Jeremy Horpedahl

Jeremy Horpedahl

  • Assistant Professor of Economics, Buena Vista University

Jeremy Horpedahl is an assistant professor of economics in the H.W. Siebens School of Business at Buena Vista University in Storm Lake, Iowa. He primarily teaches principles of microeconomics and macroeconomics, as well as international economics and political economy. Dr. Horpedahl received his Ph.D. in Economics from George Mason University in 2009, concentrating in public choice, public finance, and economic history. While at George Mason, Dr. Horpedahl was a Mercatus Center Ph.D. Fellow. He has also taught at St. Lawrence University in Canton, NY and at George Mason.

Published Research

Working Papers

Policy Briefs

Jeremy Horpedahl | May 08, 2015
The CTC provides a significant subsidy to almost all tax- paying families with children, and the US federal and local tax codes contain many other provisions that subsidize child rearing. In the aggregate, the CTC subsidy to families with children has grown to nearly $60 billion, placing it among the list of the largest “tax expenditures” as defined by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation.
Jeremy Horpedahl, Harrison Searles | Mar 06, 2014
Removing the federal tax deduction for state and local taxes would make taxes more equitable throughout the nation, as both high-tax and low-tax states are treated equally by the federal government. It may also provide an efficiency boost for states and localities, as they abandon some services that could be better provided by private companies. The removal of this deduction would also allow federal marginal tax rates to be cut across the board, providing a secondary boost to the economy while still remaining revenue-neutral at the federal level.
Jeremy Horpedahl, Harrison Searles | Sep 17, 2013
The US federal tax code contains a number of provisions designed to encourage individuals to save for retirement. These provisions allow individuals to avoid or defer taxes if they choose to set aside a portion of their income for future consumption. When all of these provisions are combined, they are the second largest “tax expenditure” category as defined by the Joint Committee on Taxation. The exclusion of retirement savings from taxation causes some economic distortions, which we will discuss in this paper. However, unlike some other tax expenditures, there is a strong economic rationale for not taxing savings. Higher rates of investment lead to higher rates of economic growth, and it may be sound policy for the tax code to encourage this behavior, even after considering the economic costs. Excluding retirement income from taxation may also make the tax system more efficient, even though most other tax expenditures reduce efficiency.
Jeremy Horpedahl, Harrison Searles | Sep 10, 2013
The exclusion of employer-provided health insurance from taxation lowers federal tax revenue significantly. According to the Office of Management and Budget, the federal government missed out on over $170 billion in income tax revenue and another $108 billion in payroll tax revenue in fiscal year 2012 due to the exclusion. Over the next five fiscal years, the federal government would collect around $1 trillion in income tax revenue if employer-provided health benefits were taxed, plus another $600 billion payroll tax revenue. Given the large deficits that the federal government continues to accumulate, this exclusion is a tempting source of new revenue. But closing this loophole would also mean a significant tax increase on all working Americans that currently receive health insurance from their employer.

Research Summaries & Toolkits

Expert Commentary

Research Areas

' '