I’m currently in Tokyo for an Innovation Summit. Perhaps because I once referred to Japan as a basket case, I’ve been asked to speak about policies that are needed to boost the nation’s competitiveness.
That sounds like an easy topic since I can simply explain that free markets and small government are the universal recipe for growth and prosperity.
But then I figured I should be more focused and look at some of Japan’s specific challenges. So I began to ponder whether I should talk about Japan’s high debt levels. Or perhaps the country’s repeated (and failed) attempts to stimulate the economy with Keynesianism. And Japan’s demographic crisis is also a very important issue.
But since I only have 20 minutes (not even counting Q&A), I don’t really have time for a detailed examination on any of those topics. So I was still uncertain of how best to illustrate the need for pro-market reforms.
My job suddenly got a lot easier, though, because Eduardo Porter of the New York Times wrote a column today that includes a graph very effectively illustrating why Japan is in trouble. Simply stated, the country is on a very bad trajectory of ever-higher taxes.
To elaborate, Japan used to have a relatively modest tax burden, as least compared to other industrialized nations. But then, thanks in part to the enactment of a value-added tax, the aggregate tax burden began to climb. It has jumped from about 18 percent of economic output in 1965 to about 32 percent of gross domestic product in 2015.
Even the French didn’t raise taxes that dramatically!
By the way, I feel compelled to digress and point out that Mr. Porter’s column was not designed to warn about rising taxes in Japan. Instead, he was whining about non-rising taxes in the United States. I’m not joking.
American tax policy must stand as one of the great mysteries of the global political economy. In 1969…federal, state and local governments in the United States raised about the same in taxes, as a share of the economy, as the government of the average industrialized country: 26.6 percent of gross domestic product, against 27 percent among the nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Nearly 50 years later, the tax picture has changed little in the United States. By 2015, …the figure was 26.4 percent of G.D.P. But across the market democracies of the O.E.C.D., the share had climbed by an average of more than seven percentage points. …Americans are paying dearly as a result, as their comparatively small government has proved incapable of providing an adequate safety net…there is no credible evidence that countries with higher tax rates necessarily grow less.
Americans are “paying dearly”? Are we “paying dearly” because our living standards are so much higher? Are we “paying dearly” because our growth rates are higher and Europe is failing to converge? Are we “paying dearly” because America’s poorest states are rich compared to European countries.
Now that I got that off my chest, let’s get back to our discussion about Japan.
Looking at the data from Economic Freedom of the World, Japan ranked among the world’s 10-freest economies as recently as 1990. Today, it ranks #39. That is a very unfortunate development, though I should point out that the nation’s relative decline isn’t solely because of misguided fiscal policy.
I’ll close by noting that even the good news from Japan isn’t that good. Yes, the government did slight lower its corporate tax rate so it no longer has the highest burden among developed nations. But having the second-highest corporate tax rate is hardly something to cheer about.
P.S. Since today’s column looks at the most depressing Japanese chart, I should remind people that I shared the most depressing Danish PowerPoint slide back in 2015. I may need to create a collection.
P.P.S. I doubt anyone will be surprised to learn that the OECD and IMF have been encouraging bad policy for Japan.
P.P.P.S. If I had to guess, I would say that Japan’s government is probably more competent than average. But that doesn’t mean it’s incapable of some bone-headed policies, such as a regulatory regime for coffee enemas and a giveaway program that was so convoluted that no companies asked for the free money.
[…] done that with regional data and also looked at depressing data from specific […]
[…] done that with regional data and also looked at depressing data from specific […]
[…] Japanese politicians definitely have been grabbing more money, enabled to a considerable extent by a money-grabbing value-added […]
[…] just industrial policy, but also tax increases, Keynesian spending, and other forms of […]
[…] can find out that a higher tax burden is bad […]
[…] the country has since moved in the wrong direction. Back in 2016, I shared the “most depressing chart about Japan” because it showed that the overall tax burden doubled in just 45 […]
[…] the increase in the tax burden generate any subsequent good […]
[…] of course, but don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. Instead, expect this “depressing chart” to get even more […]
[…] it the data on an ever-rising burden of […]
[…] And Japan could be considered an honorary member since it jumps 22 spots in the Laissez-Faire Index, up to #19. […]
[…] Japan could be considered an honorary member since it jumps 22 spots in the Laissez-Faire Index, up to […]
[…] “most depressing” chart about Japan, which shows that the tax burden has nearly doubled since […]
[…] “most depressing” chart about […]
[…] that big-sized welfare states are doomed to collapse. Think Greece and extend it to Italy, France, Japan, and other developed nations (including, I fear, the United […]
To add to my comment to Dan Cripple, who I’m starting to wholeheartedly agree with, from last November:
I will admit that the Japanese debt-to-GDP ratio is far worse than that of the USA, Japan is less economically free (ranked 30th) than the US (ranked 18th), and the Japanese fertility rate is lower than that of the US. What’s not mentioned is that the suicide rate in Japan is higher than that of the USA, and ≤2% of Japanese are Christian.
But still, to define standards of living based on size of housing, the no. of cars on the road (and the size of the cars themselves) the large portions of food, etc. is disingenuous. Not every family needs an oversized house in a car-dependent suburb. Not everyone needs to stuff themselves. Why else are the Japanese cancer and obesity rates lower than those in the USA?
To make a long story short, quality is not the same as quantity.
[…] Taxation in Japan. […]
social engineering… population density…. and a devolving social structure have created multiple societies no longer worthy of procreation… various cultures are dying… it seems “behavioral sink” has finally come to humanity…
let’s hope not…
@Dan Cripple
While you do bring a fair point about the unsustainable lifestyle of the average American, however, your condemnation of America is out-of-place.
@JMW
Just asking. Thanks anyway.
Josep, why should the fact that Japan is the 3rd largest economy matter for this discussion?
So, Dan (Mitchell), does the fact that Japan is the 3rd largest economy (after China and the USA) not matter here then? Oh well.
P.S. Please respond to each post next time, or else close the comments section! Don’t leave your fellow readers out in the cold! Healthy debate never hurts!
Always good to see a middle-aged busybody making his determinations about another country based solely off charts and metrics versus actually being there.
America’s a third world hellhole for most of the people who live there, despite “economic” freedom for those born with a silver spoon in their mouths. Yeah, an unnecessarily huge house, made in Mexico SUV, and made in China and grown in Brazil junk from Costco is what everyone really needs. Sure. Get your head out of your rectum. There’s a good reason America gets no immigrants from other first world nations–they see it for the garbage it is. That’s why many of us left America for greener pastures free of SUVs.
I believe that in developed countries there’s a very strong link between restrictive zoning that forces high density cities and severely reduced birth rates. When people live in very close quarters with others, and on a typical day by 9 AM they have already seen more strangers than they’d ever wish, then their desire to procreate seems to decrease significantly. I am not sure about the evolutional origins of this psychology. Just an empirical observation at this point. Needless to say, cultures that practice these restrictions follow their natural course, to extinction.
Also, children are very difficult to raise in tight quarters, tiny apartments, in and out of public transportation. The romance of walking from your apartment down to the elite bakery for an espresso wears out very quickly once you have children. Once you have children what you need is a big single-family residence, an SUV, and Costco. All anathema to environmentalist sheep who have been corralled into dense cities.
the Japanese have very low fertility rates as well… they will loose about 1 million people a year… by 2060 their population will be down to 87 million… from a high of 128 million… in addition… the population will be elderly… dependent on the social structure for care and financial support… culturally… the Japanese resist importing foreign nationals to supply their work force… industry has focused on the increased use of robotics… technological advancement and AI to raise productivity and reduce the need for an active Non-Japanese work force… they have a lot of challenges ahead…