Biden infrastructure/tax increase megathread

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

White Straight Old Men deliver Populist Reforms that will MAGA!  💪

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

White Straight Old Men deliver Populist Reforms that will MAGA!  💪

This but unironically. Take your sarcasm & go cry harder, Trumpist!

Eh? I was deadly serious. I've always been for Trump's Populist Deal, and criticized Pelosi for killing Trump Populist Deal 2.0. Why wouldn't I like Biden's? The same with Afghanistan - if Biden really make it, I'll be first to applaud.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/schwartzbCNBC/status/1376618726620065794

Schumer himself has been pushing to bring back the deduction. Schumer and his fellow Democratic New York senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, introduced legislation in January that would eliminate the SALT cap.

“Sen. Schumer has long been a supporter of the SALT deduction and vehemently opposed the punitive Trump tax bill that severely undermined it. He is looking for the best way to repeal the SALT deduction cap,” a Schumer spokesperson said.

The so-called SALT deduction was capped at $10,000 by former President Donald Trump’s tax reform bill, which became law in late 2017. Taxpayers, particularly wealthy people, in New York and other high-tax states, including New Jersey and California, saw the biggest benefits when there was no cap. SALT deductions account for taxes on the state and local levels, including property and income tax.

The so-called SALT deduction was capped at $10,000 by former President Donald Trump’s tax reform bill, which became law in late 2017. Taxpayers, particularly wealthy people, in New York and other high-tax states, including New Jersey and California, saw the biggest benefits when there was no cap. SALT deductions account for taxes on the state and local levels, including property and income tax.

The cap, according to the Tax Foundation, “broadened the tax base by limiting the amount individuals could deduct in state and local taxes to $10,000. For high-income taxpayers, this cap increased federal taxable income.”

I hope, Biden will refuse.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1377357708232257537

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1377748114916917252
 

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1377748114916917252
 

Pelosi just said yesterday that she hopes to do it, so unless Biden's threatening to veto (which is, y'know, lol), this doesn't actually stop Congress from just adding the proposal in on their own.

I wish Pelosi was fighting as hard to keep schools open (benefits the "backbone" of D) rather than against SALT cap (benefits the top 1%, aka Donors of the Pelosi).

https://itep.org/salt-cap-repeal-has-no-place-in-covid-19-legislation-national-and-state-by-state-data/

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/jonathanvswan/status/1377748114916917252
 

Pelosi just said yesterday that she hopes to do it, so unless Biden's threatening to veto (which is, y'know, lol), this doesn't actually stop Congress from just adding the proposal in on their own.

I wish Pelosi was fighting as hard to keep schools open (benefits the "backbone" of D) rather than against SALT cap (benefits the top 1%, aka Donors of the Pelosi).

https://itep.org/salt-cap-repeal-has-no-place-in-covid-19-legislation-national-and-state-by-state-data/

https://i.imgflip.com/546p3t.jpg

$170B worth of facts don't care about your feelings.

Unfortunately,it seems, you have problem with basic reasoning.

As it seems right now, most (D) public schools won't open until fall. Despite science saying you could have done it safe. Because Pelosi & Dems caved for Teach Unions or whatever.

In Florida of DeSantis the schools have been open since Aug (8 months ago!!). The lack of political will of Democratic counter-parts is the reason why D hasn't followed him.

https://twitter.com/VPrasadMDMPH/status/1372250876199378944


To get back to topic, here you have a map!
https://twitter.com/SethHanlon/status/1377694126674694144

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I mean the votes are in the House to kill it, if it isn't included, maybe they agree to raise the cap to a level where only the truly wealthy are affected, like say $70k or so.

Man, the following caclulations are probably somewhat misleading, but it is what it is. $4. Ok, may be $400.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/repealing-salt-caps-would-cost-another-500-billion

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

1.5% of NJ population are $ Millioners vs 0.5% on average in US. Obviously, SALT cap would hit you most.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Biden's Infrastructure plan will cost ~$2.2T over 10 years, or ~$220B a year (DoD budget is by the way ~$700B a year).

Repeal of the SALT cap would cost about ~$80B a year (if I understand correctly). How does Pelosi want to pay for that? Cut Biden's plan? Add to deficit?


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-01/pelosi-backs-move-to-lift-salt-cap-in-biden-s-economic-program

However, repealing the cap would also supply a big tax break to high-income households. Suspending the limitation for one year would cost the government about $88.7 billion, with more than half of the benefits flowing to those earning more $1 million a year, according to the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Biden's Infrastructure plan will cost ~$2.2T over 10 years, or ~$220B a year (DoD budget is by the way ~$700B a year).

Repeal of the SALT cap would cost about ~$80B a year (if I understand correctly). How does Pelosi want to pay for that? Cut Biden's plan? Add to deficit?

However, repealing the cap would also supply a big tax break to high-income households. Suspending the limitation for one year would cost the government about $88.7 billion, with more than half of the benefits flowing to those earning more $1 million a year, according to the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

Raising the corporate tax rate, cracking down on companies offshoring profits, & eliminating certain tax breaks for some industries. You damn well already knew that, so don't be disingenuous (at best) or a liar (at worst), & by the way: not only do you have no leg of credibility to stand on when it comes to caring about adding to the deficit after the last 4 years, but with the aforementioned tax increases incorporated elsewhere, the infrastructure package would not only pay for itself in 15 years, but would thereafter reduce the deficit, as opposed to adding to it. So, TL;DR - get the f**k off what's either your disingenuous or outright lying (& not to mention, easily, demonstrably & provably wrong) high horse.

See? Democrats closed the schools, and some already are worse at reading (kids) and have anxiety problems (kids and parents).

Spoiler alert! Click Show to show the content.

Show

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/education/when-covid-19-closed-schools-black-hispanic-poor-kids-took-n1249352
When Covid-19 closed schools, Black, Hispanic and poor kids took biggest hit in math, reading

https://blogs.worldbank.org/education/it-time-return-learning

But closing down schools goes beyond losing core skills – there is mounting evidence of its effects on anxiety, depression, and considerable harm to children’s mental health and well-being. School closures have also been associated with an increase in suicide rates among children and adolescents. In addition, school closures reduce female labor participation and increase the gender wage gap. 

Biden proposed ~$2.2T plan and how one will pay for that. Pelosi want to repeal the SALT cap, which would additional ~$80B a year.

My first post had a mistake though. Biden propose to pay for it over 15 years, not 10. So it will cost ~140B a year, not 220B.

That means that Pelosi wants to increase the cost of Biden's Plan by almost 60% (~$80B a year.). How does she want to pay for that?

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.axios.com/biden-salt-tax-deduction-a8213dd1-7609-4fe8-bc5a-8ee0f9848187.html

Senior Biden officials have soured on SALT deductions for two main reasons: It would undercut their working-class message and would cost them a fortune.

Reinstating SALT would reduce revenues by an estimated $70 billion to $80 billion a year, roughly half the annual amount that Biden has proposed to raise by hiking corporate rates.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters on Thursday that eliminating SALT "is not a revenue raiser ... it would cost more money," but if Democrats "want to propose a way to pay for it, and they want to put that forward, we are happy to hear their ideas.”

Psaki wonders, too, how Dems are gonna pay for that.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

— SIREN … CBS’ @stevenportnoy: “In a radio interview with @HoppyKercheval, Sen. Manchin signals there are circumstances under which he won’t vote to get onto the infrastructure bill. ‘As the bill exists today, it needs to be changed,’ Manchin says. … Manchin says more revenue needs to be collected from high income earners, but he says the corporate tax rate should be at 25%. He says he would not support raising the corp tax to 28%.”

I hope, he won't cave in easily.

28% to 25% would cost ~$30B a year. Both small and large companies pay it.
Repeal of the SALT cap would cost ~$80B a year. 99% of the Rich pay it.

I think, that according to the quote above Manchin +6 want a higher & more progressive income tax, instead of rising corp tax (~flat one).

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Good. I never did get why so many dems are so obsessed with restoring it.

It is a clear benefit for the wealthy.

Trump Derangement Syndrome. Same with schools.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-softens-tax-proposal-aimed-at-profitable-companies-that-pay-little-11617809422
Biden Softens Tax Plan Aimed at Profitable Companies That Pay Little
Treasury Department plan sets $2 billion threshold for minimum tax, up from $100 million level pitched during campaign

President Biden’s proposed 15% minimum tax on profitable corporations would affect far fewer companies than the version he campaigned on, according to details the Treasury Department released Wednesday.

The tax—aimed at companies that report large profits to investors but low tax payments—would apply only to companies with income exceeding $2 billion, up from the $100 million threshold used during the campaign. The Biden plan would now also let companies subject to the tax get the benefit for tax credits for research, renewable energy and low-income housing—in a recognition that the campaign-trail version could have undercut the president’s preference to encourage companies to invest in those areas.

The result is that just 180 companies would even meet the income threshold and just 45 would pay the tax, according to administration estimates that assume the rest of the administration’s plan gets implemented. Nearly 1,100 U.S.-listed companies would meet the $100 million threshold, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. Many of them would still face sharply higher tax bills from the rest of the Biden agenda, which raises rates on domestic and foreign income.

The 15% minimum tax “is a targeted approach to ensure that the most aggressive tax avoiders are forced to bear meaningful tax liabilities,” the Treasury Department said in a new report.

Good!

The administration’s overall plan includes raising the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%, changing several key features of the 2017 tax law and rallying the world for minimum tax rates on corporate income. The Biden administration’s weaker version of the 15% minimum tax on financial-statement income suggests that this particular idea—a frequent applause line in political speeches but fraught with technical difficulties—is taking a back seat as policy is being written.

Meh.

The administration also wants to impose a 21% minimum tax on U.S. companies’ foreign income and get other countries to do the same. To prod other nations to adopt such taxes, the new plan includes tough limits on deductions for foreign-headquartered companies from countries that don’t adopt them.

Finance ministers from the Group of 20 leading economies, meeting virtually on Wednesday, said they hope to agree on a minimum tax rate for corporate profits by the middle of this year as part of a wider overhaul of the way international businesses are taxed.

That's the best part!

The report https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/MadeInAmericaTaxPlan_Report.pdf

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I know you people hate him, rightfully so, but I will forever be thankful to Trump for ending the love for Reaganomics and minimum government enthusiasts neverending race to how much nonexistent government should be. I regard him in a significantly higher position than Bush.

From Democrats in the Obama era competing on who could be the most right-wing for the sake of compromise 10 years ago to Trump, a Republican president, pushing all these people way to the left after saying stuff like $600 checks being insufficient lmao

I approve the Keynesian shift! But it needs to be even more. So far Biden has been above average of what I expected. Already showing signs he will be significantly better than Obama at least. Naturally it isn’t something that Biden always wanted, the current context with COVID, political polarization, high economic anxiety and all that is something that pushes people to those positions, kinda like the context of post-1929 and pre-WW2 pushed FDR to be the leader he was.

The most ironical part about Trump is that he'd likely to be even more Economically Populist, if not Dems & "free" media started this ridiculous Russia Hoax, basically making Trump a hostage of Cocaine Mitch. Boy, I wanted to see Trump, the Unchained so badly. SAD!

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Every NY House Dem except AOC & Rice is drawing a hard line in the sand on repealing the SALT cap.

Credit where credit is due. AOC is correct here. Removing the SALT cap would be a gift to the upper-middle class.

Owning MAGA by *checks the notes* close the public schools for poors and reduce the tax for top 1% rich

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I don't necessarily support eliminating the cap, but I would support raising it to affect only the highest of earners.

Isn't already? Take a look at the graph.

I mean the votes are in the House to kill it, if it isn't included, maybe they agree to raise the cap to a level where only the truly wealthy are affected, like say $70k or so.

Man, the following caclulations are probably somewhat misleading, but it is what it is. $4. Ok, may be $400.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/repealing-salt-caps-would-cost-another-500-billion

Man, Pelosi is such a great messenger. Otherwise, how could she make "progressives" to defend this? She could easily make people to re-open the schools that would greatly benefit poor kids. Well, donors are more important, I guess.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I don't necessarily support eliminating the cap, but I would support raising it to affect only the highest of earners.

Isn't already? Take a look at the graph.

I mean the votes are in the House to kill it, if it isn't included, maybe they agree to raise the cap to a level where only the truly wealthy are affected, like say $70k or so.

Man, the following caclulations are probably somewhat misleading, but it is what it is. $4. Ok, may be $400.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/repealing-salt-caps-would-cost-another-500-billion

Man, Pelosi is such a great messenger. Otherwise, how could she make "progressives" to defend this? She could easily make people to re-open the schools that would greatly benefit poor kids. Well, donors are more important, I guess.

I'm very much aware of what eliminating the SALT cap would do. It makes blue states more attractive to higher earners. These are people that can deduct state and local taxes from federal taxes. This makes it easier for those states to maintain higher tax rates and pay for more generous social welfare programs. What happens with the SALT cap? Many high earners move out of California and NY and move to Texas and Florida. The latter are both states that have refused to expand their Medicaid programs even though the federal government pays for 90% of the tab (and under a new program, they would get even more funds for traditional Medicaid).

Didn't you just say that you wanted to make this tax to "affect only the highest of earners". Because it literally what Trump did, he capped it in such way it affects basically only the highest of earners. At least according to these graph. Those with earnings under $500k won't get much. Those under $100k won't get nothing at all.

Or, do you want to repeal it to make blue states more attractive to the highest of earners. Fair enough. But you can't have both.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

I don't necessarily support eliminating the cap, but I would support raising it to affect only the highest of earners.

Isn't already? Take a look at the graph.

I mean the votes are in the House to kill it, if it isn't included, maybe they agree to raise the cap to a level where only the truly wealthy are affected, like say $70k or so.

Man, the following caclulations are probably somewhat misleading, but it is what it is. $4. Ok, may be $400.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/repealing-salt-caps-would-cost-another-500-billion

Man, Pelosi is such a great messenger. Otherwise, how could she make "progressives" to defend this? She could easily make people to re-open the schools that would greatly benefit poor kids. Well, donors are more important, I guess.

I'm very much aware of what eliminating the SALT cap would do. It makes blue states more attractive to higher earners. These are people that can deduct state and local taxes from federal taxes. This makes it easier for those states to maintain higher tax rates and pay for more generous social welfare programs. What happens with the SALT cap? Many high earners move out of California and NY and move to Texas and Florida. The latter are both states that have refused to expand their Medicaid programs even though the federal government pays for 90% of the tab (and under a new program, they would get even more funds for traditional Medicaid).

Didn't you just say that you wanted to make this tax to "affect only the highest of earners". Because it literally what Trump did, he capped it in such way it affects basically only the highest of earners. At least according to these graph. Those with earnings under $500k won't get much. Those under $100k won't get nothing at all.

Or, do you want to repeal it to make blue states more attractive to the highest of earners. Fair enough. But you can't have both.

Actually, you can.  Just repeal the SALT cap and increase the highest tax bracket rates by 1 or 2 percent.

Well, yeah. That's why Biden's administration (and me) wants to know how Pelosi are going to pay for that. I don't think it would be controversial if they are going to pay for the repeal by increasing taxes for top x%. My understanding though is that it is not the case.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=3695

INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN

A plurality of Americans (44 - 38 percent) support President Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure plan, while 19 percent did not offer an opinion.

However, support grows for the infrastructure plan if it is funded by raising taxes on corporations, as Biden has proposed. In that scenario, a majority support the infrastructure plan 53 - 39 percent, with 9 percent not offering an opinion.

"The president's infrastructure bill, a $2 trillion national makeover, gets a lukewarm go ahead from Americans, but a warmer reception when the suggestion that big corporations, not taxpayers, should be forced to front the funding," added Malloy.

TAXES & SPENDING

Over 6 in 10 Americans (62 percent) support raising taxes on corporations, while 31 percent oppose it. A similar number support raising taxes on people earning more than $400,000 a year, 64 - 31 percent.

President Biden has said he will not raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 a year. When it comes to believing Biden, 48 percent of Americans say he will raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 a year, while 44 percent say he will not.

When it comes to general views on spending, 48 percent say the Biden administration wants to spend too much money, 37 percent say it wants to spend the right amount, and 8 percent say it wants to spend too little.

People wants infrastructure plan payed by taxing the Rich! (a repeal of the SALT cap would do the opposite FWIW).

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Tax the Rich! Keep the cap! Real America has spoken.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/npr-pbs-newshour-marist-poll-biden-approval-rating-and-infrastructure/

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1382800107846897668

Progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said Biden’s infrastructure-and-spending plan shouldn’t be held hostage to demands to repeal the cap on deductions for state and local taxes that are being made by some of her fellow New Yorkers and other representatives from high-tax states.

She called abolishing the $10,000 limit on SALT deductions “a giveaway to the rich.” The New York representative said that while there could be “a conversation” about adjusting the cap to help taxpayers who are deeply affected -- mostly in Democratic-run states like New York, New Jersey, California and Illinois -- a full repeal is going too far.

“I don’t think that we should be holding the infrastructure package captive for a 100% full repeal of SALT,” she said. “We can have a conversation on the policy, but it’s a bit of an extreme position, to be frank.”

Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks came shortly after a group of Democratic and Republican House members announced they were forming a caucus to push to lift the limit and threatening to vote against Biden’s plan to use the tax code to fund his proposal unless the repeal is included. That caucus numbered 32 by late Thursday afternoon. -- Billy House

Senator Chris Coons, a key ally of President Joe Biden, said Thursday he’s talking with Republican senators about breaking up the president’s infrastructure-led economic package into two bills, and passing a bipartisan bill first.

“That could end up being an $800 billion to $1 trillion bipartisan bill,” the Delaware Democrat said. Coons said that would include such items as roads, bridges, airports, water projects and rural broadband that have support from both sides of the aisle. “If there is a pathway towards a robust infrastructure package with Republicans, I will support and urge that the Biden administration embrace splitting this into two bills.”

He suggested Democrats should then pass a larger, follow-on package with Biden’s many other priorities that aren’t backed by the GOP, via a reconciliation package, which would only need a simple majority of votes in the Senate.

Coons said he spoke Wednesday with West Virginia Republican Shelley Moore Capito, who floated a $600 billion to $800 billion bipartisan package shorn of many of Biden’s spending and tax proposals that Republicans either oppose or don’t think should be included in an infrastructure bill.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/WSJPolitics/status/1384230884723683338
Smaller Corporate Tax Increase Floated at White House Infrastructure Meeting
President meets with lawmakers of both parties about potential changes to $2.3 trillion proposal

WASHINGTON—President Biden and a bipartisan group of lawmakers discussed alternative ways to pay for infrastructure spending, including a smaller increase in the corporate tax rate, as Republicans and Democrats aired possible changes to the size and scope of the package.

The White House has proposed raising the corporate tax rate to 28% from 21%, along with increasing taxes on U.S. companies’ foreign earnings, to cover the cost of Mr. Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure proposal. At the meeting Monday, lawmakers and Mr. Biden discussed a more modest tax increase, according to multiple attendees.

Rep. Charlie Crist (D., Fla.) said lawmakers discussed the potential for some “compromise wiggle room” on raising the corporate rate to help pay for the plan. “You could see a 2 or 3% increase—maybe not all the way to 28 but 25,” he said of the percentage rate.

Mr. Biden has held a series of meetings with lawmakers of both parties about his proposal, which offers funding for improving transportation, expanding access to broadband, rebuilding schools and funding elder care, among other priorities. The White House has indicated Mr. Biden is open to breaking his proposal into smaller parts and is considering different ways to pay for it, amid a swirl of proposals from lawmakers of both parties.

Republicans have indicated that they would want to focus on spending money on building roads and bridges, along with expanding access to broadband, while excluding other parts of Mr. Biden’s plan, such as providing $400 billion for caring for elderly and disabled Americans. Lawmakers at the White House Monday discussed whether certain provisions of Mr. Biden’s proposal should be considered infrastructure, with Republicans also moving to dissuade Mr. Biden from raising the corporate tax rate and instead focus on user fees.

The GOP lawmakers were “more in favor of user fees so that whoever was benefiting from that particular infrastructure project would be paying for it in the long run,” said Rep. Carlos Giménez (R., Fla.). Mr. Giménez said Mr. Biden indicated that he hoped to see a counteroffer from Republicans by mid-May.

Hopefully, it means the repeal of the cap is DOA.


https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/1384296023875493893

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1385633568903270404
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1386360856758292486

King!