Urban Institute

About: Urban Institute is a nonprofit organization based out in Washington D.C., District of Columbia, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Medicaid & Population. The organization has 927 authors who have published 2330 publications receiving 86426 citations.

How Big Are Total Individual Income Tax Expenditures, and Who Benefits from Them?

Abstract: Tax expenditures measure the cost of spend? ing programs run through the tax system. In preparing their annual lists, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) define tax expenditures as deviations from the "normal" individual and corporate income tax bases. OMB has recently also listed tax expenditures measured against consumption tax and compre? hensive income tax bases. Tax expenditures are "static," meaning that they assume no change in economic behavior if they are eliminated. Tax expenditure estimates may thus be much larger than revenue estimates for eliminating a par? ticular provision. The measurement of tax expenditures is controversial, mainly because there is no com? monly agreed tax baseline against which to measure departures. In spite of this and other measurement issues, most public finance econo? mists believe that measuring tax expenditures is an important part of good budget management because tax benefits can have the same effect on beneficiaries as direct spending programs, and impose similar opportunity costs in terms of higher taxes, reduced federal spending, and higher deficits. We should assess their effects on the federal budget and on achieving program objectives the same way we assess direct spend? ing programs. Non-business tax expenditures?the focus of this paper?are large relative to the size of the economy and to total tax revenues.1 They rose sharply between 1976 and 1985, from 4.2 to 6.4 percent of GDP. They dropped between 1985 and 1990 as a result of the Tax Reform Act of

Domestic Violence and Empowerment in Custody and Visitation Cases

Abstract: This article reports a State Justice Institute funded research project attempting to demonstrate the difference between mediation and evaluation disputes over child custody, and visitation where domestic violence is involved. The researchers attempted to develop samples at two courts—Hennepin County Circuit Court in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Multnomah County Circuit Court in Portland, Oregon.

Vulnerable people, precarious housing, and regional resilience: an exploratory analysis

Abstract: This article has two purposes. First, it explores the ideas of vulnerability, precariousness, and resilience as they apply to people, housing, neighborhoods, and metropolitan areas. People might be more vulnerable to shocks or strains, we propose, if they are members of racial/ethnic minorities, recent immigrants, non-high school graduates, are children or over 75 years old, disabled, recent veterans, living in poverty, or living in single-parent households. Housing may be more precarious, we propose, when it is rented, multi-family, manufactured, crowded, or subject to overpayment. The article goes on to document the relationships between potential personal or household vulnerability and potentially precarious housing conditions. Microdata from the 2005–2007 American Community Survey suggest that an important minority of people have multiple vulnerabilities; these vulnerabilities associate with residence in precarious housing. We suggest that policy be directed toward precarious situations most likely to...

A User's Guide to Current Statistics on the Employment of People with Disabilities

Abstract: This paper examines two fundamental questions related to measuring the employment outcomes of people with disabilities. First, can a reasonable operational definition of disability be developed from current surveys that will enable policy makers to track the size and employment outcomes of that population? And if yes, are the findings sensitive to alternative definitions of disability and employment? Our findings are relevant to researchers and policy makers interested in understanding the changing employment outcomes of people with disabilities over the past two decades. While we offer no firm conclusion about the impact of the ADA or other disability policy changes (e.g., changes in social security disability program policy) on employment, we strongly argue that when theoretically appropriate populations with disabilities are followed, and appropriate measures of their employment success are used, the employment of people with disabilities fell in the 1990s. A copy of the full paper is available in Stapleton, D. and R. Burkhauser (2003). What is Causing the Decline in the Employment of People with Disabilities: A Policy Mystery The book can be ordered from the Upjohn Institute website. A research brief that summarizes the major findings of this article is available in PDF form on Cornell's website (http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/files/download/User%20Guide%20Brief.pdf). A text version is also available from that same website (http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/extension/files/download/Users%20Guide%20Brief.txt). Other Publications by the Authors Richard Burkhauser Andrew Houtenville David Wittenburg Usage and reprints: Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site and may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact publicaffairs@urban.org. If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687. Disclaimer: The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Document date: May 01, 2002 Released online: May 01, 2002 Source: The Urban Institute, © 2012 | http://www.urban.org