SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
corporations
'Crystal Clear' Polling Shows Voters Oppose Trump's Tax Cuts for Rich
"Voters are clear about what they want: lower prices, better jobs, vital programs protected and expanded, and for the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes."
Feb 11, 2025
The Republican Party is intent on permanently extending the 2017 tax cuts which primarily benefited the wealthiest earners and corporations—a priority that would cost an estimated $4.6 trillion and which has sent lawmakers searching for potential spending offsets including cuts to Medicare, food assistance, and renewable energy programs.
But polling released Tuesday suggested the GOP is likely to face widespread outcry—and potential opposition from vulnerable Republicans who don't want to risk angering voters—as a majority of Americans are vehemently opposed to paying for tax cuts for the wealthy by slashing public programs.
The new poll, taken by Data for Progress on behalf of the progressive advocacy groups Groundwork Collaborative and the Student Borrower Protection Center, found that although Republican lawmakers have demonized efforts to provide relief to student loan borrowers, the party's potential overhaul of the income-based repayment program isn't popular among voters of any political ideology.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents said they don't want the repayment plan eliminated, including 56% of Republican voters and 70% of Independents who said they oppose funding cuts for federal student loans and grants.
The GOP's plan would save an estimated $127.3 billion over 10 years by forcing the average student loan borrower to pay nearly $200 more per month.
"Most people don't have an extra $200 a month to throw toward their student loan bill," Michele Shepard Zampini, senior director of college affordability at the Institute for College Access & Success, toldCNBC on Monday.
"Voters overwhelmingly reject efforts to cut critical supports that working families rely on."
Despite that fact, said Aissa Canchola Bañez, policy director for the Student Borrower Protection Center, the GOP's budget proposals would "cut taxes for their billionaire buddies by raiding the pockets of Americans with student debt and families already struggling to pay for college."
"This polling makes it crystal clear," she said. "Voters overwhelmingly reject efforts to cut critical supports that working families rely on."
Republicans can also expect to see pushback if they attempt cuts to Medicare and Medicaid, the survey found. Ninety percent of respondents said they want Medicare funding to increase or remain the same; 87% said the same for Medicaid. Republicans are planning to unveil the first-ever work requirements for Medicaid, which provides healthcare coverage for low-income people and those with disabilities, in an upcoming budget bill.
As Politicoreported Sunday, Republican lawmakers are "increasingly alarmed" that Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Texas), chair of the House Budget Committee, "keeps raising Medicare reforms as a potential spending offset."
More than 80% of respondents also don't want Republicans to make cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, which the GOP is also planning to make subject to expanded work requirements.
Those who want funding for SNAP to increase or stay the same include 67% of Republicans and 75% of Independents.
The polling may leave Republican leaders wondering what programs they will be able to cut without facing outcry from angry voters who rely on public services—but Elizabeth Pancotti, managing director of policy and advocacy for Groundwork Collaborative, suggested in a statement Tuesday that the answer is simple: The GOP must abandon its plan to dole out more tax breaks for the rich.
"Voters are clear about what they want: Lower prices, better jobs, vital programs protected and expanded, and for the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes," said Pancotti. "And yet, Republicans in both chambers of Congress are working overtime to achieve the exact opposite."
President Donald Trump has called on the GOP to advance his taxation, immigration, and energy agenda in "one big, beautiful bill," while Senate Republican leaders have begun work on two separate bills, with taxes dealt with later in the year.
"Whether one bill or two," said Pancotti, "House and Senate GOP members are aligned on wanting to cut lifesaving programs in order to enrich their billionaire friends and donors, and voters are taking note."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump’s Second Inauguration Took Influence Peddling to a Whole New Level
The very ripeness for scandal this time around calls for reasonable restrictions on the sources and amounts of inaugural donations.
Jan 24, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump sounded a lot of populist notes on the campaign trail. But as he took the oath of office for the second time, he was joined onstage by billionaires and CEOs who’d spent millions to be there—leaving supporters who’d traveled across the country to attend literally out in the cold.
Presidential inaugurations have always been an opportunity for wealthy special interests to curry favor with the incoming administration with generous inaugural donations. But the nation has never seen influence peddling like we just witnessed at Trump’s second inauguration.
Shattering all records, the Trump Vance Inaugural Committee, Inc. raised and spent over $200 million in special interest money celebrating the 2024 election victory. (The all-time previous record was $107 million for Trump’s first inauguration in 2017. By contrast, former President Joe Biden’s 2021 inauguration raised and spent nearly $62 million.)
The sheer volume of today’s inaugural donations suggests that wealthy special interests believe it is worth the investment.
Nearly all this financing comes from companies and wealthy business leaders who have business pending before the incoming administration. Rarely are small donations received from citizens simply excited about a new president.
The public won’t get a full picture of Trump’s inaugural donors until the spring, when the one-and-only disclosure report is filed 90 days after the inauguration. But the ones we know about so far are painting an ugly picture of corporations, government contractors, billionaires, and millionaires seeking to endear themselves to Trump and his administration.
All the self-reporting donors—including Big Tech firms like Google, Microsoft, Meta, Amazon, and OpenAI—pledged $1 million or more. The cryptocurrency firm Ripple pledged $5 million. In fact, the cryptocurrency industry even hosted its own inaugural ball.
And of course, Wall Street is cozying up with major donations from Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and billionaire hedge fund manager Ken Griffin.
“EVERYBODY WANTS TO BE MY FRIEND!!!” Trump marvels on his Truth Social account.
Some of these new friends previously expressed opposition toward Trump, who has a history of seeking revenge against his adversaries and even said he might seek retribution in his second administration. “When this election is over… I would have every right to go after them,” Trump said of his political opponents over the summer.
In addition to being former Trump critics, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Jeff Bezos of Amazon, and Sam Altman of OpenAI have their sights on major government contracts from the new administration. Each has now donated $1 million to Trump’s Inauguration. Zuckerberg and Bezos even partied with Trump at Mar-a-Lago and at the inauguration in DC.
What else does all this money buy? Access. Access itself does not necessarily mean success at buying official favors. But the sheer volume of today’s inaugural donations suggests that wealthy special interests believe it is worth the investment.
Presidential inaugurations have not always been such a soiree for the wealthy. Former President Richard Nixon in 1973 spent less than $4 million on his inauguration. Former President Jimmy Carter in 1977 spent $3.5 million. Thomas Jefferson in 1801 simply walked to the Capitol to be sworn in and then walked home.
The very ripeness for scandal this time around calls for reasonable restrictions on the sources and amounts of inaugural donations. Corporations, and certainly government contractors, should be banned from donating.
Contributions should be limited to avoid even the appearance of buying favors. The disclosure requirement should be vastly expanded to include disclosing expenditures as well as donations. And rules should be established on how surplus funds are dispensed.
Presidential inaugurations should be celebrations for the nation as a whole, not influence-peddling opportunities for the very wealthy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Watchdogs Argue 'Narrow Profit Interests' Drive Corporate Tax Debate in US
"It is the American people who lose when corporations succeed in keeping their taxes low," according to the report's authors.
Jan 23, 2025
With portions of President Donald Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that favored high income households and corporations set to expire in 2025, the watchdog group Accountable.US and the coalition Americans for Tax Fairness released a report Wednesday detailing how top corporations benefited from corporate tax law in the five years following the 2017 reform.
These corporations, which include household names such as Apple, Bank of America, Microsoft, Meta, and General Motors, make a disproportionate share of national profits and pay a big chunk of total corporate taxes, though at low rates, according to the report—as in, the "corporate tax ten" identified by the report have a lot at stake when it comes to corporate tax policy.
Ahead of the coming debate around taxes in 2025, "the American public should be aware that the debate over corporate tax policy is less about national economic impact—as corporate lobbyists tend to insist—and more about the narrow profit interests of a few mammoth corporations," according to the report's authors.
While Trump's 2017 tax law permanently lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%—and this provision is not among those set to expire this year—Trump and House Republicans have expressed interest in dropping the corporate tax rate further, to 15%. Researchers at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy found that even after Trump dropped the corporate tax rate to 21%, most profitable corporations paid considerably less than that, "mainly due to loopholes and special breaks that the 2017 tax law left in place and, in some cases, introduced."
"We've seen how Trump's tax scam played out before—after promising to deliver for Main Street, he turned around and gave trillions in tax cuts to the ultra-wealthy and mega-corporations," said David Kass, ATF's executive director in a statement Wednesday. Regular American families "will be hurt by Republicans' plans to give trillions in additional tax cuts to make the rich richer and pay for it by cutting essential programs," he added.
Citing the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the report notes that of the hundreds of billions in total subsidies received by corporations from 2018 through 2022—defined as "the difference between what they would owe over that period without special breaks in the tax code and what they actually paid with them in place"—over $150 billion of those total tax breaks were claimed by just 25 corporations, with Bank of America topping the list at nearly $24 billion in subsidies over those five years
Those breaks help explain how Bank of America paid a federal income-tax rate of just 3.8% on almost $139 billion in profits over that time period, according to the report.
Trump's 2017 legislation also lowered the tax rate for corporate income that comes from intangible assets that are held in the U.S. but generate sales overseas, so-called Foreign Derived Intangible Income (FDII) earnings, according to the report. The authors report that "of the over $50 billion the top 15 corporate beneficiaries of the FDII loophole have received over the first six years of the Trump law, almost one-quarter was reaped by Alphabet"—the parent company of Google.
The authors also note that if the 15% corporate tax rate was already in effect, Apple alone would have saved $3.5 billion on its taxes in the most recent annual reporting period.
The report gives other examples of how these top ten corporations benefit from subsidies already in place and how much they stand to gain from a potentially lowered corporate tax rate.
The report's argument that corporations approach tax policy first and foremost with their own profit margins in mind "is an important realization because it is the American people who lose when corporations succeed in keeping their taxes low: through cuts to public services because of the lost revenue; widening income and wealth gaps from increased corporate profits and stock prices; and in the growth of concentrated corporate power," the authors write.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular