What's in a name? Changes in store for programs, agencies

April 09, 1993|By Individual tax calculations by Deloitte & Touche, tax analysts. Assumption: all income is from salary. State taxes not included. Energy tax impact calculations by The Tax Foundation, based on income brackets./JEFF DAUBER/STAFF GRAPHICWashington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Along with "reinventing government," the Clinton administration wants to rename it, too.

The 1994 budget document released yesterday contains a number of proposals to change the names of federal programs or agencies along with their funding.

Some of the changes reflect plans to reorganize and streamline the bureaucracy; in other cases, it seems more a matter of politics, or even grammar.

For example, Drug Elimination Grants for Low-Income Housing, used to help public housing agencies fight drug-related crime, would be eliminated. Instead, they would become part of a new (( Community Partnerships Against Crime program.

One of the most widely used federal benefits, Guaranteed Student Loans, would become known as Federal Family Education Loans.

At the Department of Health and Human Services, the Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration would become the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

For grammar's sake, the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery fund, which uses money from timber salvage sales to improve forests damaged by insects, disease and fire in the Pacific Northwest, would become the Forest Ecosystems Health and Recovery fund.

The Antarctic Research Activities Program would simply be part of the new Polar Research Programs, a change that reflects new, federally funded scientific efforts near the North Pole.

Cost-cutting at the Agriculture Department would mean the end of the Soil Conservation Service, the Farmers Home Administration and the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service. Those well-known programs would be subsumed into a new Farm Service Agency.

President Clinton's budget priorities -- and his campaign pledge to cut the White House staff -- means the Council on Environmental Quality, established when the environmental movement took off in the late 1960s, is being dropped in favor of a new, smaller White House Office on Environmental Policy.

At the same time, the president's desire to promote sales of U.S. goods overseas means an upgrade for the new Trade and Development Agency (formerly known merely as the Trade and Development Program). The new agency would get a 30 percent budget increase, to $60 million, along with the name change.

Reflecting the end of the Cold War, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the main source of research and development funds for the military, would become the Advanced Research Projects Agency, which would encourage development of "dual use" technology with defense and civilian applications.

TAX IMPACT OF CLINTON BUDGET

%

PROFESSIONAL FAMILY

Profile: Couple, both working, two children, adjusted joint gross income of $250,000, with itemized deuctions, including mortgage, of $25,000.

Affected by: Increase in top income tax bracket from 31 percent to 36 percent on couples with adjusted gross incomes of $180,000 or more; energy tax.

Impact: Tax liability in federal income and payroll taxes would increase $4,514 from $73,115 to $77,629. Energy tax would cost them an estimated 0.32 percent of income, or $800.

SINGLE EXECUTIVE

Profile: Single, no children, adjusted gross income $150,000, renting an apartment, with itemized deductions of $3,700.

Affected by: Increase in top income tax bracket from 31 percent to 36 percent on individuals with adjusted gross incomes of $140,000 or more; energy tax.

Impact: Tax liability in federal income and payroll taxes would increase by $1,767 from $46,309 to $48,076. Energy tax would cost him or her an estimate 0.32 percent of income, or $480.

MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY

Profile: Couple, two children, adjusted gross income of $35,000.

Affected by: Energy tax on their gasoline and utilities.

Impact: Energy tax would cost them O.56 percent of their income, or $196.

SOCIAL SECURITY RECIPIENT

Profile: Single retiree, with income of $36,464 plus $13,536 in benefits, and standard deductions of $3,700

Affected by: Increase in tax on Social Security benefits from 50 percent to 85 percent for on incomes of $25,000 or more for

individuals, $32,000 for couples. Energy tax.

Impact: His or her federal tax liability tax would increase by $657 from $11,363 to $12,020. Energy tax would cost 0.49 percent of income, or $245.

WORKING POOR

Profile: Married couple, two children, with one-earner income of $8,840.

Affected by: Increase in the earned income tax credit, designed to ease poverty on working Americans.

Impact: The couple, who would owe no income taxes but would pay $676 in payroll taxes, would receive direct payment from the IRS, of $2,685. This would include refund of their payroll taxes and $2,009 in tax credit -- $l,174 more than they now are eligible to recieve. Energy tax impact would be offset by another tax credit for the low-income.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.