be reported to the IRS and to the payee. The 
proposal would be effective for sales of life insurance contracts and 
payments of death benefits after the date of enactment.
  Modify rules that apply to tax-exempt property casualty insurance 
companies.--Under current law, an insurance company with up to $350,000 
of premium income is tax-exempt, regardless of the amount of investment 
income it has. Another provision allows cer

[[Page 79]]

tain small insurance companies to elect to be taxed only on their net 
investment income. Premiums of companies in the same controlled group 
are combined for purposes of determining whether an entity is eligible 
for tax exemption. An excise tax is imposed on premiums paid to foreign 
companies with respect to policies insuring U.S. risks. Current law 
allows foreign insurance companies to elect to be taxed as domestic 
companies if they meet certain requirements. These rules have been used 
by U.S. persons to shift assets into tax-free or tax-preferred 
affiliated insurance companies, which often are located in tax havens 
and issue ``insurance'' that is generated directly or indirectly by the 
U.S. person. The proposal would modify current law, beginning the first 
taxable year after date of enactment, so that all items of gross income 
of all affiliated companies would be aggregated in determining whether 
an insurance company qualifies for tax-exempt status. Also, tax-exempt 
status would not be available to foreign insurance companies beginning 
the first taxable year after the date of enactment. Conforming 
amendments would be made to the current-law election to be taxed on 
investment income. The proposal also would modify current law so that 
the election to be taxed as a U.S. corporation would not be available to 
a foreign company formed after the date of first Committee action, and 
would not be available beginning in the second year after the date of 
enactment for any other foreign company that would otherwise qualify for 
a tax exemption under current law.

                          Exempt Organizations

  Subject investment income of trade associations to tax.--Trade 
associations described in section 501(c)(6) are generally exempt from 
Federal income tax, but are subject to tax on their unrelated business 
income. To eliminate the current-law bias in favor of trade association 
members' making and deducting advance payments to fund future collective 
activities of the trade association, the proposal would subject trade 
associations to unrelated business income tax on their net investment 
income in excess of $10,000 for any taxable year. As under current-law 
rules for certain other tax-exempt organizations, investment income 
would not be subject to tax under the proposal to the extent that it is 
set aside for a specified charitable purpose. In addition, any gain from 
the sale of property used directly in the performance of the trade 
association's exempt function would not be subject to tax under the 
proposal to the extent that the sale proceeds are used to purchase 
replacement exempt-function property. The proposal would be effective 
for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.
  Impose penalty for failure to file an annual information return.--To 
encourage voluntary compliance and assist the IRS in its enforcement 
efforts, the proposal would impose a penalty on split-interest trusts 
(such as charitable remainder trusts, charitable lead trusts, and pooled 
income funds) that fail to file an annual information return on Form 
5227. Form 5227 contains information regarding the trust's financial 
activities and whether the trust is subject to certain excise taxes. 
Under the proposal, any failure to file Form 5227 would be subject to a 
penalty of $20 per day (up to a maximum of $10,000 per return) or, in 
the case of any trust with income in excess of $250,000, $100 per day 
(up to a maximum of $50,000 per return). In addition, any trustee who 
knowingly fails to file Form 5227, unless such failure is not willful 
and is due to reasonable cause, would be jointly and severally liable 
for the amount of the penalty. The proposal would be effective for any 
return the due date for which is after the date of enactment.

                             Estate and Gift

  Restore phaseout of unified credit for large estates.--Prior to TRA97, 
the benefit of both the estate tax graduated rate brackets below fifty-
five percent and the unified credit were phased out by imposing a five-
percent surtax on estates with a value above $10 million. When TRA97 
increased the unified credit amount, the phase out of the unified credit 
was inadvertently omitted. The Administration proposes to restore the 
surtax in order to phase out the benefits of the unified credit as well 
as the graduated estate tax brackets. The proposal would be effective 
for decedents dying after the date of enactment.
  Require consistent valuation for estate and income tax purposes.--The 
basis of property acquired from a decedent generally is its fair market 
value on the date of death. Property included in the gross estate of a 
decedent is valued also at its fair market value on the date of death. 
Recipients of lifetime gifts generally take a carryover basis in the 
property received. The Administration proposes to impose a duty of 
consistency on heirs receiving property from a decedent, requiring such 
heirs to use the value as reported on the estate tax return as the basis 
for the property for income tax purposes. Estates would be required to 
notify heirs (and the IRS) of such values. In addition, donors making 
lifetime gifts would be required to notify the recipients of such gifts 
(and the IRS) of the donor's basis in the property at the time of the 
gift, as well as any gift tax paid with respect to the gift. This 
proposal would be effective for gifts made after, and decedents dying 
after, the date of enactment.
  Require basis allocation for part sale, part gift transactions.--In a 
part gift, part sale transaction, the donee/purchaser takes a basis 
equal to the greater of the amount paid by the donee or the donor's 
adjusted basis at the time of the transfer. The donor/seller uses 
adjusted cost basis in computing the gain or loss on the sale portion of 
the transaction. The Administration proposes to rationalize basis 
allocation in a part gift, part sale transaction by requiring the basis 
of the property to be allocated ratably between the gift portion and the 
sale portion based on the fair market value

[[Page 80]]

of the property on the date of transfer and the consideration paid. This 
proposal would be effective for transactions entered into on or after 
the date of enactment.
   Conform treatment of surviving spouses in community property 
States.--If joint property is owned by spouses in a non-community 
property state, a surviving spouse receives a stepped-up basis only in 
the half of the property owned by the deceased spouse. In contrast, when 
a spouse dies owning community property, the surviving spouse is 
entitled to a stepped-up basis not only in the half of the property 
owned by the deceased spouse, but also in the half of the property 
already owned by the surviving spouse prior to the decedent's death. The 
Administration proposes to eliminate the stepped-up basis in the part of 
the community property owned by the surviving spouse prior to the 
deceased spouse's death. The half of the community property owned by the 
deceased spouse would continue to be entitled to a stepped-up basis upon 
death. This treatment will be consistent with the treatment of joint 
property owned by spouses in a non-community property State. This 
proposal would be effective for decedents dying after the date of 
enactment.
  Include qualified terminable interest property (QTIP) trust assets in 
surviving spouse's estate.--A marital deduction is allowed for qualified 
terminable interest property (QTIP) passing to a qualifying trust for a 
spouse either by gift or by bequest. The value of the recipient spouse's 
estate includes the value of any such property in which the decedent had 
a qualifying income interest for life and a deduction was allowed under 
the gift or estate tax. In some cases, taxpayers have attempted to 
whipsaw the government by claiming the deduction in the first estate and 
then arguing against inclusion in the second estate due to some 
technical flaw in the QTIP election. The Administration proposes that, 
if a deduction is allowed under the QTIP provisions, inclusion is 
required in the beneficiary spouse's estate. The proposal would be 
effective for decedents dying after the date of enactment.
  Eliminate non-business valuation discounts.--Under current law, 
taxpayers are claiming large discounts on the valuation of gifts and 
bequests of interests in entities holding marketable assets. Because 
these discounts are inappropriate, the Administration proposes to 
eliminate valuation discounts except as they apply to active businesses. 
Interests in entities generally would be required to be valued for gift 
and estate tax purposes at a proportional share of the net asset value 
of the entity to the extent that the entity holds non-business assets. 
The proposal would be effective for gifts made after, and decedents 
dying after, the date of enactment.
  Eliminate gift tax exemption for personal residence trusts.--Current 
law excepts transfers of personal residences in trust from the special 
valuation rules applicable when a grantor retains an interest in a 
trust. The Administration proposes to repeal this personal residence 
trust exception. Thereafter, if a residence is to be used to fund a 
grantor retained interest trust, the trust would be required to pay out 
the required annuity or unitrust amount or else the grantor's retained 
interest would be valued at zero for gift tax purposes. This proposal 
would be effective for transfers in trust after the date of enactment.
  Modify requirements for annual exclusion for gifts.--Currently, annual 
gifts of present interests of up to $10,000 (in 2000) per donor per 
donee are excepted from the gift tax. The decision in Crummey v. 
Commissioner held that a transfer in trust is a transfer of a present 
interest if the beneficiary has a right to withdraw the property from 
the trust for a limited period of time. Two recent cases expanded on the 
Crummey  rule by holding that the annual exclusion is available, even 
where the person holding the withdrawal power is not a primary 
beneficiary of the trust. The Administration proposes to modify the 
annual exclusion rule as it applies to gifts and trusts so that a 
transfer to a trust would qualify only if: (1) during the life of the 
individual who is the beneficiary of the trust, no portion of the corpus 
or income of the trust may be distributed to or for the benefit of any 
person other than the beneficiary, and (2) the trust does not terminate 
before the beneficiary dies, the assets of the trust will be includible 
in the gross estate of the beneficiary. A withdrawal right would not be 
sufficient to create a present interest. This proposal would be 
effective for gifts completed after December 31, 2000. A grandfather 
rule would allow continued use of Crummey powers in existing irrevocable 
trusts, but only to the extent that the Crummey powers are held by 
primary noncontingent beneficiaries.

                                Pensions

  Increase elective withholding rate for nonperiodic distributions from 
deferred compensation plans. --The Administration proposes increasing 
the current 10-percent elective withholding rate for nonperiodic 
distributions (such as certain lump sums) from pensions, IRAs and 
annuities to 15 percent, which more closely approximates the taxpayer's 
income tax liability for the distribution effective for distributions 
after 2001. The withholding would not apply to eligible rollover 
distributions.
  Increase excise tax for excess IRA contributions.--Excess IRA 
contributions are currently subject to an annual 6-percent tax rate. 
With high investment returns, this annual 6-percent rate may be 
insufficient to discourage contributions in excess of the current limits 
for IRAs. The Administration proposes increasing from 6 percent to 10 
percent the excise tax on excess contributions to IRAs for taxable years 
after the year the excess contribution is made. Thus, the 6-percent rate 
would continue to apply for the year of the excess contribution and the 
higher annual rate would only

[[Page 81]]

apply if the excess amounts are not withdrawn from the IRA. This 
increase would be effective for taxable years beginning after 2000.
  Limit pre-funding of welfare benefits for 10 or more employer plans.--
Current law generally limits the ability of employers to claim a 
deduction for amounts used to prefund welfare benefits. An exception is 
provided for certain arrangements where 10 or more employers participate 
because it is believed that such relationships involve risk-sharing 
similar to insurance which will effectively eliminate any incentive for 
participating employers to prefund benefits . However, as a practical 
matter, it has proven difficult to enforce the risk-sharing requirements 
in the context of certain arrangements. The Administration proposes 
limiting the 10 or more employer plan funding exception to medical, 
disability, and group-term life insurance benefits because these 
benefits do not present the same risk of prefunding abuse. Thus, 
effective for contributions paid after the date of first committee 
action, the existing deduction rules of the Internal Revenue Code would 
apply to prevent an employer who contributes to a 10 or more employer 
plan from claiming a current deduction for supplemental unemployment 
benefits, severance pay or life insurance (other than group-term life 
insurance) benefits to be paid in future years.
  Subject signing bonuses to employment taxes.--Bonuses paid to 
individuals for signing a first contract of employment are ordinary 
income in the year received. The Administration proposes to clarify that 
these amounts are treated as wages for purposes of income tax 
withholding and FICA taxes effective after date of enactment. No 
inference is intended with respect to the application of prior law 
withholding rules to signing bonuses.
  Clarify employment tax treatment of choreworkers.--Choreworkers, 
individuals paid by State agencies to provide domestic services for 
disabled and elderly individuals, often provide services for more than 
one disabled or elderly individual. The Administration's proposal would 
clarify that State agencies, and not the disabled or elderly individual 
receiving the services, are responsible for withholding and employment 
taxes for choreworkers effective for wages paid after 2000. For this 
purpose, all wages paid by the State agency to a choreworker are treated 
as paid by a single employer.
  Prohibit IRAs from investing in foreign sales corporations.--Foreign 
sales corporations (FSCs) are foreign corporations whose income is 
partially subject to US tax. IRAs were never intended to be able to 
invest in FSCs. The proposal would prohibit an IRA from investing in a 
FSC effective after the date of first committee action.

                               Compliance

  Tighten the substantial understatement penalty for large 
corporations.--Currently taxpayers may be penalized for erroneous, but 
non-negligent, return positions if the amount of the understatement is 
``substantial'' and the taxpayer did not disclose the position in a 
statement with the return. ``Substantial'' is defined as 10 percent of 
the taxpayer's total current tax liability, but this can be a very large 
amount. This has led some large corporations to take aggressive 
reporting positions where huge amounts of potential tax liability are at 
stake--in effect playing the audit lottery--without any downside risk of 
penalties if they are caught, because the potential tax still would not 
exceed 10 percent of the company's total tax liability. To discourage 
such aggressive tax planning, the Administration proposes that any 
deficiency greater than $10 million be considered ``substantial'' for 
purposes of the substantial understatement penalty, whether or not it 
exceeds 10 percent of the taxpayer's liability. The proposal, which 
would be effective for taxable years beginning after the date of 
enactment, would affect only taxpayers that have tax liabilities greater 
than or equal to $100 million.
  Require withholding on certain gambling winnings.--Proceeds of most 
wagers with odds of less than 300 to 1 are exempt from withholding, as 
are all bingo and keno winnings. The Administration proposes to impose 
withholding on proceeds of bingo or keno in excess of $5,000 at a rate 
of 28 percent, regardless of the odds of the wager, effective for 
payments made after the start of the first calendar quarter that is at 
least 30 days after the date of enactment.
   Require information reporting for private separate accounts.--Direct 
investments generally result in taxable income each year of dividends 
and interest, plus taxable gain or loss for changes in the value of the 
securities in the year that such securities are sold. In contrast, 
investments held through insurance contracts--called separate accounts--
generally give rise to tax-free or tax-deferred income unless the 
policyholder has too much control over the contract's investments. 
Insurance companies sometimes create private separate accounts through 
which only one or a small group of policyholders may invest their funds. 
These policyholders generally exercise investor control, and thus are 
liable for income tax each year on the investment income earned. 
However, the IRS has no efficient way to identify which insurance 
contracts' funds are invested through private separate accounts. The 
Administration proposal would require insurance companies to report each 
insurance contract with funds invested through private separate 
accounts, and the policyholder taxpayer identification number and 
earnings for such contract. The proposal would be effective for taxable 
years beginning after the date of enactment.

[[Page 82]]

  Increase penalties for failure to file correct information returns.--
Any person who fails to file required information returns in a timely 
manner or incorrectly reports such information is subject to penalties. 
For taxpayers filing large volumes of information returns or reporting 
significant payments, existing penalties ($15 per return, not to exceed 
$75,000 if corrected within 30 days; $30 per return, not to exceed 
$150,000 if corrected by August 1; and $50 per return, not to exceed 
$250,000 if not corrected at all) may not be sufficient to encourage 
timely and accurate reporting. The Administration proposes to increase 
the general penalty amount, subject to the overall dollar limitations, 
to the greater of $50 per return or five percent of the total amount 
required to be reported. The increased penalty would not apply if the 
aggregate amount actually reported by the taxpayer on all returns filed 
for that calendar year was at least 97 percent of the amount required to 
be reported. The increased penalty would be effective for returns the 
due date for which is more than 90 days after the date of enactment.

                              Miscellaneous

  Modify deposit requirement for Federal Unemployment Act (FUTA).--
Beginning in 2005, the Administration proposes to require an employer to 
pay Federal and State unemployment taxes monthly (instead of quarterly) 
in a given year, if the employer's FUTA tax liability in the immediately 
preceding year was $1,100 or more.
  Reinstate Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund tax.--Before January 1, 1995, 
a five-cents-per-barrel excise tax was imposed on domestic crude oil and 
imported oil and petroleum products. The tax was dedicated to the Oil 
Spill Liability Trust Fund to finance the cleanup of oil spills and was 
not imposed for a calendar quarter if the unobligated balance in the 
Trust Fund exceeded $1 billion at the close of the preceding quarter. 
The Administration proposes to reinstate this tax for the period after 
September 30, 2001 and before October 1, 2010. The tax would be 
suspended for a given calendar quarter if the unobligated Trust Fund 
balance at the end of the preceding quarter exceeded $5 billion.
  Repeal percentage depletion for non-fuel minerals mined on Federal and 
formerly Federal lands.--Taxpayers are allowed to deduct a reasonable 
allowance for depletion relating to certain mineral deposits. The 
depletion deduction for any taxable year is calculated under either the 
cost depletion method or the percentage depletion method, whichever 
results in the greater allowance for depletion for the year. The 
percentage depletion method is viewed as an incentive for mineral 
production rather than as a normative rule for recovering the taxpayer's 
investment in the property. This incentive is excessive with respect to 
minerals mined on Federal and formerly Federal lands under the 1872 
mining act, in light of the minimal costs of acquiring the mining rights 
($5.00 or less per acre). The Administration proposes to repeal 
percentage depletion for non-fuel minerals mined on Federal lands where 
the mining rights were originally acquired under the 1872 law, and on 
private lands acquired under the 1872 law. The proposal would be 
effective for taxable years beginning after the date of enactment.
  Impose excise tax on purchase of structured settlements.--Current law 
facilitates the use of structured personal injury settlements because 
recipients of annuities under these settlements are less likely than 
recipients of lump sum awards to consume their awards too quickly and 
require public assistance. Consistent with that policy, this favorable 
treatment is conditional upon a requirement that the periodic payments 
cannot be accelerated, deferred, increased or decreased by the injured 
person. Nonetheless, certain factoring companies are able to purchase a 
portion of the annuities from the recipients for heavily discounted lump 
sums. These purchases are inconsistent with the policy underlying 
favorable tax treatment of structured settlements. Accordingly, the 
Administration proposes to impose on any person who purchases (or 
otherwise acquires for consideration) a structured settlement payment 
stream, a 40-percent excise tax on the difference between the amount 
paid by the purchaser to the injured person and the undiscounted value 
of the purchased payment stream unless such purchase is pursuant to a 
court order finding that the extraordinary and unanticipated needs of 
the original intended recipient render such a transaction desirable. The 
proposal would apply to purchases occurring on or after the date of 
enactment. No inference is intended as to the contractual validity of 
the purchase or the effect of the purchase transaction on the tax 
treatment of any party other than the purchaser.
  Require taxpayers to include rental income of residence in income 
without regard to the period of rental.--Under current law, rental 
income is generally includable in income and the deductibility of 
expenses attributable to the rental property is subject to certain 
limitations. An exception to this general treatment applies if a 
dwelling is used by the taxpayer as a residence and is rented for less 
than 15 days during the taxable year. The income from such a rental is 
not included in gross income and no expenses arising from the rental are 
deductible. The Administration proposes to repeal this 15-day exception. 
The proposal would apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
2000.
  Eliminate installment payment of heavy vehicle use tax.--An annual tax 
is imposed on the use of heavy (at least 55,000 pounds) highway 
vehicles. The tax year is July 1 through June 30 and the tax return is 
generally due on August 31 of the year to which it relates. A taxpayer 
may, however, elect to pay the tax in installments. The installment 
option generally permits payment of one quarter of the tax on each of 
the following dates: August 31, December 31, March 31, and

[[Page 83]]

June 30. States are required to obtain evidence, before issuing tags for 
a vehicle, that the use tax return has been filed and any tax due with 
the return (generally only the first installment) has been paid. To 
foster compliance, the Administration proposes to eliminate the 
installment option for taxable years beginning after June 30, 2002. 
Thus, heavy vehicle owners would be required to pay the entire tax with 
their returns and would be unable to obtain State tags without providing 
proof of full payment.
   Require recognition of gain on sale of principal residence if 
acquired in a tax-free exchange within five years of sale.--Gain of up 
to $250,000 ($500,000 in the case of a joint return) from the sale or 
exchange of property is excluded from income if, during the five-year 
period ending on the date of the sale or exchange, the property has been 
owned and used by the taxpayer as the taxpayer's principal residence for 
periods aggregating two years or more. No gain or loss is recognized if 
property held for use in a trade or business or for investment is 
exchanged solely for other like-kind property held for use in a trade or 
business or for investment. The current-law exclusion for principal 
residences, in combination with the tax-free like-kind exchange 
provision, allows planning opportunities for taxpayers who wish to 
liquidate real property held for use in a trade or business or for 
investment. Such planning opportunities are beyond the intended scope of 
the principal residence exclusion. The Administration proposes to 
require recognition of gain on the sale of property that has been owned 
and used by the taxpayer as the taxpayer's principal residence for 
periods aggregating two years or more if the property was acquired in a 
tax-free like-kind exchange within five years of the sale. The proposal 
would be effective for sales after the date of enactment.

                              International

                          Identified Tax Havens

  The Administration is concerned about the use of tax havens. Tax 
havens facilitate tax avoidance and evasion and many of them, through 
strict confidentiality rules, substandard regulatory regimes, and 
uncooperative information exchange practices, inhibit our law 
enforcement capabilities. The Administration proposes several remedies 
to reduce the attractiveness of, and increase access to information 
about activity in, certain tax havens identified by the Secretary of the 
Treasury (``Identified Tax Havens''). To identify tax havens that will 
be subject to these rules, the Secretary of the Treasury will use 
criteria including, but not limited to, whether a jurisdiction imposes 
no or nominal taxation, either generally or on specific classes of 
capital income, has strict confidentiality rules and practices, and has 
ineffective information exchange practices.

  Require reporting of all payments to identified tax havens--The 
proposal would provide that all payments to entities, including 
corporations, partnerships and disregarded entities, branches, trusts, 
accounts or individuals resident or located in Identified Tax Havens 
must be reported on the taxpayer's annual return unless: (1) information 
regarding the payment would be available to the IRS upon request or 
otherwise, or (2) the payment is less than $10,000. Failure to report a 
covered payment would result in the imposition of a penalty equal to 20 
percent of the amount of the payment. Special rules would apply to 
certain financial services businesses that would permit reporting 
certain payments on an aggregate basis. An anti-abuse rule would require 
aggregation of related payments for purposes of determining whether a 
payment is under $10,000. The proposal would be effective for payments 
made after the date of enactment.
   Impose limitations on certain tax attributes and income flowing 
through Identified Tax Havens.--Current rules deny foreign tax credits 
for taxes paid to (1) countries whose governments the U.S. does not 
recognize, (2) countries with respect to which the U.S. has severed 
diplomatic relations, or (3) countries that the State Department cites 
as supporting international terrorism. In addition, the foreign tax 
credit limitation and other rules are applied separately to income 
attributable to such countries. The proposal would apply similar rules 
to Identified Tax Havens. In addition, the proposal would reduce by a 
factor (similar to the international boycott factor) a taxpayer's (1) 
otherwise allowable foreign tax credit or FSC benefit attributable to 
income from an Identified Tax Haven, and (2) the income, attributable to 
an Identified Tax Haven, that is otherwise eligible for deferral. This 
reduction of tax benefits would be based on a fraction the numerator of 
which is the sum of the taxpayer's income and gains from an Identified 
Tax Haven and the denominator of which is the taxpayer's total non-U.S. 
income and gains. The proposal would be effective for taxable years 
beginning after the date of enactment.

                        Mark-to-Market Proposals

  Modify treatment of built-in losses and other attributes 
trafficking.--Under current law, a taxpayer that becomes subject to U.S. 
taxation may take the position that it determines its beginning bases in 
its assets under U.S. tax principles as if the taxpayer had historically 
been subject to U.S. tax. Other tax attributes are computed similarly. A 
taxpayer may thus ``import'' built-in losses or other favorable tax 
attributes incurred outside U.S. taxing jurisdiction to offset income or 
gain that would otherwise be subject to U.S. tax. To prevent this 
ability to import ``built-in'' losses or other favorable attributes, the 
proposal would eliminate tax attributes (including built-in items) and 
mark-to-market bases when an entity or an asset becomes relevant for 
U.S. tax purposes. The proposal would be effective for transactions in 
which assets or entities become relevant for U.S. tax purposes on or 
after the date of enactment.

[[Page 84]]

  Simplify taxation of property that no longer produces income 
effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business.--Under current law, 
a foreign person is subject to tax in the United States on net income 
that is effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business (``ECI''). 
If a foreign person transfers property from a U.S. trade or business to 
its foreign office, the United States retains the right to tax all of 
the gain realized from a subsequent disposition of the property if the 
disposition occurs within ten years of the time the property ceased to 
be used in the U.S. trade or business. The United States also retains, 
for ten years, the right to tax deferred income from an asset 
attributable to a U.S. trade or business. These rules are difficult to 
administer and may in some cases result in the United States taxing gain 
that economically accrued after the property was removed from U.S. 
taxing jurisdiction. The proposal would mark to market property 
(including rights to deferred income) at the time that the property 
ceases to be used in, or attributable to, a U.S. trade or business. The 
proposal would be effective for property that ceases to be used in, or 
attributable to, a U.S. trade or business after the date of enactment.
  Prevent avoidance of tax on U.S.-accrued gains (expatriation).---Under 
current rules, persons renouncing U.S. citizenship for tax-avoidance 
purposes are subject to U.S. taxation for ten years after renunciation. 
Although these rules were modified in 1996, they are still easily 
avoided and impose significant administrative burdens on both taxpayers 
and the Government. The proposal would simplify and toughen the taxation 
of expatriates by repealing the current regime and imposing a one-time 
tax on accrued gains at the time of expatriation. Also, if an expatriate 
subsequently makes a gift or bequest to a U.S. person, the proposal 
would treat the gift as gross income to the U.S. recipient, taxable at 
the highest marginal rate applicable to gifts and bequests. In addition, 
the proposal would amend a 1996 law (the ``Reed Amendment''), which 
requires the Attorney General to deny re-entry to a tax-motivated 
expatriate, to coordinate it with the tax proposal, and improve the 
enforceability of both the tax proposal and the Reed Amendment. The 
proposal would apply for individuals expatriating on or after the date 
of first committee action.

                     Other International Provisions

  Expand ECI rules to include certain foreign source income.---Under 
current rules, only certain enumerated types of foreign source income of 
a nonresident (rents, royalties, interest, dividends and sales of 
inventory property) can be treated as effectively connected with a U.S. 
trade or business (``ECI'') and thus subject to net basis taxation. 
Economic equivalents of such enumerated types of foreign source income, 
such as interest equivalents (including letter of credit fees) and 
dividend equivalents, cannot constitute ECI under any circumstances. 
Moreover, some excluded foreign source income can in large part be 
attributable to business activities that take place in the United 
States. For example, a foreign satellite corporation with an office, 
satellite ground station or other fixed place of business in the United 
States may earn income with respect to the leasing of a satellite. Under 
current rules, such foreign source income would not be subject to U.S. 
tax as ECI even if it is attributable to the foreign corporation's U.S. 
office. The proposal would expand the categories of foreign source 
income that could constitute ECI to include interest equivalents and 
dividend equivalents and to include other income that is attributable to 
an office or other fixed place of business in the U.S. The proposal 
would be effective for taxable years beginning after date of enactment.
  Limit basis step-up for imported pensions.--Under current law, a 
nonresident alien individual who anticipates receiving a distribution 
from a foreign pension plan may, under certain circumstances, establish 
U.S. residency, receive the distribution, claim a high basis in the plan 
distribution, and pay little or no U.S. tax on the distribution. 
Moreover, as a result of certain existing U.S. tax treaties, the 
individual may pay no foreign tax on the distribution. The proposal 
would prevent individuals from utilizing internal law and U.S. tax 
treaties to produce double non-taxation on foreign pension plan 
distributions. The proposal would modify the Internal Revenue Code to 
give an individual basis in a foreign pension plan distribution only to 
the extent the individual previously has been subject to tax (either in 
the United States or the foreign jurisdiction) on the amounts being 
distributed. The proposal would be effective for distributions occurring 
on or after the date of enactment.
  Replace sales-source rules.--If inventory is manufactured in the 
United States and sold abroad, Treasury regulations provide that 50 
percent of the income from such sales is treated as earned in production 
activities and 50 percent in sales activities. The income from the 
production activities is sourced on the basis of the location of assets 
held or used to produce the income. The income from the sales activities 
(the remaining 50 percent) is sourced based on where title to the 
inventory transfers. If inventory is purchased in the United States and 
sold abroad, 100 percent of the sales income generally is deemed to be 
foreign source. These rules generally produce more foreign source income 
for United States tax purposes than is subject to foreign tax. This 
generally increases the U.S. exporters' foreign tax credit limitation 
and allows U.S. exporters that operate in high-tax foreign countries to 
credit against their U.S. tax liability foreign income taxes levied in 
excess of the U.S. income tax rate. The proposal would require that the 
allocation between production and sales be based on actual economic 
activity. The proposal would be effective for taxable years beginning 
after the date of enactment.
  Modify rules relating to foreign oil and gas extraction income.--To be 
eligible for the U.S. foreign

[[Page 85]]

tax credit, a foreign levy must be the substantial equivalent of an 
income tax in the U.S. sense, regardless of the label the foreign 
government attaches to it. Under regulations, a foreign levy is a tax if 
it is a compulsory payment under the authority of a foreign government 
to levy taxes and is not compensation for a specific economic benefit 
provided by the foreign country. Taxpayers that are subject to a foreign 
levy and that also receive (directly or indirectly) a specific economic 
benefit from the levying country are referred to as ``dual capacity'' 
taxpayers and may not claim a credit for that portion of the foreign 
levy paid as compensation for the specific economic benefit received. 
The Administration proposes to treat as taxes payments by a dual-
capacity taxpayer to a foreign country that would otherwise qualify as 
income taxes or ``in lieu of'' taxes, only if there is a ``generally 
applicable income tax'' in that country. For this purpose, a generally 
applicable income tax is an income tax (or a series of income taxes) 
that applies to trade or business income from sources in that country, 
so long as the levy has substantial application both to non-dual-
capacity taxpayers and to persons who are citizens or residents of that 
country. Where the foreign country does generally impose an income tax, 
as under present law, credits would be allowed up to the level of 
taxation that would be imposed under that general tax, so long as the 
tax satisfies the new statutory definition of a ``generally applicable 
income tax.'' The proposal also would create a new foreign tax credit 
basket within section 904 for foreign oil and gas income. The proposal 
would be effective for taxable years beginning after the date of 
enactment. The proposal would yield to U.S. tax treaty obligations that 
allow a credit for taxes paid or accrued on certain oil or gas income.
  Recapture overall foreign losses when controlled foreign corporation 
(CFC) stock is disposed.--Under the interest allocation rules of section 
864(e), the value of stock in a CFC is added to the value of directly-
owned foreign assets, and then compared to the value of domestic assets 
of a corporation (or a group of affiliated U.S. corporations) for 
purposes of determining how much of the corporation's interest 
deductions should be allocated against foreign income and how much 
against domestic income. If these deductions against foreign income 
result in (or increase) an overall foreign loss which is then applied 
against U.S. income, section 904(f) recapture rules require subsequent 
foreign income or gain to be recharacterized as domestic. Recapture can 
take place when a taxpayer disposes of directly-owned foreign assets, 
for example. However, there may be no recapture when a shareholder 
disposes of stock in a CFC. The proposal would correct that asymmetry by 
providing that property subject to the recapture rules upon disposition 
under section 904(f)(3) would include stock in a CFC. The proposal would 
be effective on or after the date of enactment.
  Modify foreign office material participation exception applicable to 
inventory sales attributable to nonresident's U.S. office.--In the case 
of a sale of inventory property that is attributable to a nonresident's 
office or other fixed place of business within the United States, the 
sales income is generally U.S. source. The income is foreign source, 
however, if the inventory is sold for use, disposition, or consumption 
outside the United States and the nonresident's foreign office or other 
fixed place of business materially participates in the sale. The 
proposal would provide that the foreign source exception shall apply 
only if an income tax equal to at least 10 percent of the income from 
the sale is actually paid to a foreign country with respect to such 
income. The proposal thereby ensures that the United States does not 
cede its jurisdiction to tax such sales unless the income from the sale 
is actually taxed by a foreign country at some minimal level. The 
proposal would be effective for transactions occurring on or after the 
date of enactment.

                  OTHER PROVISIONS THAT AFFECT RECEIPTS

  Reinstate environmental tax imposed on corporate taxable income and 
deposited in the Hazardous Substance Superfund Trust Fund.--Under prior 
law, a tax equal to 0.12 percent of alternative minimum taxable income 
(with certain modifications) in excess of $2 million was levied on all 
corporations and deposited in the Hazardous Substance Superfund Trust 
Fund. The Administration proposes to reinstate this tax, which expired 
on December 31, 1995, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 
1999 and before January 1, 2011.
  Reinstate excise taxes deposited in the Hazardous Substance Superfund 
Trust Fund.--The excise taxes that were levied on petroleum, chemicals, 
and imported substances and deposited in the Hazardous Substance 
Superfund Trust Fund are proposed to be reinstated for the period after 
the date of enactment and before October 1, 2010. These taxes expired on 
December 31, 1995.
  Convert a portion of the excise taxes deposited in the Airport and 
Airway Trust Fund to cost-based user fees assessed for Federal Aviation 
Administration (FAA) services.--The excise taxes that are levied on 
domestic air passenger tickets and flight segments, international 
departures and arrivals, and domestic air cargo are proposed to be 
reduced over time as more efficient, cost-based user fees for air 
traffic services are phased in beginning in fiscal year 2001. The 
Administration proposes to phase in implementation of the new fees over 
two years and raise sufficient revenue (excise taxes plus new fees) to 
support expected FAA operational and capital needs in the subsequent 
year.
  Increase excise tax on tobacco products and levy a youth smoking 
assessment on tobacco manufacturers. --Under current law, the 34-cents-
per-pack excise tax on cigarettes is scheduled to increase by 5-cents-
per-pack effective January 1, 2002. The Adminis

[[Page 86]]

tration proposes to accelerate the scheduled 5-cents-per-pack increase 
in the excise tax on cigarettes and to increase the tax by an additional 
25-cents-per-pack effective October 1, 2000. Tax rates on other taxable 
tobacco products will increase proportionately. In addition, beginning 
after 2003, the Administration proposes to levy an assessment on tobacco 
manufacturers if the youth smoking rate is not reduced by 50 percent.
  Recover State bank supervision and regulation expenses (receipt 
effect).--The Administration proposes to require the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Federal Reserve to recover their 
respective costs for supervision and regulation of State-chartered banks 
and bank holding companies. The Federal Reserve currently funds the 
costs of such examinations from earnings; therefore, deposits of 
earnings by the Federal Reserve, which are classified as governmental 
receipts, will increase by the amount of the recoveries.
  Maintain Federal Reserve surplus transfer to the Treasury.--In FY 
2000, the Federal Reserve System transferred $3.752 billion from its 
capital account surplus funds to the Treasury. The Administration 
proposes in FY 2001 that the Federal Reserve System maintain the capital 
account surplus fund at the post-transfer level.
  Restore premiums for the United Mine Workers of America Combined 
Benefit Fund.--The Administration proposes legislation to restore the 
previous calculation of premiums charged to coal companies that employed 
the retired miners that have been assigned to them. By reversing the 
court decision of National Coal v. Chater, this legislation will restore 
a premium calculation that supports medical cost containment.
  Extend abandoned mine reclamation fees.--The abandoned mine 
reclamation fees, which are scheduled to expire on September 30, 2004, 
are proposed to be extended through September 30, 2014. These fees, 
which are levied on coal operators, generally are the lesser of 15 cents 
per ton for coal produced by underground mining and 35 cents per ton for 
coal produced by surface mining, or 10 percent of the value of the coal 
at the mine. Amounts collected will be used to continue abandoned coal 
mine reclamation. The coal mining states and Indian Tribes have 
identified over $4.2 billion in remaining restoration needs. Each year, 
states, Indian Tribes and Federal agencies identify additional needs.
  Replace Harbor Maintenance Tax with the Harbor Services User Fee 
(receipt effect).--The Administration proposes to replace the ad valorem 
Harbor Maintenance Tax with a cost-based user fee, the Harbor Services 
User Fee. The user fee will finance construction and operation and 
maintenance of harbor activities performed by the Army Corps of 
Engineers, the costs of operating and maintaining the Saint Lawrence 
Seaway, and the costs of administering the fee. Through appropriation 
acts, the fee will raise an average of $980 million annually through FY 
2005, which is less than would have been raised by the Harbor 
Maintenance Tax before the Supreme Court decision that the ad valorem 
tax on exports was unconstitutional.
  Revise Army Corps of Engineers regulatory program fees.--The Army 
Corps of Engineers has not changed the fee structure of its regulatory 
program since 1977. The Administration proposes to pursue reasonable 
changes that would reduce the fees paid from many applicants and 
increase recovery from commercial applicants.
  Roll back Federal employee retirement contributions.--The 
Administration proposes to roll back to pre-1999 levels the higher 
retirement contributions required of Federal employees by the Balanced 
Budget Act of 1997. The rollback is proposed to take effect in January 
2001.
  Provide government-wide buyout authority (receipt effect).--The 
Administration proposes to provide government-wide buyout authority, 
which will lower employee contributions to the civil service retirement 
fund.

[[Page 87]]



                                   Table 3-3.  EFFECT OF PROPOSALS ON RECEIPTS
                                            (In millions of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        Estimate
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          2000      2001      2002       2003       2004       2005    2001-2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provide tax relief:

  Expand educational opportunities:
    Provide College Opportunity tax     ........     -395    -2,009     -2,323     -3,103     -3,262    -11,092
     cut..............................
    Provide incentives for public       ........      -36      -174       -419       -739     -1,020     -2,388
     school construction and
     modernization....................
    Expand exclusion for employer-          -66      -275       -90   .........  .........  .........      -365
     provided educational assistance
     to include graduate education....
    Eliminate 60-month limit on         ........      -23       -80        -87        -89        -93       -372
     student loan interest deduction..
    Eliminate tax when forgiving        ........  ........  ........  .........  .........  .........  .........
     student loans subject to income
     contingent repayment.............
    Provide tax relief for              ........       -3        -7         -7         -7         -6        -30
     participants in certain Federal
     education programs...............
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, expand educational          -66      -732    -2,360     -2,836     -3,938     -4,381    -14,247
       opportunities..................

  Provide poverty relief and
   revitalize communities:
    Increase and simplify the Earned    ........   -2,293    -1,936     -1,967     -1,992     -2,001    -10,189
     Income Tax Credit (EITC) \1\.....
    Increase and index low-income       ........       -6       -55       -168       -306       -448       -983
     housing tax credit per-capita cap
    Provide New Markets Tax Credit....  ........      -30      -222       -515       -743       -940     -2,450
    Extend Empowerment Zone (EZ) tax    ........      -36      -167       -333       -452       -568     -1,556
     incentives and authorize
     additional EZs...................
    Provide Better America Bonds to     ........       -8       -41       -112       -214       -315       -690
     improve the environment..........
    Permanently extend the expensing    ........  ........      -98       -152       -146       -140       -536
     of brownfields remediation costs.
    Expand tax incentives for                -*        -*        -*         -*         -*         -*         -*
     specialized small business
     investment companies (SSBICs)....
    Bridge the Digital Divide.........  ........     -107      -272       -344       -289       -207     -1,219
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, provide poverty relief  ........   -2,480    -2,791     -3,591     -4,142     -4,619    -17,623
       and revitalize communities.....

  Make health care more affordable:
    Assist taxpayers with long-term     ........     -109    -1,150     -1,681     -2,427     -3,028     -8,395
     care needs \2\...................
    Encourage COBRA continuation        ........  ........      -41       -858     -1,149     -1,286     -3,334
     coverage.........................
    Provide tax credit for Medicare     ........  ........       -5       -105       -140       -164       -414
     buy-in program...................
    Provide tax relief for workers      ........      -18      -128       -143       -158       -165       -612
     with disabilities \2\............
    Provide tax relief to encourage     ........       -1        -9        -22        -35        -38       -105
     small business health plans......
    Encourage development of vaccines   ........  ........  ........  .........  .........  .........  .........
     for targeted diseases............
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, make health care more   ........     -128    -1,333     -2,809     -3,909     -4,681    -12,860
       affordable \2\.................

  Strengthen families and improve work
   incentives:
    Provide marriage penalty relief     ........     -248      -843     -1,536     -2,130     -4,637     -9,394
     and increase standard deduction..
    Increase, expand, and simplify      ........     -121      -589       -922     -1,288     -1,643     -4,563
     child and dependent care tax
     credit \2\.......................
    Provide tax incentives for          ........      -42       -88       -121       -140       -148       -539
     employer-provided child-care
     facilities.......................
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, strengthen families     ........     -411    -1,520     -2,579     -3,558     -6,428    -14,496
       and improve work incentives \2\

  Promote expanded retirement savings,
   security, and portability:
    Establish Retirement Savings        ........  ........     -657     -2,185     -2,290     -4,034     -9,166
     Accounts.........................
    Provide small business tax credit   ........  ........     -157       -648     -1,878     -3,074     -5,757
     for automatic contributions for
     non-highly compensated employees.
    Provide tax credit for plan start        -1       -18       -35        -61        -92       -135       -341
     up and administrative expenses;
     provide for payroll deduction
     IRAs.............................
    Provide for the SMART plan........  ........      -44       -65        -66        -68        -70       -313
    Enhance the 401(k) SIMPLE plan....  ........      -25       -61       -108       -161       -236       -591
    Accelerate vesting for qualified    ........      214       137        104         66         29        550
     plans............................
    Other changes affecting retirement  ........      -53      -207       -288       -377       -450     -1,375
     savings, security and portability
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, promote expanded             -1        74    -1,045     -3,252     -4,800     -7,970    -16,993
       retirement savings, security
       and portability................

  Provide AMT relief for families and
   simplify the tax laws:
    Provide adjustments for personal        -72      -377      -544       -996     -1,312     -1,650     -4,879
     exemptions and the standard
     deduction in the individual
     alternative minimum tax (AMT)....
    Simplify and increase standard           -7       -42       -29        -33        -51        -37       -192
     deduction for dependent filers...
    Replace support test with           ........      -66       -97       -102       -107       -112       -484
     residency test (limited to
     children)........................
    Provide tax credit to encourage     ........  ........     -192       -207       -208       -209       -816
     electronic filing of individual
     income tax returns \2\...........
    Simplify, retarget and expand       ........     -217      -206        -19        -86       -135       -663
     expensing for small business.....
    Simplify the foreign tax credit         -80      -168      -102        -46         10         27       -279
     limitation for dividends from 10/
     50 companies.....................
    Other simplification..............       -1       -17       -23        -27        -30        -35       -132
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, provide AMT relief for     -160      -887    -1,193     -1,430     -1,784     -2,151     -7,445
       families and simplify the tax
       laws \2\.......................

  Encourage philanthropy:
    Allow deduction for charitable      ........     -516    -1,062       -733       -765       -817     -3,893
     contributions by non-itemizing
     taxpayers........................
    Simplify and reduce the excise tax  ........      -49       -70        -71        -73        -75       -338
     on foundation investment income..
    Increase limit on charitable        ........       -7       -47        -29        -20        -12       -115
     donations of appreciated property

[[Page 88]]


    Clarify public charity status of          *         *         *          *          *          *          *
     donor advised funds..............
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, encourage philanthropy  ........     -572    -1,179       -833       -858       -904     -4,346

  Promote energy efficiency and
   improve the environment:
    Provide tax credit for energy-      ........      -18       -35        -49        -71        -28       -201
     efficient building equipment.....
    Provide tax credit for new energy-  ........      -82      -150       -194       -134        -73       -633
     efficient homes..................
    Extend electric vehicle tax credit  ........  ........       -4       -182       -700     -1,192     -2,078
     and provide tax credit for hybrid
     vehicles.........................
    Provide 15-year depreciable life    ........       -1        -1         -2         -3         -3        -10
     for distributed power property...
    Extend and modify the tax credit    ........      -91      -173       -220       -231       -261       -976
     for producing electricity from
     certain sources..................
    Provide tax credit for solar        ........       -9       -19        -25        -34        -45       -132
     energy systems...................
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, promote energy          ........     -201      -382       -672     -1,173     -1,602     -4,030
       efficiency and improve the
       environment....................
  Electricity restructuring...........  ........        3        11         20         30         41        105

  Modify international trade
   provisions:
    Extend and modify Puerto Rico       ........      -35       -67       -101       -134       -166       -503
     economic-activity tax credit.....
    Extend GSP and modify other trade       -10      -454      -858       -940       -884       -248     -3,384
     provisions \3\...................
    Levy tariff on certain textiles/    ........  ........      169        169        169        169        676
     apparel produced in the CNMI \3\.
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, modify international        -10      -489      -756       -872       -849       -245     -3,211
       trade provisions \3\...........

  Miscellaneous provisions:
    Make first $2,000 of severance pay  ........      -43      -174       -180       -138   .........      -535
     exempt from income tax...........
    Exempt Holocaust reparations from        -4       -17       -18        -19        -15   .........       -69
     Federal income tax...............
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, miscellaneous                -4       -60      -192       -199       -153   .........      -604
       provisions.....................
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, provide tax relief \2\     -241    -5,883   -12,740    -19,053    -25,134    -32,940    -95,750
       \3\............................
      Refundable credits..............  ........      -23      -679       -736     -2,218     -2,343     -5,999
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total gross tax relief including     -241    -5,906   -13,419    -19,789    -27,352    -35,283   -101,749
       refundable credits \3\.........

Eliminate unwarranted benefits and
 adopt other revenue measures:

  Limit benefits of corporate tax
   shelter transactions:
    Increase disclosure of certain      ........    1,872     1,392      1,357      1,351      1,374      7,346
     transactions, modify substantial
     understatement penalty for
     corporate tax shelters, codify
     the economic substance doctrine,
     tax income from shelters
     involving tax-indifferent parties
     and impose a penalty excise tax
     on certain fees received by
     promotors and advisors...........
    Require accrual of income on              1         5        10         15         21         26         77
     forward sale of corporate stock..
    Modify treatment of ESOP as S       ........       15        47         67         88        104        321
     corporation shareholder..........
    Limit dividend treatment for        ........       22        37         39         40         42        180
     payments on certain self-
     amortizing stock.................
    Prevent serial liquidation of U.S.       12        20        19         19         19         18         95
     subsidiaries of foreign
     corporations.....................
    Prevent capital gains avoidance          71       328       121         65         45         26        585
     through basis shift transactions
     involving foreign shareholders...
    Prevent mismatching of deductions   ........       62       108        112        117        122        521
     and income in transactions with
     related foreign persons..........
    Prevent duplication or                    4        34        36         37         38         40        185
     acceleration of loss through
     assumption of certain liabilities
    Amend 80/20 company rules.........  ........       21        46         53         54         56        230
    Modify corporate-owned life         ........      176       340        417        489        548      1,970
     insurance (COLI) rules...........
    Require lessors of tax-exempt-use   ........        6        11         17         24         30         88
     property to include service
     contract options in lease term...
    Interaction.......................      -42      -239      -175       -157       -157       -160       -888
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, limit benefits of            46     2,322     1,992      2,041      2,129      2,226     10,710
       corporate tax shelter
       transactions...................

  Other proposals:
    Require banks to accrue interest          6        63        21          4          5          5         98
     on short-term obligations........
    Require current accrual of market         1         7        13         19         25         31         95
     discount by accrual method
     taxpayers........................
    Modify and clarify certain rules          9        73        74         71         70         70        358
     relating to debt-for-debt
     exchanges........................
    Modify and clarify the straddle          14        30        34         33         34         35        166
     rules............................
    Provide generalized rules for all         7        18        22         21         19         18         98
     stripping transactions...........
    Require ordinary treatment for           16        29        31         31         31         31        153
     certain dealers of commodities
     and equity options...............
    Prohibit tax deferral on            ........        2         5          8         10         11         36
     contributions of appreciated
     property to swap funds...........
    Conform control test for tax-free        13        34        41         39         38         39        191
     incorporations, distributions,
     and reorganizations..............
    Treat receipt of tracking stock in       28       108       158        153        149        151        719
     certain distributions and
     exchanges as the receipt of
     property.........................
    Require consistent treatment and          1        41        51         53         55         57        257
     provide basis allocation rules
     for transfers of intangibles in
     certain nonrecognition
     transactions.....................
    Modify tax treatment of certain          17        49        66         71         77         83        346
     reorganizations involving
     portfolio stock..................
    Modify definition of nonqualified        11        53        61         64         67         54        299
     preferred stock..................

[[Page 89]]


    Modify estimated tax provision for  ........      314        90        -23        -15         -8        358
     deemed asset sales...............
    Modify treatment of transfers to          3        15        18         19         20         21         93
     creditors in divisive
     reorganizations..................
    Provide mandatory basis                 -41        50        52         55         60         58        275
     adjustments for partners that
     have a significant net built-in
     loss in partnership property.....
    Modify treatment of closely held    ........        1         4          8         12         17         42
     REITs............................
    Apply RIC excise tax to             ........  ........        1          1          1          1          4
     undistributed profits of REITs...
    Allow RICs a dividends paid         ........       99       489        457        429        405      1,879
     deduction for redemptions only in
     cases where the redemption
     represents a contraction in the
     RIC..............................
    Require REMICs to be secondarily    ........        5        17         29         42         55        148
     liable for the tax liability of
     REMIC residual interest holders..
    Deny change in method treatment to        3        59        59         59         61         63        301
     tax-free formations..............
    Deny deduction for punitive              16        92       130        137        144        151        654
     damages..........................
    Repeal lower-of-cost-or-market      ........      459       447        371        372        154      1,803
     inventory accounting method......
    Disallow interest on debt                 4        11        18         24         30         35        118
     allocable to tax-exempt
     obligations......................
    Require capitalization of mutual    ........       23       111         98         83         64        379
     fund commissions.................
    Provide consistent amortization     ........     -216      -220         34        259        445        302
     periods for intangibles..........
    Clarify recovery period of utility       12        40        65         82         91         99        377
     grading costs....................
    Apply rules generally applicable          2        43        73        113        141        139        509
     to acquisitions of tangible
     assets to acquisitions of
     professional sports franchises...
    Require recapture of policyholder   ........       65       174        285        522        782      1,828
     surplus accounts.................
    Modify rules for capitalizing       ........      536     1,820      2,191      2,413      1,328      8,288
     policy acquisition costs of life
     insurance companies..............
    Increase the proration percentage   ........       48        82         98        115        133        476
     for P&C insurance companies......
    Modify rules that apply to sales    ........       13        35         39         43         48        178
     of life insurance contracts......
    Modify rules that apply to tax-     ........       12        22         23         24         25        106
     exempt property casualty
     insurance companies..............
    Subject investment income of trade  ........      180       309        325        341        358      1,513
     associations to tax..............
    Impose penalty for failure to file  ........  ........       24         23         22         21         90
     an annual information return.....
    Restore phaseout of unified credit  ........       33        70         78         83        106        370
     for large estates................
    Require consistent valuation for          1         5        10         14         18         21         68
     estate and income tax purposes...
    Require basis allocation for part   ........        2         3          4          5          5         19
     sale, part gift transactions.....
    Conform treatment of surviving            3        19        42         59         75         92        287
     spouses in community property
     States...........................
    Include QTIP trust assets in        ........  ........        2          2          2          2          8
     surviving spouse's estate........
    Eliminate non-business valuation    ........      271       575        600        636        618      2,700
     discounts........................
    Eliminate gift tax exemption for    ........       -1        -1   .........         5         14         17
     personal residence trusts........
    Modify requirements for annual      ........  ........       20         20         22         20         82
     exclusion for gifts..............
    Increase elective withholding rate  ........  ........       47          3          3          3         56
     for nonperiodic distributions
     from deferred compensation plans.
    Increase excise tax for excess IRA  ........        1        12         13         14         14         54
     contributions....................
    Limit pre-funding of welfare        ........       92       156        159        151        150        708
     benefits for 10 or more employer
     plans............................
    Subject signing bonuses to          ........        5         3          3          3          2         16
     employment taxes.................
    Clarify employment tax treatment    ........       48        64         64         63         63        302
     of choreworkers..................
    Prohibit IRAs from investing in           3        16        29         30         32         33        140
     foreign sales corporations.......
    Tighten the substantial             ........       26        44         45         41         37        193
     understatement penalty for large
     corporations.....................
    Require withholding on certain      ........       20         1          1          1          1         24
     gambling winnings................
    Require information reporting for   ........        5        10         14         18         21         68
     private separate accounts........
    Increase penalties for failure to   ........        6        15         15          9         10         55
     file correct information returns.
    Modify deposit requirement for      ........  ........  ........  .........  .........     1,583      1,583
     FUTA.............................
    Reinstate Oil Spill Liability       ........  ........      253        261        264        266      1,044
     Trust Fund tax \3\...............
    Repeal percentage depletion for     ........       94        96         97         99        101        487
     non-fuel minerals mined on
     Federal and formerly Federal
     lands............................
    Impose excise tax on purchase of          6         7         5          2   .........        -2         12
     structured settlements...........
    Require taxpayers to include        ........        4        11         12         12         13         52
     rental income of residence in
     income without regard to the
     period of rental.................
    Eliminate installment payment of    ........  ........      378         27         30         32        467
     heavy vehicle use tax \3\........
    Require recognition of gain on      ........       10        13         11         11         11         56
     sale of principal residence if
     acquired in a tax-free exchange
     within five years of the sale....
    Limit benefits of transactions      ........       36        52         40         36         35        199
     with ``Identified Tax Havens''...
    Modify treatment of built-in              1        78       136        143        151        161        669
     losses and other attributes
     trafficking......................
    Simplify taxation of property that        *         *         *          *          *          *          *
     no longer produces income
     effectively connected with a U.S.
     trade or business................
    Prevent avoidance of tax on U.S.-         3        28        58        107        155        212        560
     accrued gains (expatriation).....
    Expand ECI rules to include         ........       22        38         39         41         42        182
     certain foreign source income....
    Limit basis step-up for imported          2        26        33         34         36         38        167
     pensions.........................
    Replace sales-source rules........  ........      320       570        600        630        660      2,780
    Modify rules relating to foreign    ........        5        69        112        118        124        428
     oil and gas extraction income....
    Recapture overall foreign losses          1         1         *          *          *          *          1
     when CFC stock is disposed.......
    Modify foreign office material            1         7        10         11         11         11         50
     participation exception
     applicable to inventory sales
     attributable to nonresident's
     U.S. office......................
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 90]]


      Subtotal, other proposals \3\...      143     3,542     7,221      7,635      8,565      9,478     36,441
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal, eliminate unwarranted         189     5,864     9,213      9,676     10,694     11,704     47,151
     benefits and adopt other revenue
     measures \3\.....................
    Net tax relief including                -52       -42    -4,206    -10,113    -16,658    -23,579    -54,598
     refundable credits \3\...........
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other provisions that affect receipts:
  Reinstate environmental tax on        ........      725       432        438        434        437      2,466
   corporate taxable income \4\.......
  Reinstate Superfund excise taxes \3\      152       707       762        772        785        797      3,823
  Convert Airport and Airway Trust      ........      724     1,399      1,500      1,522      1,522      6,667
   Fund taxes to a cost-based user fee
   system \3\.........................
  Increase excise tax on tobacco            446     4,084     3,738      3,532     10,140      9,700     31,194
   products and levy a youth smoking
   assessment on tobacco manufacturers
   \3\................................
  Recover State bank supervision and    ........       78        82         86         90         95        431
   regulation expenses (receipt
   effect) \3\........................
  Maintain Federal Reserve surplus      ........    3,752   ........  .........  .........  .........     3,752
   transfer to the Treasury...........
  Restore premiums for United Mine      ........       11        10         10          9          9         49
   Workers of America Combined Benefit
   Fund...............................
  Extend abandoned mine reclamation     ........  ........  ........  .........  .........       218        218
   fees \3\...........................
  Replace Harbor Maintenance tax with   ........     -549      -602       -647       -681       -718     -3,197
   the Harbor Services User Fee
   (receipt effect) \3\...............
  Revise Army Corps of Engineers        ........        5         5          5          5          5         25
   regulatory program fees \3\........
  Roll back Federal employee            ........     -427      -619       -160   .........  .........    -1,206
   retirement contributions...........
  Provide Government-wide buyout        ........       -9       -18         -9   .........  .........       -36
   authority (receipt effect).........
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total, other provisions \3\ \4\...      598     9,101     5,189      5,527     12,304     12,065     44,186
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* $500,000 or less

\1\ The proposal to increase and simplify the Earned Income Tax Credit has both receipts and outlay effects. The
  receipts effect for the proposal is -$305 million, -$304 million, -$314 million, -$326 million and -$339
  million for fiscal years 2001-2005, respectively. The outlay effect is $2,003 million, $1,936 million, $1,967
  million, $1,992 million and $2,001 million for fiscal years 2001-2005, respectively.

\2\ Amounts shown are the effect on receipts.

\3\ Net of income offsets

\4\ Net of deductibility for income tax purposes


[[Page 91]]


                                          Table 3-4. RECEIPTS BY SOURCE
                                            (In millions of dollars)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Estimate
           Source                1999    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                Actual       2000        2001        2002        2003        2004        2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Individual income taxes
 (federal funds):
  Existing law..............     879,480     951,945     978,249   1,005,714   1,040,248   1,086,039   1,143,081
    Proposed Legislation      ..........        -359      -5,634     -10,125     -14,215     -19,554     -25,821
     (PAYGO)................
    Legislative proposal,     ..........  ..........        -205        -397        -424        -432        -432
     discretionary offset...
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total individual income          879,480     951,586     972,410     995,192   1,025,609   1,066,053   1,116,828
 taxes......................
                             ===================================================================================
Corporation income taxes:
  Federal funds:
    Existing law............     184,670     192,285     189,594     190,189     191,800     196,090     205,076
      Proposed Legislation    ..........         110       3,942       4,405       3,105       3,150  ..........
       (PAYGO)..............
      Legislative proposal,   ..........  ..........         119         102         110         119         131
       discretionary offset.
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total Federal funds            184,670     192,395     193,655     194,696     195,015     199,359     205,207
   corporation income taxes.
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Trust funds:
    Hazardous substance               10  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
     superfund..............
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........       1,115         664         674         668         673
       (PAYGO)..............
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total corporation income         184,680     192,395     194,770     195,360     195,689     200,027     205,880
 taxes......................
                             ===================================================================================
Social insurance and
 retirement receipts (trust
 funds):
  Employment and general
   retirement:
    Old age and survivors        383,559     408,583     427,322     446,421     465,244     484,401     511,676
     insurance (Off-budget).
    Disability insurance          60,909      68,180      72,573      75,805      79,003      82,259      86,890
     (Off-budget)...........
    Hospital insurance......     132,268     136,515     143,695     150,290     156,694     163,258     172,612
    Railroad retirement:
      Social Security              1,515       1,639       1,674       1,697       1,719       1,740       1,762
       equivalent account...
      Rail pension and             2,629       2,621       2,661       2,699       2,736       2,773       2,803
       supplemental annuity.
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total employment and           580,880     617,538     647,925     676,912     705,396     734,431     775,743
   general retirement.......
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On-budget...............     136,412     140,775     148,030     154,686     161,149     167,771     177,177
    Off-budget..............     444,468     476,763     499,895     522,226     544,247     566,660     598,566
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Unemployment insurance:
    Deposits by States \1\ .      19,894      21,453      23,327      24,529      25,594      26,273      27,411
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........       1,297
       (PAYGO)..............
    Federal unemployment           6,475       6,668       6,873       7,010       7,127       7,260       7,405
     receipts \1\ ..........
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........         286
       (PAYGO)..............
    Railroad unemployment            111          67          54          97         123         124         102
     receipts \1\ ..........
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total unemployment              26,480      28,188      30,254      31,636      32,844      33,657      36,501
   insurance................
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Other retirement:
    Federal employees'             4,400       4,221       4,269       4,194       3,547       3,197       3,028
     retirement--employee
     share..................
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........          -9         -18          -9  ..........  ..........
       (non-PAYGO)..........
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........        -427        -619        -160  ..........  ..........
       (PAYGO)..............
    Non-Federal employees             73          74          68          63          51          46          43
     retirement \2\ ........
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total other retirement....       4,473       4,295       3,901       3,620       3,429       3,243       3,071
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total social insurance and       611,833     650,021     682,080     712,168     741,669     771,331     815,315
 retirement receipts........
                             ===================================================================================
  On-budget.................     167,365     173,258     182,185     189,942     197,422     204,671     216,749
  Off-budget................     444,468     476,763     499,895     522,226     544,247     566,660     598,566
                             ===================================================================================
Excise taxes:
  Federal funds:
    Alcohol taxes...........       7,386       7,267       7,150       7,158       7,120       7,091       7,080
      Proposed Legislation    ..........         -32          32  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
       (PAYGO)..............
    Tobacco taxes...........       5,400       6,742       7,158       7,844       8,013       7,938       7,869
      Proposed Legislation    ..........         594       5,446       4,985       4,709       4,018       3,756
       (PAYGO)..............
    Transportation fuels tax         849         787         808         793         811         817         836
    Telephone and teletype         5,185       5,500       5,821       6,142       6,471       6,833       7,231
     services...............
    Ozone depleting                  105          73          73          22           9  ..........  ..........
     chemicals and products.
    Other Federal fund               368       2,174       2,200       2,114       1,997       1,987       2,030
     excise taxes...........

[[Page 92]]


      Proposed Legislation    ..........          38         -74         -65         -69         -73         -77
       (PAYGO)..............
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total Federal fund excise       19,293      23,143      28,614      28,993      29,061      28,611      28,725
   taxes....................
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Trust funds:
    Highway.................      39,299      34,311      35,148      35,597      36,229      36,870      37,622
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........  ..........         383          32          35          37
       (PAYGO)..............
    Airport and airway......      10,391       9,222       9,645      10,173      10,630      11,333      12,115
      Legislative proposal,   ..........  ..........         965       1,866       1,999       2,030       2,030
       discretionary offset.
    Aquatic resources.......         374         336         341         376         380         395         401
    Black lung disability            596         577         591         606         619         628         636
     insurance..............
    Inland waterway.........         104         104         107         109         111         114         116
    Hazardous substance               11  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
     superfund..............
      Proposed Legislation    ..........         204         942       1,016       1,031       1,046       1,063
       (PAYGO)..............
    Oil spill liability.....  ..........         173  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........
      Proposed Legislation    ..........  ..........  ..........         338         348         351         355
       (PAYGO)..............
    Vaccine injury                   130         131         134         137         139         141         110
     compensation...........
    Leaking underground              216         183         189         191         195         198         202
     storage tank...........
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Total trust funds excise        51,121      45,241      48,062      50,792      51,713      53,141      54,687
   taxes....................
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total excise taxes..........      70,414      68,384      76,676      79,785      80,774      81,752      83,412
                             ===================================================================================
Estate and gift taxes:
  Federal funds.............      27,782      30,482      31,975      34,172      35,494      37,831      36,151
    Proposed Legislation      ..........           4         329         721         777         846         878
     (PAYGO)................
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total estate and gift taxes.      27,782      30,486      32,304      34,893      36,271      38,677      37,029
                             ===================================================================================
Customs duties:
  Federal funds.............      17,727      20,149      21,405      23,430      25,262      26,554      27,921
    Proposed Legislation      ..........         -13        -569        -880        -990        -917         -71
     (PAYGO)................
  Trust funds...............         609         739         797         870         932         978       1,030
    Proposed Legislation      ..........  ..........         -30         -30         -30         -30         -30
     (PAYGO)................
    Legislative proposal,     ..........  ..........        -732        -803        -863        -908        -958
     discretionary offset...
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total customs duties........      18,336      20,875      20,871      22,587      24,311      25,677      27,892
                             ===================================================================================
MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPTS: \3\
  Miscellaneous taxes.......         101         119         121         124         126         129         132
  Proposed youth smoking      ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........  ..........       7,379       7,280
   assessment (PAYGO).......
  United Mine Workers of             148         142         138         132         127         122         118
   America combined benefit
   fund.....................
    Proposed Legislation      ..........  ..........          11          10          10           9           9
     (PAYGO)................
  Deposit of earnings,            25,917      32,452      25,664      30,196      31,296      32,489      33,662
   Federal Reserve System...
    Legislative proposal,     ..........  ..........       3,856         109         115         120         126
     discretionary offset...
  Defense cooperation.......  ..........           6           6           6           6           6           6
  Fees for permits and             6,572       7,509       7,965       8,726       9,549      10,378      10,972
   regulatory and judicial
   services.................
    Proposed Legislation      ..........  ..........          -2          -7          -7  ..........         290
     (PAYGO)................
    Legislative proposal,     ..........  ..........           7           7           7           7           7
     discretionary offset...
  Fines, penalties, and            2,738       2,188       2,157       1,966       1,977       1,977       1,979
   forfeitures..............
  Gifts and contributions...         186         281         188         156         150         148         149
  Refunds and recoveries....        -733        -192        -191        -190        -190        -190        -190
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total miscellaneous receipts      34,929      42,505      39,920      41,235      43,166      52,574      54,540
                             ===================================================================================
Total budget receipts.......   1,827,454   1,956,252   2,019,031   2,081,220   2,147,489   2,236,091   2,340,896
  On-budget.................   1,382,986   1,479,489   1,519,136   1,558,994   1,603,242   1,669,431   1,742,330
  Off-budget................     444,468     476,763     499,895     522,226     544,247     566,660     598,566
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Deposits by States cover the benefit part of the program. Federal unemployment receipts cover administrative
  costs at both the Federal and State levels. Railroad unemployment receipts cover both the benefits and
  administrative costs of the program for the railroads.
\2\ Represents employer and employee contributions to the civil service retirement and disability fund for
  covered employees of Government-sponsored, privately owned enterprises and the District of Columbia municipal
  government.
\3\ Includes both Federal and trust funds.

