July, 01 2020, 12:00am EDT
Proposed Vacation Tax Credit Exposes Vacation Inequality
As the summer heat cranks up, the idea of a federal tax credit of up to $8,000 for vacation expenses sounds good. But the proposed tax credit is nonrefundable so that most working-class people would receive no or only modest benefits from it.
WASHINGTON
As the summer heat cranks up, the idea of a federal tax credit of up to $8,000 for vacation expenses sounds good. But the proposed tax credit is nonrefundable so that most working-class people would receive no or only modest benefits from it.
In a new analysis released by the Center for Economic and Policy Research, (CEPR), author Shawn Fremstad explains that the proposed nonrefundable tax credit or tax deduction for vacation expenses can only be claimed in full by wealthier taxpayers. However, this latest proposed tax giveaway to the wealthy "shouldn't blind us to the fact that annual vacations are a necessity, and that social policy has a legitimate role to play in ensuring that all people are able to take one."
"Progressives shouldn't shy away from using social policy to reduce vacation inequality," writes Fremstad. He proposes that questions about the ability to afford a vacation be added to federal government economic surveys.
Fremstad also documents how other wealthy nations have long-standing social policies that encourage vacations and reduce vacation inequality. One of these policies, vacation pay for workers, is explored in depth in the 2019 CEPR report, No-Vacation Nation, Revised.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
'Cruel Betrayal': Educators Furious Over Trump Funding Freeze for School Programs
One Democratic senator called the move a "clear as day violation of federal law."
Jul 02, 2025
The Trump administration informed state education agencies on Monday that it would not release over $6 billion in previously approved federal funding for schools—sparking outcry from teachers unions, Democratic lawmakers, and education-focused groups who called the move harmful to students.
In an unsigned email, Education Department staff told states that they would not be dispersing any money from five programs that focus on issues including migrant education, before- and after-school programs, English learner services, and more.
"Given the change in administrations, the department is reviewing the FY 2025 funding for the [Title I-C, II-A, III-A, IV-A, IV-B] grant program(s), and decisions have not yet been made concerning submissions and awards for this upcoming year," according to the email, which was obtained by NPR.
Jodi Grant, executive director of the Afterschool Alliance, a group that promotes access to after-school programs for kids, called the funding loss "catastrophic," according to The New York Times.
Grant's organization is sounding the alarm that loss of funding for 21st Century Community Learning Centers, one of the programs targeted, could mean that 10,000 after-school and summer programs could close their doors for the 2025-26 school year. Over a million children are at risk of losing their programs as soon as this summer, according to the Afterschool Alliance.
The email came one day before the federal government was scheduled to disperse the money, on July 1. The funding had been previously approved by Congress in a continuing budget resolution that passed in March.
On Wednesday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) called the move a "clear as day violation of federal law. The appropriations law passed by Congress requires this money to be spent."
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, a teachers union, also called it unlawful. "This is another illegal usurpation of the authority of the Congress. Plus it directly harms the children in our nation," she said in a statement on Tuesday.
According to Education Week, a 2026 federal budget proposal from the White House unveiled last month seeks to eliminate all five of the education programs targeted in this week's funding freeze, meaning this move from the Trump administration is essentially the White House advancing its priorities early, without Congress' consideration.
"Withholding billions in promised federal education funding that students need—and states had planned to use to support children in their states—is a cruel betrayal of students, especially those who rely on critical support services," said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers union, in a statement on Tuesday.
"Sadly, this is part of a broader pattern by this administration of undermining public education—starving it of resources, sowing distrust, and pushing privatization at the expense of the nation's most vulnerable students," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lawsuit Aims to End 'Systematic' Snatching of Brown-Skinned People by Trump Agents
"These guys are popping up, rampant all over the city, just taking people randomly, and we want that particular practice to end," one attorney in the case said of Department of Homeland Security agents.
Jul 02, 2025
Immigrant rights defenders in California on Wednesday sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, accusing the Trump administration of "abducting and disappearing community members using unlawful stop and arrest practices and confining individuals at a federal building in illegal conditions while denying them access to attorneys" as part of its mass deportation effort.
The lawsuit was brought by five individual workers, three advocacy groups, and a legal services provider: The Los Angeles Worker Center Network, United Farm Workers (UFW), the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), and Immigrant Defenders Law Center. Their complaint accuses DHS of unconstitutionally arresting and detaining people, according to the ACLU, which is assisting with the legal challenge, "in order to meet arbitrary arrest quotas set by the Trump administration."
According to the complaint:
The raids in this district follow a common, systematic pattern. Individuals with brown skin are approached or pulled aside by unidentified federal agents, suddenly and with a show of force, and made to answer questions about who they are and where they are from. If they hesitate, attempt to leave, or do not answer the questions to the satisfaction of the agents, they are detained, sometimes tackled, handcuffed, and/or taken into custody. In these interactions, agents typically have no prior information about the individual and no warrant of any kind. If agents make an arrest, contrary to federal law, they do not make any determination of whether a person poses a risk of flight before a warrant can be obtained. Also contrary to federal law, the agents do not identify themselves or explain why the individual is being arrested.
"DHS—at explicit direction from the Trump administration—has gone after day laborers, car wash workers, farm workers, street vendors, service workers, nannies, and others who form the lifeblood of communities across Southern California," said ACLU Foundation of Southern California senior staff attorney Mohammad Tajsar, who is representing plaintiffs in the case.ho "Everyone deserves to feel safe going about their daily lives. DHS must stop disappearing people from our communities."
Tajsar told the Los Angeles Times that "these guys are popping up, rampant all over the city, just taking people randomly, and we want that particular practice to end."
Alvaro M. Huerta, director of litigation and advocacy at Immigrant Defenders Law Center and a plaintiff's attorney in the suit, said in a statement that "the federal government is waging a campaign of terror across Southern California, abducting community members off the streets and warehousing them in deplorable conditions away from their loved ones, all while denying them access to legal counsel."
"It's blatantly unconstitutional, cruelly inhumane, and a violation of any common decency," Huerta added. "If the Trump administration insists on trampling Angelenos' rights, we'll see them in court."
Plaintiffs in the case—who are seeking to represent people subjected to random stops and arrests—are asking the court to certify the case as a class action. They have also requested preliminary and permanent injunctions barring further violations of constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures and self-incrimination, as enshrined in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, respectively.
As the lawsuit notes, "one of the clearest patterns that have emerged in the raids in Southern California... has been stops and interrogations... on the basis of apparent race and ethnicity."
"These raids have targeted the most vulnerable members of our workforce, essential workers who are the backbone of our local economy," said Los Angeles Worker Center Network executive director Armando Gudino. "We cannot allow racial profiling, warrantless arrests, and denial of due process to become the standard operating procedure in our communities."
DHS has been holding arrested people in the basement of a federal building in downtown Los Angeles commonly referred to as B-18. The lockup has no beds, showers, or medical facilities, according to the ACLU of Southern California. Furthermore, B-18 is meant to hold only a small number of people on a temporary basis while they are processed.
"We have heard from over 100 families of Individuals taken to B-18 and other detention centers that attest to their loved ones being kept in overcrowded, cold, and inhumane conditions," said CHIRLA executive director Angelica Salas. "They are held in small windowless rooms with dozens or more other detainees, in extremely cramped quarters while being verbally humiliated and pressured into signing papers they don't understand."
The ACLU of Southern California said: "The ongoing raids have led to the disappearance of more than 1,500 people. The suit details how federal agents consistently refuse to identify themselves or what agency they are with when asked, using anonymity as a tactic to shield lawlessness."
UFW president Teresa Romero noted in a statement that "the raids in the greater Los Angeles area have not been limited to the urban center; we have also seen horrific instances of Border Patrol agents chasing down farm workers in the fields of Ventura County. The spouse of a UFW member was among those unjustly detained."
"Now the very workers who feed America go to work in fear," she added. "Their American-born children are scared not knowing if their parents will come home. Farm workers deserve better. We've seen these unconstitutional and un-American tactics before, with Border Patrol targeting random farm workers and anyone with brown skin in Kern County during their large sweep in January. We sued then and we are suing now."
While U.S. President Donald Trump, members of his administration, and Republican lawmakers and supporters claim the DHS crackdown is targeting dangerous criminals, critics have noted that people legally seeking asylum, families, relatives of American citizens, and even citizens themselves have been swept up in the mass deportation dragnet.
According to the libertarian Cato Institute, 65% of people taken by ICE had no criminal conviction whatsoever and 93% had no conviction for violent offenses.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Says Paramount Deal With Trump Represents 'Dark Day for Independent Journalism'
"Trump is undermining our democracy and rapidly moving us towards authoritarianism, and the billionaires who care more about their stock portfolios than our democracy are helping him do it," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
Jul 02, 2025
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders warned Wednesday that Paramount Global's decision to settle President Donald Trump's meritless lawsuit sets "an extremely dangerous precedent" that could further enable authoritarian attacks on press freedom.
"Paramount's decision will only embolden Trump to continue attacking, suing, and intimidating the media, which he has labeled 'the enemy of the people,'" Sanders (I-Vt.) said following news that Paramount agreed to pay $16 million to settle Trump's suit over the media organization's handling of a "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris ahead of the 2024 election.
"It is a dark day for independent journalism and freedom of the press—an essential part of our democracy. It is a victory for a president who is attempting to stifle dissent and undermine American democracy," Sanders continued. "Make no mistake about it. Trump is undermining our democracy and rapidly moving us towards authoritarianism, and the billionaires who care more about their stock portfolios than our democracy are helping him do it."
The senator accused Paramount of caving to Trump to help grease the federal approval process for the company's pending merger with Skydance. As part of the deal, Paramount chair Shari Redstone agreed to sell her family's company, National Amusements—which controls nearly 80% of Paramount voting stock—for $2.4 billion.
"In other words," Sanders said Wednesday, "the Redstone family diminished the freedom of the press today in exchange for a $2.4 billion payday."
It is a dark day for freedom of the press. Paramount’s decision to settle with Trump will only embolden him to continue his attack on the media.
Trump is undermining our democracy and moving us towards authoritarianism, and the billionaires are helping him do it. pic.twitter.com/FwzW74xN0z
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) July 2, 2025
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) joined Sanders in condemning the settlement and called for a "full investigation into whether or not any anti-bribery laws were broken."
"The Trump administration's level of sheer corruption is appalling," said Warren, "and Paramount should be ashamed of putting its profits over independent journalism."
The Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), a Paramount shareholder that has threatened to sue the company if it settled the Trump suit, said Wednesday that the deal "will be remembered as one of the most shameful capitulations by the press to a president in history."
"Paramount's spineless decision to settle Trump's baseless and patently unconstitutional lawsuit is an insult to the journalists of '60 Minutes' and an invitation to Trump to continue targeting other news outlets," said Seth Stern, FPF's director of advocacy. "Each time a company cowers and surrenders to Trump's demands only emboldens him to do it again."
"But we are not done fighting," Stern said. "We've already filed a shareholder information demand and are sending a second demand today to uncover information about this decision. With that information, we will continue to pursue our legal options to stop this affront to Paramount shareholders, CBS journalists, and the First Amendment. Paramount directors should be held accountable, and we will do all we can to make that happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular