The system of private saving and investment in the United States spans more than a dozen special-purpose accounts, which breed complexity and discourage use. A new bill introduced by Senators Ted Cruz (R‑TX) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (D‑DE) gives families expanded flexibility to use their own savings with fewer government restrictions. The 529 Retirement Enhancement Act (S. 5550) would repeal the $35,000 lifetime cap on 529-to-Roth IRA rollovers. 

This simple change would let families roll more unused education savings into their child’s Roth IRA over time, instead of leaving the money stranded in a 529 plan when a child earns a scholarship or chooses an alternative to college. It also removes one reason families hesitate to use a 529 plan in the first place.

Too Many Rules Discourage Saving 

A 529 plan with limited rollovers illustrates two problems with special-purpose accounts. Savers may underfund the account because they worry that their life goals might change, while those who do save can face penalties when their circumstances change. 

Read the rest of this post →

Eliminating the Social Security payroll tax cap is often presented as a simple way to close the program’s worsening financing gap. Setting aside that this change would at best close 30 percent of the funding shortfall, who would end up paying the higher tax? Our analysis identifies where workers earning above the cap live and which occupations would be most affected.

• Affluent Democratic congressional districts would bear the largest share of the tax increase. 62.7 percent of individuals who earn more than the taxable maximum live in districts represented by Democrats. 
• The average Democratic district has 92 workers earning above the taxable maximum per 1,000 residents, compared with 53 in the average Republican district.
• The top ten congressional districts with the highest shares of workers earning above the taxable maximum are all represented by Democrats and are concentrated in New York City, Seattle, and coastal California.
• The workers most affected by the elimination of the taxable maximum are surgeons, physicians, nurse anesthetists, architectural and engineering managers, and dentists. 

Read the rest of this post →

After President Trump’s endorsement, a bipartisan, bicameral group of lawmakers recently introduced the Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act. The bill would create the first direct federal subsidy for Hollywood movie studios through a tax credit covering 20 to 30 percent of what film and TV productions pay their workers. 

Dozens of states and countries have experimented with subsidies for the film industry. The overwhelming evidence is that the subsidies mostly don’t create new production, don’t meaningfully increase jobs or wages, don’t build an industry that survives without the subsidy, and are fiscally costly. 

Read the rest of this post →

On September 30, $810 million in appropriated fiscal year (FY) 2026 spending expired because of a Trump administration maneuver known as a pocket rescission. The rescission, which targeted spending that the administration correctly described as wasteful, functions as a unilateral spending cut by the executive. This makes it appealing to many who want to see less spending. However, the pocket rescission approach creates risks, and Republicans and libertarians alike should be wary of how the strategy could be exploited in the future.

The administration’s maneuver has received a mix of criticism and support. Appropriators from both parties decried the pocket rescission, calling it an illegal usurpation of congressional spending authority. Seven states have filed a lawsuit against the administration to undo the rescission. Conservatives such as Reps. Chip Roy (R‑TX) and Scott Perry (R‑PA) have praised the administration, focusing on the importance of cutting wasteful spending. Sen. John Kennedy (R‑LA) criticized Congress for not enacting more cuts.

Read the rest of this post →

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), in its September 2026 forecasts, projects that Social Security (OASI) faces a shortfall of 4.55 percent of taxable payroll. The Social Security Administration also projected earlier this year that Social Security faces a shortfall of 4.55 percent of taxable payroll. This is a departure from previous years, when the CBO has typically projected a larger long-term shortfall than the Social Security Administration, and thus warrants a closer look.

Our analysis finds that much of the decline in CBO’s headline estimate reflects higher projected interest rates, which change how future shortfalls are valued in net present value terms. The smaller estimated payroll tax gap does not imply that the actual financing shortfall, the difference between what Social Security collects and what it is scheduled to pay, has narrowed.

Read the rest of this post →

Late in the afternoon on Friday, September 25, 2026, President Trump announced the cancellation of $810 million in spending across several agencies. The use of the phrase “pocket rescission” in White House messaging made its intentions explicit: the administration seeks to block appropriated spending that Congress passed and that Trump signed into law. 

The administration did not issue the rescission until after the House announced on September 16 that it would be out of session until November. Because there has been no announcement that the House will return to Washington to vote on rescissions, the spending is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year on September 30. The administration used the same maneuver in 2025 to freeze $4 billion of foreign aid spending until the funds expired and faced no consequences for doing so. 

Read the rest of this post →

On September 21, the House Budget Committee held a field hearing in Dallas, TX, on the need for a fiscal commission. My ears perked up when former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta started speaking about BRAC, the Base Realignment and Closure Commission, as a model for overcoming politically difficult budget choices:

Read the rest of this post →