Edward A. Zelinsky (Cardozo), Against a VAT (Oxford University Press Blog):

A federal value-added tax (VAT) is today’s magic bullet for slaying the federal budget deficit. A federal VAT would be a veritable cash cow, obviating the need for painful measures like serious spending reductions and middle class income tax hikes. A VAT would be more regressive and complex than its proponents acknowledge. Like most putative panaceas, a VAT should be rejected.

N. Gregory Mankiw (Harvard University, Department of Economics), Much to Love, and Hate, in a VAT (New York Times):

The policy world is abuzz with talk about whether a value-added tax should be part of the solution to our long-term fiscal problems. Most recently, Paul A. Volcker, head of President Obama’s economic advisory board, said a VAT was “not as toxic an idea” as it used to be.

But is it actually a good idea? Regardless of whether your politics lean left or right, the VAT gives you some things to love and some to hate. …

For liberals, the main advantage of a VAT is that it would be a source of revenue to fund a robust, compassionate government. …

Conservatives emphasize an altogether different set of concerns. For them, the main disadvantage of a VAT is that it would be a source of revenue to fund a large, intrusive government.