Talk:Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Globalization Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Left-leaning"

Should we really be saying that they are "left-leaning" on the basis of an op-ed calling them "a bunch of lefties" but that says they are accurate? —Cupco 16:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, and I believe it provides an inaccurate description when that very article goes on to say: "I've followed the work of ITEP and its related entities ... for years. ... When they have studied the distributional effects of tax cuts, they've generally been right in their conclusions." This clearly implies that their work is ultimately non-partisan. Fishicus (talk) 22:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They are left leaning. Look at this article calling proponents of tax elimination 'right wingers' https://itep.org/some-lawmakers-continue-to-mythologize-income-tax-elimination-despite-widespread-opposition/ 107.209.55.107 (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On one hand, I think that info houses can be both correct and partisan. ITEP is a reliable source of information on tax reports, with a left leaning opinion piece blog, Just Taxes. These two things are kept separate; as far as I'm aware, the reports do not link to opinion pieces. On the other hand, I think calling them a partisan source or left-leaning without distinguishing their reports from their blog is disingenuous and suggests that their tax briefs are partisan, which is incorrect, as they are very transparent about their methodology and as far as I can tell, remains fairly objective. My take is that the briefs should be specified as ultimately non-partisan. Zoipingus (talk) 09:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110322053945/http://taxes.state.mn.us:80/legal_policy/Documents/other_supporting_content_2011_tax_incidence_study_links.pdf to http://taxes.state.mn.us/legal_policy/Documents/other_supporting_content_2011_tax_incidence_study_links.pdf

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:21, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war - ITEP

A user continues to delete well sourced information about ITEP describing its own programs and research. I think it is worth some discussion before discussing further. Calwatch (talk) 22:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(outdated, see "request for significant edits")

Hey everyone, I work for ITEP and I'm looking to update our page with more relevant material.

The main changes are headers that help explain the org (activities, history and goals), current funders, and over a dozen sources from the past couple years that cite ITEP's work. You can find the draft of my updated version here (User:Salta524/sandbox).

My previous edits were removed because users with a conflict of interest should first disclose their edits on the talk page for other editors to review before publishing (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest).

Feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Salta524 (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see no issue with these edits. I think they reflect Wikipedia's status quo on information regarding similar organizations. Zoipingus (talk) 09:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for significant edits

Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented.

What I think should be changed (include citations):

I'm requesting more additions than changes, so all the edits can be found in this sandbox: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Salta524/sandbox

Here's a summary:

- Update headquarters address as it's currently outdated.

- Revise opening paragraph to a more neutral tone and mention current leadership.

- Add sections "History and Goals" and "Activities" with following subheadings: Federal, state, and local tax policy research; Corporate tax policy research; Who Pays?; Tax Microsimulation Model.

- Add over a dozen secondary sources that are more relevant to the org's recent activities.

- Update "Funders" list and sources as they're currently outdated.

- Reorganize the "See Also" section.

Why it should be changed:

The wiki page is currently lacking the information that most research org wiki pages are reasonably expected to provide, especially the new sections and relevant sources. The outdated funders list and address also reflect that issue.

Salta524 (talk) 16:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please declare your conflict of interest, as required by WP:COI and WP:DISCLOSE. Axad12 (talk) 20:37, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Partly done: Missing secondary, reliable sources for many of the claims. The funders section was removed recently due to lack of secondary sources. I've added some bits from the see also section but don't think that certain policies are relevant here. Encoded Talk 💬 21:37, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]