Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA)

An act of 1981, a significant tax legislation passed during President Ronald Reagan's administration in the United States

Author: Rani Thakur
Rani Thakur
Rani Thakur
Rani Thakur is an Economics Honours student at Delhi Technological University, skilled in finance, economics, research, and analytics. She has interned as a Financial Research Analyst, Business Growth Intern, and Financial Accounting Intern.
Reviewed By: Josh Pupkin
Josh Pupkin
Josh Pupkin
Private Equity | Investment Banking

Josh has extensive experience private equity, business development, and investment banking. Josh started his career working as an investment banking analyst for Barclays before transitioning to a private equity role Neuberger Berman. Currently, Josh is an Associate in the Strategic Finance Group of Accordion Partners, a management consulting firm which advises on, executes, and implements value creation initiatives and 100 day plans for Private Equity-backed companies and their financial sponsors.

Josh graduated Magna Cum Laude from the University of Maryland, College Park with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and is currently an MBA candidate at Duke University Fuqua School of Business with a concentration in Corporate Strategy.

Last Updated:January 7, 2024

What Was the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981?

The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981  was a significant tax legislation passed during President Ronald Reagan's administration in the United States. 

This legislation had a substantial impact on shaping economic policies during that era.

Enacted by the 97th U.S. Congress, President Ronald Reagan signed the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 into law on August 13, 1981.

The underlying philosophy driving ERTA was rooted in the belief that reducing taxes would incentivize economic activity, ultimately leading to increased government revenue. 

The subsequent discussions on ERTA revolved around debates regarding its potential impact on economic expansion and income distribution.

ERTA reduced the highest income tax rate and accelerated the expensing of depreciable assets. It provided benefits for small businesses and retirement savings and implemented inflation indexing for tax brackets.

Acknowledged as one of the most significant tax reductions in American history, the Reagan tax cuts comprised the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) and the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

Alongside reductions in government spending, these initiatives were pivotal in what some contemporaries praised as the conservative "Reagan Revolution."

A pivotal component of ERTA was the implementation of the Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS), which underwent modifications in 1986, evolving into the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS).

Key Takeaways

  • The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) aimed to spur U.S. economic growth through significant tax cuts.
  • ERTA, often called the "Kemp-Roth Tax Cut," stands among the most impactful tax reductions, contributing to the "Reagan Revolution." 
  • ERTA was influenced by supply-side economics, seeking to boost growth by encouraging wealthier individuals to invest more capital.
  • Post-ERTA outcomes included subdued business investment, persistent unemployment, and skepticism towards the "trickle-down" economic theory.
  • In 1982, Congress modified ERTA to address economic challenges, contributing to an economic recovery."

Understanding the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981

In the late 1970s, the United States faced economic challenges marked by stagflation—a combination of high inflation and stagnant economic growth

Under President Ronald Reagan's leadership, the Reagan administration aimed to address these issues through a bold approach: tax cuts. 

ERTA was conceived with the belief that lowering tax burdens for businesses and individuals would unlock economic potential and foster a more prosperous nation.

ERTA derived its name, the Kemp-Roth tax cut, from its Republican sponsors, Representative Jack Kemp of New York and Senator William V. Roth of Delaware. 

The legislation mainly benefited rich Americans by cutting the top income tax rate from 70% to 50% over three years. It also lowered the lowest tax bracket from 14% to 11%.

Beyond tax reductions and accelerated depreciation deductions, the law incorporated additional elements like 

  • streamlined rules for creating employee stock ownership plans (ESOP), 
  • broader qualification criteria for Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs)
  • a reduction in the capital gains tax from 28% to 20%, and 
  • an elevated estate tax exemption. 

Adjusting tax brackets through indexing was a significant provision to tackle the issues arising from double-digit annual inflation. This inflation pushed even lower- and middle-income households into higher tax brackets.

ERTA was introduced to jumpstart economic growth. It adopted a supply-side economics approach, emphasizing the importance of boosting productive resources in shaping economic policies. 

The tax cuts generated controversy due to their magnitude, with some expressing concerns that the subsequent decrease in federal government revenues could exacerbate economic challenges.

Main Objectives of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981

The following includes the key provisions of the Economic Recovery Tax Act Of 1981:  

1. Individual Tax Cuts

ERTA implemented significant cuts in personal income tax rates over three years. The initial top marginal tax rate was 70% before the act and progressively lowered to 50% by 1983. 

The primary goal of this reduction was to stimulate consumer spending, enhance disposable income, and encourage economic activity.

2. Accelerated Depreciation

Accelerated depreciation involves altering depreciation timetables for businesses, enabling them to deduct the expenses associated with capital investments quickly. 

This adjustment incentivized companies to invest more in new equipment and technology, ultimately fostering innovation and boosting productivity.

3. Business Tax Incentives

ERTA implemented various tax incentives to encourage business expansion. These incentives encompassed a reduction in the corporate tax rate and the introduction of the Job Creation Credit.

Note

The primary aim was to stimulate job creation, foster entrepreneurship, and enhance the global competitiveness of American enterprises.

4. Estate Tax Reforms

The Estate Tax underwent substantial changes through ERTA, including raising the exemption amount and reducing the maximum tax rate. 

These adjustments were implemented to alleviate the tax responsibilities on family-owned businesses and farms, making passing assets from one generation to another more seamless.

What was the Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS)?

The Accelerated Cost Recovery System (ACRS) was introduced through the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 in the United States to promote capital investment.

The ACRS includes the following features:

1. Accelerated Depreciation Schedules

ACRS introduced faster recovery of asset costs, allowing businesses to depreciate their investments more quickly compared to previous regulations.

2. Tax Incentives for Businesses

Tax incentives encouraged businesses to invest in capital assets, thereby promoting economic growth.

3. Simplified Depreciation Rules

ACRS simplified depreciation rules, making it easier for businesses to calculate deductions. This streamlining aimed to facilitate immediate returns on investments, further stimulating economic activity.

As part of its evolution, ACRS was later modified by the Tax Reform Act of 1986, leading to the Modified Accelerated Cost Recovery System (MACRS) creation.

While MACRS retained the principles of accelerated depreciation, it introduced some changes to the methods and recovery periods.

Despite its eventual transition to MACRS, the core idea of ACRS is to provide businesses with tax incentives to stimulate capital investment, which remains influential in discussions surrounding U.S. tax policy. 

The legacy of ACRS underscores the ongoing importance of balancing tax regulations to encourage economic growth and investment.

ERTA And Supply-Side Economics

ERTA, influenced by the principles of supply-side economics advanced by economist and Reagan adviser Arthur Laffer, hinged on the belief that reducing taxes for wealthier individuals would act as a catalyst for economic growth. 

The fundamental concept behind this tax relief was to encourage wealthy individuals to invest greater amounts of capital, thereby promoting innovation and creating jobs.

The anticipated outcome was that these advantages would gradually extend to the general population through higher consumer spending and increased job opportunities, ultimately resulting in a subsequent growth in overall tax revenues.

Despite these theoretical underpinnings, the real-world outcomes of ERTA did not align with the optimistic projections. 

In the aftermath of the bill's passage, business investment remained subdued, unemployment rates persisted at elevated levels, and the expected surge in consumer spending failed to materialize. 

An additional challenge was the unforeseen consequence of a significant spike in the federal deficit. The anticipated increase in tax revenue to offset the reduced rates materialized more slowly and comprehensively than proponents had envisioned.

The notion of "trickle-down" economics, where the benefits of tax cuts for the wealthy would swiftly permeate the economic landscape, faced skepticism.
Critics contended that the promised short-term economic benefits were elusive, questioning the effectiveness of ERTA as an immediate driver of economic revitalization. 

This disconnection between theory and reality prompted a reassessment of the viability of supply-side economics in delivering rapid and widespread economic improvements, adding nuance to the ongoing debates about the merits of tax policy and its impact on economic health.

Congressional Adjustments to ERTA in 1982

ERTA was enacted in response to a challenging economic period in the United States, characterized by the onset of the second phase of a "double-dip" recession.

This economic downturn was exacerbated by the resolute measures taken by Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker to manage inflation, resulting in a notably elevated benchmark interest rate reaching as high as 20%.

With the economy facing difficulties and tax revenue declining, the U.S. deficit increased, prompting Congress to respond. 

In September 1982, led by Senate Finance Committee chair Robert Dole, Congress changed some parts of the ERTA with the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act. This policy shift played a role in starting a quick economic recovery.

The ERTA has been a topic of disagreement. While there was a noticeable economic improvement in the mid-and late-1980s, supporters credited the tax cuts introduced by the ERTA for this recovery. 

However, a 2012 analysis by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service covering tax rates and their economic impact from 1940 to 2010 suggested that reducing top tax rates had no significant impact on economic growth or productivity. 

Instead, it indicated a contribution to the widening of wealth inequality.

Criticisms of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981

The following includes the criticism associated with the ERTA: 

1. Revenue Loss and Budget Deficit

A major critique of ERTA centered on its association with a decline in government revenue, leading to a subsequent rise in the federal budget deficit. 

Detractors contended that the tax reductions lacked adequate compensation through substantial economic expansion or reductions in government spending.

2. Distributional Effects and Inequality

Critics argued that the provisions of the Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) disproportionately favored wealthier individuals and corporations, contributing to increased income inequality within the United States.

3. Effectiveness in Stimulating Economic Growth

The effectiveness of ERTA in promoting economic growth has generated discussions due to its varied outcomes, leading to ongoing debates about its overall success in sustaining economic development.

Note

Some critics contend that the advantages were temporary and that the enduring repercussions, such as heightened deficits, overshadowed the benefits.

4. International Trade Imbalances

Some critics argued that the tax cuts provided by ERTA might have contributed to imbalances in international trade.

They also argued that the act may have contributed to trade deficits and other challenges in the global economic landscape by stimulating domestic demand without corresponding efforts to address trade issues.

5. Complexity and Loopholes

Another criticism of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (ERTA) was its complexity, which created loopholes that allowed certain individuals and corporations to exploit the tax code. 

Critics argued that the intricate provisions of the act provided opportunities for tax avoidance and evasion, undermining the intended economic stimulus.

Economic Recovery Tax Act (ERTA) Of 1938 FAQs

Accounting Foundations Course

Everything You Need To Build Your Accounting Skills

To Help You Thrive in the Most Flexible Job in the World.

Learn More

Authored and researched by Rani Thakur | LinkedIn

Reviewed and edited by Parul GuptaLinkedIn

Free Resources

To continue learning and advancing your career, check out these additional helpful WSO resources: