It took a bit of searching around, but that is an excellent resource. I find it hard to test the claim (and this is probably why people argue it so much), because for receipts they have absolute $, and they have % of GDP, but my guess is that adjusting for inflation might also need to be looked at. That said, my gut reaction is that as far as income taxes go, a correlation with receipts might be difficult to make. This is an interesting chart of US income taxes, 1913-2010. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States...)

Still, I don't wholly buy the initial premise. Just as important as tax receipts, IMO you need to look at the deficit/surplus. If the government is deficit spending, then tax revenue will increase too. For example, if the government buys 3 aircraft carriers by selling Treasury bonds to China, then those companies that built the carriers will report higher earnings and pay more taxes that year. (That could cover the gap due to the drop in their rate.) So for example, during the GWB years, although rates dropped, government spending increased, and contractors were paying taxes on profit made by loans from China (and others). It muddies the waters for sure. You could hide loss revenue due to tax cuts by deficit spending.

IMHO not all taxes, (or tax cuts) are created equal. Of course we want the government to provide some services (especially those that we want run at cost or at a loss), and we want them to step aside when profit motivation and market demand produces a satisfactory result. Taxes spent when the market does not provide the best solution seem to me to be good ones, and taxes that are spent to provide what the market could seem to me to be ones that should be cut.

Of course, we are in a deficit situation, so this is so much more complicated.

Endlessly interesting topic, btw. The link is great.