How do you say fuggedaboutit in Kentucky? Senate Democrats said they’d be willing to work with Republicans on a bipartisan tax bill, but only if the measure did not add to the deficit, didn’t cut taxes for the rich, and did cut taxes for the middle-income households. Finance Committee chair Orrin Hatch suggested some business could be done, but within hours Majority Leader Mitch McConnell slammed the door. So, as with the health bill, the GOP will try to get it done on its own.
Some GOP lawmakers would like to meet that devil in tax-proposal details. Bloomberg examines how Republican rank-and-file members of Congress are responding to the GOP leadership’s plans for tax cuts. Representative Ted Yoho of Florida, for example, would like to see more details on the corporate tax rate and the estate tax. House Freedom Caucus Chair Mark Meadows said “There are so many other questions… We need a lot more level of detail before you can opine on whether it’s good or bad.”
Details, details… PoliticoPro reports that three Trump Administration appointees, including the White House director of intergovernmental affairs, owe tens of thousands of dollars in back taxes. The Center for Public Integrity reports that intergovernmental director Justin Clark, who consulted for candidate Trump and served as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s director of operations, owes between $15,000 and $50,000 in back taxes. Of the three, only Clark has not disclosed repayment plans for the tax debt.
And some Senate Democrats would like a new outsourcing tax. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, Michigan’s Debbie Stabenow, and Indiana’s Senator Joe Donnelly announced their proposal to punish companies that outsource jobs. The firms would have to pay the regular 35 percent corporate tax rate on any profits held overseas before relocating. Right now, they can defer those taxes until they bring profits back to the US. The proposal also bars companies from taking a tax deduction for the cost of moving jobs ofshore. But if a company brings jobs back to the US, it would receive a tax credit of 20 percent of those costs.
Did a gun tax backfire? A gun-rights group in Seattle, Washington, claims that the city spent more defending its tax on gun sales than it collected in revenue. The tax, which roughly equals $25 per firearm and 2 or 5 cents per round of ammunition, has so far generated $108,013.04, according to court documents in a lawsuit filed by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). The plaintiffs argued that Seattle must disclose the amount it collected through the gun tax. The city must now pay SAF attorney fees plus a small penalty, which exceeds the amount of revenue thus far collected.
Correction: Yesterday’s Daily Deduction e-newsletter did not accurately list the affiliation for Aparna Mathur, of the American Enterprise Institute. We regret the error.
Posts and Comments are solely the opinion of the author and not that of the Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute, or Brookings Institution.
- © Urban Institute, Brookings Institution, and individual authors, 2016.