...And remember, boys and girls, the canonical "risk free" rate of return these days is that of a T-Bill. Maybe not so much anymore? "House Republicans stood and supported the Petraeus surge so our troops would have victory in Iraq. Today, House Republicans oppose the Paulson splurge so that we can have prosperity in America in the long run. And make no mistake, we understand the gravity of this situation. But we will not engage in a rush to judgment that destroys the possibility of the free market and prosperity for American families for decades to come. We will not walk out of this room after a forced vote, waving a piece of paper in our hands, claiming fleece in our time. " -- Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (R) MI-11, Speech on the floor of the US House of Representatives, September 25, 2008 Cheers, RAH ------- <http://www.realclearmarkets.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearmarkets.c om/articles/2009/08/20/imagining_a_world_without_tax-free_government_bonds_97 368.html

RealClearMarkets August 20, 2009 Imagining a World Without Tax-Free Government Bonds By John Tamny Last month federal agents arrested a large number of New Jersey politicians on bribery and money laundering charges. As described in the Wall Street Journal, one $97,000 bribe was handed off in an empty Apple Jacks box. Last week the New York Post exposed the highly suspect activities of State Sen. Pedro Espada Jr. A self-described "hero" to his largely Hispanic constituency, Espada was somehow able to secure for his son a $120,000/year state job. The only problem was that no one in the son's downtown Manhattan office had ever seen him before because he'd never shown up for work. And on Tuesday of this week, Dallas's former mayor pro tem and a city planning commissioner were charged with bribery and extortion in a federal corruption case. It seems they'd pressured "developers to award contracts to friends in the name of supporting minority-owned businesses." How does this relate to tax-free bonds? At first glance it's a reminder to investors that when they purchase municipal and state bonds, they're helping fund the activities of a pretty sleazy crowd. Creators of no wealth themselves, politicians seek office to control and distribute the wealth of others. When we buy government bonds, we transfer wealth to a particularly grasping strain of person eager to access the money of others in order to elevate themselves. If power corrupts politicians, it is private producers who offer up the wealth that makes them powerful. What makes this even more despicable is the way in which state and local polities raise their funds. Government at its core is force, so the taxing authority enjoyed by our local politicians makes it easy for them to float bonds ahead of tax revenues. And not as dim as they often appear, politicians don't stop there. Indeed, perhaps correctly aware that no reasonably sane investor would fund the waste that is government if given the choice to invest in something productive and similarly remunerative in the private sector, state and local politicians have secured a sweet deal whereby the income streams from their bonds are not just exempt from local and state taxes (that's a given), but also federal. As it is, state and local bonds are more "equal" to a profit seeking investor than corporate bonds for the explicit promise of tax revenues to be confiscated from an increasingly powerless electorate. Since jail is the end result for those who evade taxes, local and state bonds are mostly a good bet for investors. Corporations, on the other hand, can't arrest the individuals who choose not to buy their goods and services. But as has already been mentioned, the income that municipal bonds generate is tax free. So assuming a generic New York City bond with a 5% yield versus a corporate bond yielding the same, in income terms there's no comparison. That's the case because a New York City resident paying a combined local, state and federal tax rate of 42% would achieve a taxable equivalent yield of 8.6 percent (5/1 -.42 = 8.6) on purchases of New York munis. There are a lot of rich people in New York who in an equal investor environment might fund a lot more private-sector activity, but thanks to the security and increased yield offered by New York municipal bonds, private entities seeking capital to grow must offer up income to investors that not only reflects the risk premium that is part and parcel of existing in the for-profit world, but more yield on top of that to make up for the taxable difference. In seeking safety and yield, the New York rich frequently hand their money over to governments run by people like Pedro Espada Jr. This is offensive on its face knowing what we know about him and others in New York's political class, but the unseen in this instance is even more horrifying. Indeed, what businesses in New York and around the world never formed at all due to a scarcity of capital wrought by the relative income appeal of government bonds? It's a tautology to say that entrepreneurs can't be entrepreneurs without capital, and the ease with which local and state governments vacuum up cash means that on the margin, many entrepreneurs go wanting. Of course there are no wages without capital either, so when governments float bonds to fund their bloated, inefficient and frequently corrupt operations, they're indirectly reducing the size of all of our paychecks. If we throw federal politicians into the mix, their ability to fleece the whole country makes U.S. Treasuries even more appealing. The income from Treasuries is not exempt from federal taxes (it is exempt from state and local taxes), but so powerful is the IRS's ability to tax, U.S. Treasuries are seen as the safest investment of all. The funds raised allow for various "Bridges to Nowhere", while the unseen is once again the private concepts that will never see the light of day due to insufficient capital. For now, and presumably forever, Americans will accept the preferred status attached to local, state and federal debt because as an overtaxed society, we're eager to shield any investment income we can from the tax authorities. But more than ever it's worthwhile for all Americans to imagine a world without tax-free bonds. If we do, we might realize what a bad deal politicians are "giving" us when they issue bonds paying income that they don't "take." There's no such thing as a free lunch, and so long as government bonds are tax free, our standard of living and wages must decline for all the innovations and jobs lost thanks to governments availing themselves of a major privilege on our backs. For Americans to imagine a world without tax-free government bonds is for them to conceptualize a much more prosperous one. That kind of thinking must horrify politicians. John Tamny is editor of RealClearMarkets, a senior economic advisor for H.C. Wainwright Economics, and a senior economic advisor to Toreador Research and Trading (www.trtadvisors.com). He can be reached at jtamny@realclearmarkets.com.