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
patriotic millionaires
Tax Groups Warn 'Billionaires and Big Corporations Sharpening Their Knives'
"Billionaires and big corporations are sharpening their knives in anticipation of huge tax cuts, already lobbying and donating to get the tax plan that gives them the biggest windfall."
Nov 08, 2024
Economic justice organizations are bracing for a grueling uphill battle as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and his Republican allies in Congress lay the groundwork to swiftly enact another massive tax cut for the wealthy and large corporations, a move that would worsen inequality and add trillions of dollars to the nation's deficit.
With Trump soon to be in the White House, a Senate majority secured, and control of the House in sight, Republicans are wasting no time preparing for a legislative push to extend soon-to-expire provisions of their deeply regressive 2017 tax law and further cut taxes for rich Americans and large corporations.
In the months leading up to Tuesday's election, GOP lawmakers have been discussing plans to use the fast-track process known as reconciliation to dodge the Senate's 60-vote filibuster and ram through another round of tax cuts. Republicans are set to hold at least 53 Senate seats in the new Congress and are currently just seven seats short of a majority in the lower chamber.
Grover Norquist, a longtime anti-tax crusader and informal economic adviser to Trump, predicted that Republicans are going to try to push through tax legislation "very early."
"The House and Senate guys have been working on this together forever," Norquist toldThe Washington Post on Thursday.
During his 2024 campaign, Trump pledged to cut the statutory corporate tax rate from 21% to 15%, a change that would deliver close to $50 billion in tax breaks annually to the nation's largest companies. The president-elect also floated a number of additional proposals, including eliminating taxes on tips and Social Security benefits.
David Kass, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF), said Friday that "the incoming Congress faces a generational tax fight on the renewal of the disastrous Trump tax provisions that benefit the wealthiest Americans and corporations."
"Make no mistake, billionaires spent record amounts of money this election cycle to buy themselves a tax cut worth trillions—and the vast majority of Americans will pay the price," said Kass. "ATF and its coalition will fight for a fair tax code where the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share. We'll hold elected officials accountable if they attempt to redirect trillions from working families to the wealthy and big corporations."
"President Trump and his extreme agenda are the embodiment of inequality, fueling the division between the ultrawealthy and the rest of us."
An analysis published ahead of the election by the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) found that Trump's economic proposals would cut taxes for the richest 5% of Americans while raising them for the bottom 95%.
In a blog post on Friday, ITEP executive director Amy Hanauer wrote that a tax package that centers proposals Trump floated on the campaign trail "would be disastrous for families, communities, and the country."
"Billionaires and big corporations are sharpening their knives in anticipation of huge tax cuts, already lobbying and donating to get the tax plan that gives them the biggest windfall," Hanauer added. "Those forces have always had tremendous influence in Washington. Now they have more."
Lobbying related to expiring provisions of the 2017 Trump-GOP tax law surged in the run-up to Tuesday's election, with corporate giants such as FedEx, Starbucks, Pfizer, and Toyota pressuring Congress to prevent parts of the law from lapsing.
In addition to further cutting corporate taxes and extending elements of the 2017 law, Trump is also weighing an attempt to cut capital gains taxes without congressional authorization.
"Toward the end of his first administration, senior White House officials and Treasury staff held extensive discussions about bypassing Congress with a unilateral $100 billion tax cut that would primarily benefit the wealthy," the Postreported Thursday. "Numerous Trump advisers have hoped to take another shot at it in his second term."
Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, pledged after Trump's victory earlier this week that "we will work to stop any extension of President Trump's tax cuts for billionaires and the ultrarich."
"President Trump and his extreme agenda are the embodiment of inequality, fueling the division between the ultrawealthy and the rest of us," said Maxman. "His policies create chaos and only serve billionaires and corporations, not working people."
Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl sounded a similarly defiant note.
"This round went to the oligarchs," Pearl said of the 2024 election. "But rest assured, Patriotic Millionaires will rise to the fight. We've only just begun."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Slams 'Big Money Interests' and Consultants That Control Democratic Party After Loss to Trump
"While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change," said the Vermont Independent. "And they're right."
Nov 06, 2024
Shortly before Vice President Kamala Harris delivered her concession speech on Wednesday, U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders forcefully called out Democratic Party leadership for losing the White House and at least one chamber of Congress to Republicans.
"It should come as no great surprise that a Democratic Party which has abandoned working-class people would find that the working class has abandoned them," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. "First, it was the white working class, and now it is Latino and Black workers as well."
"While the Democratic leadership defends the status quo, the American people are angry and want change," said the senator, who decisively won reelection on Tuesday as Republicans reclaimed the upper chamber. "And they're right."
After seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016 and 2020, Sanders spent this cycle campaigning for Harris, warning of Republican President-elect Donald Trump's return, blasting billionaire involvement in U.S. politics, and urging Democrats to better serve working people.
"Will the big money interests and well-paid consultants who control the Democratic Party learn any real lessons from this disastrous campaign? ...Probably not."
In Sanders' new statement, he highlighted U.S. income and wealth inequality, worker concerns about artificial intelligence, and the federal government's failure to provide paid leave and universal healthcare while pouring billions of dollars into Israel's war on the Gaza Strip.
"Will the big money interests and well-paid consultants who control the Democratic Party learn any real lessons from this disastrous campaign? Will they understand the pain and political alienation that tens of millions of Americans are experiencing? Do they have any ideas as to how we can take on the increasingly powerful oligarchy which has so much economic and political power?" he asked. "Probably not."
"In the coming weeks and months those of us concerned about grassroots democracy and economic justice need to have some very serious political discussions," Sanders concluded. "Stay tuned."
Progressives—who have responded to Trump's Electoral College and popular vote win by criticizing billionaires who backed him and promising "unprecedented resistance" during his second term—echoed Sanders' remarks.
Sharing Sanders' statement on X—the social media platform owned by billionaire Trump backer Elon Musk—United Auto Workers (UAW) communications director Jonah Furman said: "The task has been clear for a decade. The question is only whether and when we will rise to the task."
Separately, the union's president, Shawn Fain, said in a Wednesday statement that "UAW members around the country clocked in today under the same threat they faced yesterday: unchecked corporate greed destroying our lives, our families, and our communities."
"We've said all along that no matter who is in the White House, our fight remains the same," Fain continued, pointing to the battle against "broken trade laws" like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and fights for good union jobs, a secure retirement for everyone, a living wage, affordable healthcare, and time for families.
"It's time for Washington, D.C. to put up or shut up, no matter the party, no matter the candidate," added Fain, whose union endorsed Harris. "Will our government stand with the working class, or keep doing the bidding of the billionaires? That's the question we face today. And that's the question we'll face tomorrow. The answer lies with us. No matter who's in office."
"Will our government stand with the working class, or keep doing the bidding of the billionaires?"
In a post-election column, Chuck Idelson, former communications senior strategist for National Nurses United, made the case that "amid the postmortems and reckoning that will now follow the wreckage of Donald Trump's return to 'absolute' power, as authorized by the Supreme Court, there are... two notes in particular that deserve a deeper dive."
"In Missouri, a state Trump won by 58%, voters also acted to increase the state's minimum wage to $15 an hour and to require employers to provide paid sick leave to workers," he pointed out. "In Nebraska, another red state won by Trump, voters also passed a paid sick leave measure, Initiative 436, by 75%."
In addition to the ballot measures, Idelson highlighted that "in the multitude of exit poll results, one particularly stands out—94% of registered Republicans voted for Trump, the exact same percentage he received in 2020. The heavy campaign focus on pulling away Republican voters from Trump turned out to be a pipe dream. The old cliché 'it's the economy stupid,' triumphed again."
Harris' campaign, he argued, "reflected the direction the Democratic Party establishment has taken, away from working-class issues since the advent of neoliberal policies in the 1970s and carried out by most Democratic Party presidents since."
Historian Harvey J. Kaye, professor emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, took aim at the Democratic Party on social media Wednesday, noting failures to stand up to billionaires, raise the minimum wage, and pass the Richard L. Trumka Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act.
Morris Pearl, chair of the Patriotic Millionaires and a former managing director at BlackRock, said in a Wednesday statement that "a self-avowed authoritarian successfully wielded the economic frustrations of millions to win the most consequential election of our nation's history. The Democratic establishment has only itself to blame."
"Voters demanded a fundamental overhaul of a rigged economic system. When neoliberal Democrats dithered, Donald Trump offered to clear the board, and voters chose the dark unknown rather than the status quo," Pearl added. "The only question remaining is, why are Democrats surprised? This is the entirely predictable result of a multidecade strategy to appease the rich that met no serious resistance."
The Sunrise Movement—a youth-led climate group that worked to reach millions of young voters in swing states to defeat Trump—similarly stressed on social media Wednesday that "last night's results were a call for change. Millions of people are fed up after living through decades of a rigged economy and corrupt political system. They are looking for someone to blame. It's critical the Dem Party takes that seriously."
"For decades, Democrats have prioritized corporations over people. This is the result. Every working American feels the crisis. We can't pay rent. Our government can't pass basic legislation. The WEATHER has turned against us. And Dems look us in the eye and say it's fine," the group continued. "Trump loves corporations even more than Democrats do, but he ran an anti-establishment campaign that gave an answer to people's desire for change."
"We can stop him, and we must," Sunrise said of Trump. "But it's going to take many thousands of people taking to the streets and preparing to strike. And it's going to take mass movements putting out a better vision for our country than Trumpism and proving that we can make it happen."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ron Johnson Is Working Tirelessly to Protect the Super-Rich From Paying Their Fair Share
While purporting to be concerned about income inequality, Johnson advocates for proposals obviously intended to benefit his rich benefactors and, worse yet, himself.
Oct 11, 2024
If you were a rich Wisconsinite striving to get even richer and you had little regard for intellectual honesty or the well-being of your fellow citizens, you would agree with Sen. Ron Johnson’s remarks at last month’s Senate Finance Committee hearing.
Otherwise, you’d find the senator’s views troublesome, to say the least.
I was a witness at that hearing. Johnson asked me to agree with him that having both an income tax and an estate tax is double taxation. As politely as I could, I pointed out that the income tax and the estate tax are two different taxes. The senator’s argument is no different than saying it is double taxation if an average American, after paying tax on her wages, pays federal excise tax at the pump when she purchases gas.
Unless and until Johnson’s face replaces Roosevelt’s at Mt. Rushmore, I’ll go out on a limb and say we should stick with the tax structure Roosevelt advocated.
Johnson undoubtedly knows better. America has had both an estate tax and an income tax for over a century now. They’re two different taxes. One is an income tax; the other is an excise tax on the transfer of substantial wealth. The specific purpose of the estate tax was to limit the size of America’s largest dynastic fortunes, lest we slip into an aristocracy. The lead advocate for the estate tax, President Teddy Roosevelt, recognized the necessity for both taxes: “The really swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size,” Roosevelt observed, “acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means.” Therefore, Roosevelt, a Republican like Johnson, advocated for both a “graduated income tax on big fortunes,” and “a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.”
At the hearing, Johnson was speaking in support of keeping one of the worst loopholes in the tax code, a provision commonly known as stepped-up basis. It allows the untaxed gains on the investment assets of mega-millionaires and billionaires to escape income taxation entirely, as long as they hold those assets until death. Jeff Bezos, for example, would avoid income tax on over $100 billion of gain on his Amazon shares were he to hold those shares until his death. And if ultra-rich Americans ever need cash, they don’t need to sell highly appreciated assets. Instead, they can borrow against the assets. It’s a strategy known as buy-borrow-die.
Johnson’s true goal isn’t really protecting the ultra-rich from double taxation, though. He actually wants to protect them from any taxation. That’s what the Death Tax Repeal Act of 2023, a bill Johnson and 41 other Republican senators have sponsored, would do. If that were to become law, Mr. Bezos, or any other billionaire, could pass his billions to his inheritors free of both estate tax and income tax on all those previously untaxed gains.
Unless and until Johnson’s face replaces Roosevelt’s at Mt. Rushmore, I’ll go out on a limb and say we should stick with the tax structure Roosevelt advocated. And that requires closing the stepped-up basis loophole.
At the hearing, Johnson did not limit his shilling for the ultra-rich to the stepped-up basis issue. While purporting to be concerned about income inequality, Johnson advocated for proposals obviously intended to benefit his rich benefactors and, worse yet, himself. Were it up to him, for example, our tax law would “index out” inflationary gains. Here’s how that would work for Johnson and his fellow real estate moguls: Say Johnson purchased a property for $10 million with $2 million in cash and an $8 million loan, using the property’s rental income to make the loan payments. Now, say inflation ran at 4% for 10 years and Johnson’s property kept pace. Under his plan, he’d be treated as if he paid $14 million for the property. And if he then sold the property for its $14 million value? He’d have no income tax to pay, but after paying off the loan, he’d have a $4 million profit. Yes, $800,000 of that profit would be attributable to inflation, but the other $3.2 million would be real profit, and it would escape tax entirely if Johnson has his way.
Johnson’s efforts to “address inequality”—yes, he really presented it this way at the hearing—aren’t limited to opposing stepped-up basis reform and advocating for indexing for inflation. He also insists that he and his rich patrons not be taxed on their massive investment gains until they sell assets so they have the “wherewithal to pay.” That would allow the country’s ultra-rich to continue to benefit from the tax-free compounding of their investment gains using the buy-borrow-die strategy. When you do the math, even when the ultra-rich sell long-held investments before they die and pay tax on their gains, the effective annual rate of tax on the growth in their wealth can be less than 5%. With Johnson’s plan to “index out” inflation added to his staunch support of buy-borrow die, that effective rate would be even lower.
There’s no need to guess about whether Johnson believes he’s advocating for good tax policy or is simply carrying water for his billionaire backers (and himself). The record is clear. In 2017, Johnson pushed hard for the so-called “pass-through deduction,” which allows owners of limited liability companies and subchapter S corporations to pay a 20% lower rate of tax on their income. He even threatened to withhold his vote for former President Donald Trump’s tax package unless the pass-through deduction was increased. In 2018, according to reporting by ProPublica, the pass-through deduction generated tax deductions of over $117 million for Dick and Liz Uihlein, the owners of Uline, and over $97 million for Diane Hendricks, the owner of ABC Supply Co. In 2022, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Hendricks and the Uihleins contributed at least $22.5 million to Wisconsin Truth PAC, a Johnson-supporting super PAC which spent $24 million on ads attacking Johnson’s 2022 opponent, Mandela Barnes.
Those massive contributions were entirely rational, in a depressing way that reeks of corruption. In 2018 alone, Hendricks and the Uihleins saved just under $80 million in tax as a result of Johnson’s handiwork. His efforts to continue the pass-through deduction past its scheduled 2025 expiration date could net them about $1 billion over the next decade. That $22.5 million they spent on Johson’s 2022 senate campaign may be categorized as a campaign contribution. But when $22.5 million has the potential to enrich you to the tune of $1 billion, it smells a lot more like an investment. And a highly profitable one; the kind only billionaires experience.
With Washington filled with politicians like Ron Johnson, we need more patriotic millionaires. A lot more. To paraphrase our Vice Chair, Stephen Prince, we need more wealthy Americans to step up and say that while they like being rich, they recognize that our tax system has been rigged in their favor for far too long. And we need more politicians fighting to unrig our tax system, not rig it further. We’ll never change the mindset of Ron Johnson and his ilk. The only way to fix this mess is to elect politicians who will outvote them.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular