Do Any Studies Show that Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves?

I concluded a prior post with the following statement:

As I mentioned, I am yet to find a single economic study that purports to show evidence that any income tax cut has ever paid for itself. If anyone who reads this should know of one, please leave a comment with a link to that study. Thanks.

I did receive a couple of replies to that request but neither of them focused on income tax cuts in the United States. One focused on capital gains tax cuts and the other focused on countries with relatively weak tax authorities where tax cuts might increase compliance (like Russia). In any case, I replied to both. I also have not found an economic study that shows an income tax cut paying for itself from any other source. However, I am continuing to search for such a study and have posted links to any related information that I've found at this link. I believe that only one of those links is to a study that purports to show a tax cut that paid for itself. It is a paper published by Laffer Associates titled The Onslaught From The Left, Part III: The Capital Gains Tax. Following is an excerpt:

We now have at least three years of data to assess the effect of the 2003 capital gains tax rate reduction on capital gains tax receipts. Figure 6 shows that from 2002 through 2005, capital gains receipts have doubled, from $49 billion to $97 billion. The latest projection for receipts in 2006 is $110 billion. This represents a 124% increase in revenues over four years with a 25% cut in tax rates. You can’t ask for more than that.

As stated, this paper involves a capital gains tax cut and looks at just 3 years worth of data. Figure 2 on page 4 of this Congressional Research Service paper shows that capital gains tax receipts sank back toward their 2002 level in the 2009 financial crisis.

In any event, I took those studies that gave actual numbers for the estimated revenue recouped following tax cuts and compiled them into a table at this link. Following is that table:

Estimates of the Percent of Revenue Cost Recouped after Tax Cut

Labor  Taxes	Capital  Taxes	Author (s)	Title	Date	Notes
17-25*		Lindsey, Lawrence	Individual Taxpayer Response to Tax Cuts 1982-1984 with Implications for the Revenue Maximizing Tax Rate	11/86	* 1982-1984
33*		Lindsey, Lawrence	The Growth Experiment	10/91	* according to  Bartlett
17	50	Mankiw, Gregory  Weinzierl, Matthew	Dynamic Scoring: A Back-of-the-Envelope Guide	12/04
-5 to  32*		Congressional Budget  Office	Analyzing the Economic and Budgetary Effects of a 10 Percent Cut in Income Tax Rates	12/01/05	* for 2nd 5 years
< 10*		Treasury Department	A Dynamic Analysis of Permanent Extension of the President’s Tax Relief	7/25/06	* according to  CBPP
30*		Foertsch, Tracy  Rector, Ralph A.	A Dynamic Analysis of the 2001 and 2003 Bush Tax Cuts: Applying an Alternative  Technique for Calibrating Macroeconomic and Microsimulation Models	11/22/06	* 295.5 / 991.9
39*		Auten, Gerald  Carroll, Robert  Gee, Geoffrey	The 2001 and 2003 Tax Rate Reductions: An Overview and Estimate of the Taxable Income Response	9/08	* reduction in  top 2 rates
32	51	Trabandt, Mathias  Uhlig, Harald	How Far Are We From The Slippery Slope? The Laffer Curve Revisited	4/10

As can be seen, none of the studies projected that tax cuts would pay for themselves. At most, they projected that about a third of the cost of labor taxes and half of the cost of capital taxes would be recouped. In fact, the CBO study suggests that the feedback could actually be negative, causing the revenue loss to be larger than the static revenue loss. Following is a summary of the study given by Bruce Bartlett:

A 2005 Congressional Budget Office study during the time that Republican Doug Holtz-Eakin was CBO director concluded that a 10 percent cut in federal income tax rates would recoup at most 28 percent of the static revenue loss over 10 years. And this estimate assumes that taxpayers have unlimited foresight and know that taxes will be raised after 10 years to stabilize the debt/GDP ratio. Without foresight and no compensating tax increases or spending cuts, leading to an increase in the debt, feedback would be negative; i.e., causing the revenue loss to be larger than the static revenue loss.

This seems to agree with the study by Christina and David Romer that I mentioned in my prior post that found that "deficit-driven tax increases" have had a positive effect on economic growth. In any case, I am interested in any studies that give estimates for the revenue cost recouped following tax cuts. This especially applies to any studies that suggest that an income tax cut in the United States would pay for itself. As mentioned, I am yet to find such a study.

Note: There is a discussion of this post at this link.