This is the very definition of 'dynamic scoring'. It is speculative and unmeasureable. Really, exactly 11% and not 10% or 12%?

Quote:

---

the increased incentives to work and invest from this tax plan would increase the size of the economy by 11 percent over the long run.

---

Quote:

---

Using dynamic scoring has been promoted by Republican legislators to argue that supply-side tax policy, for example the Bush tax cuts of 2001[1] and 2011 GOP Path to Prosperity proposal,[2] return higher benefits in terms of GDP growth and revenue increases than are predicted from static scoring. Some economists[who?] argue that their dynamic scoring conclusions are overstated,[3] pointing out that CBO practices already include some dynamic scoring elements and that to include more may lead to politicization of the department.[4]

---