"They really couldn't be more different," said Leonard Burman, director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which conducted the studies, said in a press call with reporters.
The differences begin with the deficit effects: The center says Clinton's plan would decrease the deficit by $1.6 trillion over 10 years with substantial tax increases on the wealthy and companies. Trump's would boost the deficit by $6.2 trillion over a decade with major tax cuts for the wealthy and companies.
Burman called the plans "mirror images" of each other. The analyses can be seen here.
The center did not account for the effects of either's candidates spending proposals or the growth effects from tax changes, so-called dynamic scoring.
Burman said that its analyses, sent in advance to both campaigns before being released publicly, had already garnered complaints from Trump advisors because they failed to account for the dynamic growth effects of its plan. The Trump campaign says that its tax cuts, along with loosening regulations and cutting government spending, will dramatically increase growth from the current average of around 2 percent per year to 3.5 percent and mitigate if not eliminate the deficit effects from lower taxes.