Jason Furman, a Harvard economist and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, posted on X today, October 22, 2026, about the methodology for evaluating tax policies. Furman stated, “This is the standard way to score tax policy. You score the law as written (in this case a one-time wealth tax) and the behavioral consequences from that law (people worried it will last moving). There are arguments against that approach. But is not “highly inappropriate” or “dishonest” to do what JCT or any other neutral body would do.” His comments addressed criticisms regarding the integrity of such scoring practices.
The discussion around economic policy evaluation comes as financial markets grapple with inflation and interest rate dynamics. Recent Gokhshtein coverage includes Peter Schiff's warning about a worsening cost of living crisis due to inflation data and BlackRock's report on corporate bond yields becoming self-sustaining without rate cuts. The persistent inflation has also reportedly broken bonds' equity hedge, stressing the traditional 60/40 investment model.
Furman's statement implies that understanding the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) or similar bodies' methodologies is crucial for assessing proposed tax changes, such as a wealth tax. His view suggests that accounting for both the direct impact of the law and the behavioral shifts it might induce is a legitimate and established practice, rather than a biased one. Investors and policymakers will watch how proposed tax policies are scored and debated.
