Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
NewsOpinionOp-Eds

Cut food subsidies for wealthy CEOs, not needy families

Laws and LegislationBusinessSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramCorporate Officers

Congress seems to be focusing its austerity efforts on America's most vulnerable citizens, including those who need help feeding their families. Meanwhile, large food subsidies that benefit the most affluent Americans aren't even on the table.

The House of Representatives recently voted to cut $4 billion a year from food stamps, known more formally as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). A cut of that level would mean 3.8 million Americans would lose the help they receive to put food on their families' tables, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Democrats have resisted that effort, but with President Barack Obama's call for Congress to turn its attention back to passing a farm bill in the wake of the recent government shutdown, the level of food subsidies will once again be at the center of debate.

What nobody in the House is talking about, though, is the fact that wealthy corporate executives will continue to enjoy food subsidies of another sort. When CEOs of major corporations host business dinners at 5-star restaurants, they get to deduct that expense from their income taxes.

Imagine that the tab for dinner and drinks for 10 executives comes to $1,600. Current tax law allows companies to deduct half of the cost of business meals — in this case, $800. With a corporate tax rate of 35 percent, each dollar of deductions yields 35 cents of tax savings — so that $800 deduction saves $280 in taxes. This means one dinner for 10 people provides more public food assistance than the $279 an average household receives in food stamps for the whole month.

The IRS doesn't publish data on meal deductions taken by America's businesses. Citizens for Tax Justice, a non-partisan public interest research and advocacy organization, last examined the issue a decade ago and at that time found that food subsidies for businesspeople cost the government $4 billion a year. Given inflation, and a lack of evidence that businesses have cut back on their food and entertainment tabs, it's likely that the cost of this tax break is even bigger now.

Can someone please tell me why American taxpayers should subsidize meals consumed by CEOs and other businesspeople at no risk of experiencing hunger?

Food stamps provide a subsidy of about $1.50 per meal to SNAP beneficiaries. If the same $1.50 per meal subsidy were applied to the CEO dinner party mentioned above, the corporation's tax bill would be cut by $15. That would be 95 percent less than the tax reduction allowed by current law.

Another way tax policies subsidize the food and beverages consumed by affluent Americans is the lavish marketing that pharmaceutical companies spend on physicians. Drug companies annually spend tens of millions of dollars taking physicians on cruises, ski jaunts and other free trips, where they learn about the drug companies' latest products — when they aren't indulging in lavish meals or otherwise enjoying themselves.

In many instances, drug companies spend far more on marketing their drugs than they spend on research and development. All of the expenses of physician trips and other marketing efforts are fully deductible from corporate taxes. For every $10 million a drug company spends this way, taxpayers pick up as much as $3.5 million of the tab.

Why do so many members of Congress feel obliged to curb federal spending for food subsidies for people with bare pantries? Ending tax subsidies for fancy corporate dinners would make far more sense.

Scott Klinger is an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington.

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
Laws and LegislationBusinessSupplemental Nutrition Assistance ProgramCorporate Officers
  • Building bridges with international students
    Building bridges with international students

    My Mexican father applied to colleges in the United States in the late 1940s and was offered scholarships by the University of Arizona and by Western Reserve (now Case Western Reserve) in Cleveland. His father sat him down and drew a line from west to east across a map of the United States...

  • Drugs rotting on the vine
    Drugs rotting on the vine

    With Ebola threatening the world's populations, there is a new urgency to find therapies. Bringing naturally occurring pharmaceuticals to market should be a priority for our nation because drugs derived from nature are astonishingly successful. The United States' policy and law,...

  • Improve Baltimore's transit to improve its future
    Improve Baltimore's transit to improve its future

    Can Baltimore continue to do what it takes to become a thriving metropolis like Boston and San Francisco, or are we destined to be stuck in the Detroit-Cleveland post industrial doldrums? That question may well be answered by political and civic leaders in the coming months.

  • JLENS: securing our coast
    JLENS: securing our coast

    This Christmas, the United States Army will deliver a spectacular present to Harford and Baltimore counties. A pair of big white blimps will be flying two miles above Aberdeen Proving Ground — unless Congress balks.

  • True news has substance
    True news has substance

    Someone recently told me that she watches the news on TV every night. Her news broadcast of choice: "Entertainment Tonight."

  • Remembering Frank Mankiewicz
    Remembering Frank Mankiewicz

    In the hard-boiled if fading world of print journalism, it's often said that the only way to look at a politician is down. And the worst crime of all is to work both sides of the street, doubling as a reporter while working for a pol, or vice versa.

Comments
Loading