Michael J. Graetz写道“前言 - 2017年减税：偏振政治如何产生不稳定的政策。“他触及了T中提到的一些主题乔尔·斯莱德和艾伦·奥尔巴赫的两篇论文在2018年秋季出现的“税收削减和职业宪法”中出现了“研讨会”中国经济观光杂志：是的，美国公司税收需要较低的率和对跨国公司的更明智的治疗，但在许多方面，新的税收法案创造了混乱的混乱 - 并将导致预算赤字的含量大幅增加。这是Graetz的味道（省略脚注）：
“The Democrats’ complaints about the law’s reduction in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% ring hollow. Democrats themselves had long realized that the U.S.’s exceptionally high corporate tax rate in today’s global economy—with highly mobile capital and intellectual property income—invited both U.S. and foreign multinational companies to locate their deductions, especially for interest and royalties, in the United States, and to locate their income in low- or zero-tax countries. This is obviously not a recipe for economic success. Both before and after the legislation, Democrats urged a corporate tax rate of 25% to 28%; meanwhile, Donald Trump asked for a 15% rate.So, even if Democrats had been involved in the legislative process, the 21% rate that we ended up with would be in the realm of a reasonable compromise. ... [A] significantly lower corporate rate has been long overdue, and raising it would be a mistake. If Democrats are unhappy with the distributional consequence that a corporate tax cut will benefit high-income shareholders, the appropriate remedy––given the mobility of business capital, businesses’ ability to shift mobile intellectual property and financial income to low-tax jurisdictions, and the challenges of intercompany transfer pricing––is to increase taxes at the shareholder level, not to increase corporate tax rates. ...
国会在制作此税务立法方面的最大挑战是弄清楚了解国际税收规则的事。...决定哪些规则取代我们失败的外国税收信贷的延期政权时，国会迫切令人艰难的挑战。基本上有两种选择：（1）加强美国商业活动的源泉税收，并允许美国跨国公司的外国业务收入无拘无束期;或（2）在当前跨国公司的全球营业收入征税，当时在收入对该收入施加的全部或部分外国所得税的信用时获得跨国公司。面临着征税美国跨国公司外国收入的这两个两种不同政权的选择。......
毫无疑问，分析师可以找到赞美和其他人在这种扩张的立法中哀悼的规定，但我们不应该忽视其最重要的缺点：它对联邦赤字和债务的影响。......
根据2017年税法，公众持有的联邦债务估计到2028年的GDP的96％以上，这并不算上总统特朗普总统于二零一八年签署的综合支出法案。...如果经营当前的税收和支出的政策水平，未来十年的总赤字将接近16万亿美元，超过2020年的GDP的赤字大于5％。到2028年，目前的财政政策将产生超过的赤字每年占GDP的7％。这是不可持续的。...... 1990年代的预算立法以及20世纪90年代后期信息技术革命的经济增长，彻底消除了2000年的预计赤字，并自1969年以来首次制作了联邦盈余。实际上，国会预算办公室在本世纪初预算的预算盈余如此之大，2001年3月联邦储备董事长Alan Greenspan告诉大会，联邦政府很快就会偿还所有国家债务，并且必须开始投资公司股票的盈余收入，他是令人憎恶的前景。好消息是这个问题已经解决了。
我也被琳达Sugin的文章所震撼，“税收和职位法案的社会意义。“Sugin描述了似乎利于TCJA的规定的社会价值观。她写道：
本文讨论了TCJA揭示了五个美国优先事项和价值观：
传统的家庭是最好的;
2.个人对其资本具有更大的权利而不是劳动力;
人们是自治人士;
慈善机构是为了富人;和
5.物理的东西很重要。
TCJA的分布效果与这些值燕尾。......首先，具有单一工作配偶和留在家庭配偶的传统家庭不成比例地繁荣，因此补贴家庭模式降低了累进效力。其次，获得资本的富裕增加，因此对投资收入的更大权利有利于享受富裕的纳税人。第三，重视个人自治是符合强劲的个人财产权，而且与共享社区目的的高税收较低，较少。第四，有利于慈善捐赠的富人允许他们无法向他人提供税收，并发送慈善事业替代税务的信息。第五，优先考虑物理资产有利于个人能够投资此类资产并低估工人促进繁荣的重要价值。关于法律重新分配税收的立法批评人数负担收入规模及其预计的预算赤字必须更多地关注这些嵌入的优先事项。
在另外三篇论文中，两篇论文挖掘了国际企业税制的变化细节，而另一篇论文认为，税收和就业行为将使公司远离使用债务融资 - 因此走向替代类型融资 - 尚未清楚的含义。
Rebecca M. Kysar讨论“批评（和修复）新的国际税收制度。“
“In this Essay, I address three serious problems created—or left unaddressed—by the new U.S. international tax regime. First, the new international rules aimed at intangible income incentivize offshoring and do not sufficiently deter profit shifting. Second, the new patent box regime is unlikely to increase innovation, can be easily gamed, and will create difficulties for the United States at the World Trade Organization. Third, the new inbound regime has too generous of thresholds and can be readily circumvented. There are ways, however, to improve upon many of these shortcomings through modest and achievable legislative changes, eventually paving the way for more ambitious reform. These recommendations, which I explore in detail below, include moving to a per-country minimum tax, eliminating the patent box, and strengthening the new inbound regime. Even if Congress were to enact these possible legislative fixes, however, it would be a grave mistake for the United States to become complacent in the international tax area. In addition to the issues mentioned above, the challenges of the modern global economy will continue to demand dramatic revisions to the tax system."苏珊C.莫尔斯举起了关于的影响国际合作与2017年税收法。
“Some have criticized the 2017 Tax Act for lowering the corporate tax rate. This Essay argues instead that Congress deserves credit for bringing the U.S. rate in line with other OECD countries, potentially saving the corporate tax by establishing a minimum global rate. ... There is a silver lining for the corporate income tax in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. This is because the Act’s international provisions contain not only competitive but also cooperative elements. The Act adopts a lower, dual-rate structure that pursues a competitiveness strategy and taxes regular corporate income at 21% and foreign-derived intangible income at 13.125%. But the Act also supports the continued existence of the corporate income tax globally, thus favoring cooperation among members of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Its cooperative provisions feature the minimum tax on global intangible low-taxed income, or GILTI, earned by non-U.S. subsidiaries. Another cooperative provision is the base erosion and anti-abuse tax, or BEAT. The impact of the Act on global corporate income tax policy will depend on how the U.S. implements the law and on how other nations respond to it."Robert E. Holo，Jasmine N. Hay和William J. Smolinski讨论了公司杠杆的问题“不是那么快：163（j），245a，并在TCJA世界的杠杆作用。“
“税收和职业法案将需要大型跨国公司重新评估其收购和企业结构的债务使用。对该法案所带来的税收代码的变化减少了在这些背景下使用债务的激励措施。这些变化可能需要从业者确定融资收购的新方法，并需要对大型跨国实体使用的当前资本结构的重新评估。......
“换句话说，是一个好主意挫败资本结构债务的全球偏好？是否有一个有问题的偏好，债务首先需要修复？很可能让潜在数量意外的后果是我在新法律下的结果。......通过改变游戏规则，美国国税局有效地改变了对该建模运动的投入。它仍然是一个复杂的问题，无论是全面的，商业实体相对于股权携带多余的债务;但肯定是一套新的规则，在他们的脸上似乎有利于债务的股权，可能非常好，导致这些建模练习产生了制定债务权偏好的转变的产出。“
