Saturday, November 2, 2024

GOP tax bill gets modest changes

November 7, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off

House Republicans on Monday again rejected President Trump’s push to use their tax bill to repeal a critical piece of the Affordable Care Act, instead making only modest changes to their legislation as they attempt to move it closer to a vote on the House floor.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Tex.) offered an amendment that would tweak the way the bill would tax the earnings of investment managers, cross-border transactions by multi­national corporations and the endowments of private universities.

The amendment did not make other, more costly changes to business taxation or repeal the Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate, which requires most Americans to obtain some form of health insurance.

Brady said at a day-long Ways and Means markup session Monday that “we are not including various health-tax related measures as part of our tax reform efforts,” though he did not specifically rule out repealing the ACA’s individual mandate.

“We will move to these important policies separately and immediately after conclusion of our tax reform efforts,” Brady said, referring to bipartisan efforts to repeal ACA taxes on medical devices, over-the-counter drugs and health insurance premiums.

Trump had personally pushed Brady to include the mandate repeal, a change nonpartisan analysts say would save the government more than $400 billion over a decade but would also leave 15 million more Americans without health insurance. The plan would give Republicans more flexibility in crafting their bill, but it would complicate the bill’s already difficult path through the Senate, where internal Republican divisions and unanimous Democratic opposition have thwarted multiple efforts at repealing the heath-care law.

Brady’s changes, which were adopted on a party-line committee vote late Monday, came as Republicans battled new evidence that their tax plan, which they are promoting as a middle-class tax cut, will instead deliver uneven benefits to American workers while delivering outsize benefits to corporations and the wealthiest tier of individuals.

Thomas A. Barthold, chief of staff of the nonpartisan congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, testified Monday that up to 38 million Americans with annual incomes between $20,000 and $40,000 would, on average, see a tax increase starting in 2023 under the House GOP plan.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the legislative centerpiece of President Trump’s economic agenda, aims to deliver a $1.5 trillion tax cut to stimulate economic growth, and Republicans have promised an immediate $1,100 tax cut for a family of four making $59,000. The cliff in 2023, they argue, is due to the planned expiration of a tax credit that Congress will most likely act to extend. But several Democrats on the panel quizzed Barthold, who testified on his office’s fiscal analysis of the plan, on the apparent temporary nature of the bill’s benefits for some middle-class families.

Barthold also testified that the bill, if passed, would have the immediate impact of greatly reducing the number of taxpayers who itemize their deductions — from the current rate of 29 percent to a projected 6 percent in 2018.

That reflects the GOP plan’s substantial increase in the standard deduction, which could mean simpler filing for tens of millions of taxpayers — a Republican priority. But the drastic reduction in itemization could carry major implications for the housing and nonprofit sectors, which have respectively come to rely on tax deductions to encourage taxpayers to buy homes and donate to charity.

The debate over the middle-class benefits of the bill came as House Republican tax writers negotiated behind the scenes to keep the legislation on track.

The suite of changes Brady unveiled Monday included a change to the way the federal tax code handles “carried interest,” a provision allowing investors to pay tax on some income at the lower capital-gains rate rather than the standard rate for earned income. Among those who take frequent advantage of the provision are managers of hedge funds and private equity firms. Supporters say the provision is an incentive for better performance by investment managers, but critics say it’s a loophole for the super-rich.

The change requires any asset to be held for three years before a taxpayer could claim the carried-interest provision. The change, Brady said in a Monday morning CNBC interview, would “make sure it really is focused on those long-term, traditional real estate partnerships” rather than hedge funds. But it would stop well short of the complete repeal long advocated by Democrats who argue that carried interest allows investors to recast ordinary income earned for services rendered as investment income subject to a lower rate.

The proposed change comes as Democrats criticize the bill as a giveaway to the wealthy — a charge Republicans deny — and several nonpartisan analyses have suggested the very wealthy would enjoy an outsize share of the measure’s proposed $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over a decade.

Brady rebutted recent studies, including from the Joint Committee on Taxation, that suggest that the GOP tax bill is heavily tilted in favor of businesses and the wealthy. According to the JCT’s analysis, more than two-thirds of the $1.5 trillion tax cut would go to businesses and wealthy families who would avoid the estate tax.

“We want a dramatically more pro-growth tax code where our companies, whether they are local or global, can compete and win anywhere in the world, including here at home,” Brady said, adding that the rewrite was “about flattering the tax code, making it understandable and fair.”

The amendment unveiled Monday also appeared to address concerns from multinational firms who opposed a new 20 percent tax on certain transactions between corporate affiliates meant to discourage those firms from shifting profits to lower-taxed countries. It also reduced the reach of a new 1.4 percent tax on large university endowments, applying it only to institutions with assets of $250,000 per enrolled student or more, vs. the $100,000 threshold in the initial bill. Also protected is the current $5,000 per year exclusion for employer-provided dependent-care savings accounts.

Brady introduced the bill last week as part of his party’s effort to make the biggest changes to the U.S. tax code since the Reagan administration. The Ways and Means markup session could stretch into Thursday as committee Republicans and Democrats propose, debate and vote on amendments to the measure. Republican leaders hope to pass their bill through the House by Thanksgiving.

The debate turned heated at times Monday, with several Democrats raising their voices to accuse Republicans of rushing the process and misrepresenting the effects of the bill.

“Why are you doing this?” Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) shouted to Brady at one point. “You are desperately looking for something to pass.”

Other changes that Republican tax writers discussed Sunday in a closed-door meeting were not included — such as an increase in the bill’s proposed $500,000 limit on the mortgage interest deduction or the preservation of existing tax incentives for adoptive families.

Rep. Diane Black (R-Tenn.), a Ways and Means member who is pushing to maintain the adoption incentives, said discussions were continuing. “We want to make sure that it really, truly takes care of those children that are most in need,” she said.

GOP lawmakers also did not change the treatment of “pass-through” businesses — firms where earnings are passed to its owners to be taxed as individual income. Lawmakers are exploring how to expand eligibility for a new 25 percent rate on that income, in part to address the concerns of the National Federation of Independent Business, a lobbying group. But any expansion could explode the cost of a provision already estimated to cost roughly $450 billion over the coming decade.

The NFIB said last week it would oppose the initial version of the bill because it “leaves too many small businesses behind” by leaving them ineligible for the lower rate. “We believe that tax reform should provide substantial relief to all small businesses, so they can reinvest their money, grow, and create jobs,” the group said.

And serious discussion remains about repealing the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, which could give the tax writers room to make these or other costly changes without exceeding a $1.5 trillion limit on the total cost of the bill over the coming decade. Repealing the mandate would mean fewer Americans would purchase insurance using federal subsidies, leading to less government spending.

Although the Congressional Budget Office estimated last year that a repeal would have a $416 billion positive deficit impact, updates to the nonpartisan scorekeeper’s model have significantly reduced that figure, according to GOP officials. One of the officials said Monday that the new analysis will not be available until later in the week.

The Senate Finance Committee is expected to unveil its version of a tax bill Thursday once the House committee’s proceedings end, according to multiple aides familiar with the plans, setting up its own markup next week.

Damian Paletta contributed to this report.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Carter Page testimony highlights: Trump aide dismisses Russian interference

November 7, 2017 by  
Filed under Choosing Lingerie

Comments Off


Carter Page is pictured. | AP Photo

Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, speaks with reporters following a day of questions from the House Intelligence Committee, on Nov. 2. | J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo

Carter Page, who advised President Donald Trump’s campaign on foreign policy, jousted with House Intelligence Committee members for nearly seven hours last week as lawmakers grilled him about his contacts with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign.

But unlike other witnesses in the committee’s investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, Page struck a deal to release his interview transcript publicly, and the committee posted it — with classified details redacted — on Monday evening.

Story Continued Below

The longtime energy consultant has drawn scrutiny for a July 2016 trip to Russia. He was also named in a disputed dossier, compiled by a former British intelligence agent, Christopher Steele, that purported to detail connections between Trump and the Kremlin. Page has dismissed the “dodgy dossier” repeatedly, but he’s also offered erratic and sometimes evasive answers about his own Russia connections and his role in the campaign.

Here are the highlights of his marathon interview, which he conducted without a lawyer guiding his responses:

Page asked campaign officials to OK trip to Moscow: During Page’s testimony, he revealed that he sent an email to several campaign officials in advance of his trip to Moscow, including then-campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, Trump adviser Hope Hicks (now the White House communications director) and Trump campaign policy aide J.D. Gordon. Page told lawmakers that Lewandowski said he could go, so long as he went outside of his capacity as a Trump campaign adviser.

Conveying support from deputy Russian prime minister: Page told the committee that after his trip, he relayed to the campaign that in a “private conversation” with Russia’s deputy prime minister, Arkady Dvorkovich, that Dvorkovich had “expressed strong support for Mr. Trump and a desire to work together toward devising better solutions in response to the vast range of current international problems.” Page said the exchange was just “a general sentiment of, you know, hope for the future. That’s all he expressed in that brief hello.”

Page also acknowledged sending a separate email to campaign advisers, including Gordon, indicating he planned to “send you guys a readout soon regarding some incredible insights and outreach I’ve received from a few Russian legislators and senior members of the Presidential administration here.”

Meeting with the FBI: Page confirmed that he met with the FBI several times in its ongoing investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. He said agents generally asked him questions about the events described in the Steele dossier, a document that Trump himself has dismissed as fake and that has come under renewed scrutiny because it was commissioned by an opposition research firm on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer. Page said he hadn’t been informed by special counsel Robert Mueller that he should expect to be indicted in the probe.

How Page got to the Trump campaign: Page told the House Intelligence Committee that he volunteered himself to become part of the Trump campaign and that the man who first connected him was New York State GOP Chairman Ed Cox. Page described his office building as located next to Trump Tower, and said he had “always had an admiration for President Trump.” So a few months after the mogul launched his campaign in 2015, Page reached out to Cox and asked him for help connecting with the Trump camp. Page said Cox then introduced him to Trump’s campaign manager, Lewandowski.

Page said that his initial meeting with Lewandowski was in January 2016 and that Lewandowski was multitasking and only partially focused on their interactions. He added that he signed a nondisclosure agreement when he joined the campaign, at the request of campaign adviser Sam Clovis.

Contact with Bannon: Page said he recalled receiving text messages from Steve Bannon — soon to be a senior adviser to the Trump White House — in January 2017 advising him against appearing on MSNBC. “He just said that’s probably not a good idea,” Page recalled under questioning from Schiff.

Page said Bannon ultimately called him and warned him against making his TV appearance, which he said was slated not long after the Steele dossier was publicly posted. Page said the conversation came around the same time he had received a letter from Jones Day, the law firm that represented the Trump campaign, imploring him not to “give the wrong impression that you’re part of the administration or the Trump campaign.”

“And my response to that was, of course I’m not,” Page added. He said he ultimately agreed not to do the interview.

Playing down the influence of Russia-linked ads: Last week, the House Intelligence Committee questioned lawyers for Facebook, Twitter and Google about thousands of paid, Russia-linked ads on the companies’ platforms and their influence during the campaign. Page, in his opening statement, characterized these as “private sector companies … passively allowing a few hundred thousand dollars of social media advertisements that virtually no one paid attention to.”

Opening statement sidesteps Russian interference: In his opening remarks to the committee, Page did not acknowledge the consensus of the U.S. intelligence community that Russian players had interfered in the election. Instead, he focused on what he said were “epic fictitious stories” perpetrated by “opposition political research” that “maliciously attacked me and the Trump campaign” in the final months before Election Day. Though Trump won the election, Page in his opening statement said: “I hope that the lessons from the extraordinary damage suffered by the Trump campaign and myself may help America avoid future domestic attacks on our fundamental democratic principles and constitutional foundations.”

Fifth Amendment rights: Under questioning from the committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff of California, Page acknowledged that he had invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to avoid turning over relevant documents to the committee. But Page, without a lawyer, repeatedly indicated he had no incriminating documents in his possession, prompting Schiff to question why his Fifth Amendment rights would be relevant. Page, at various moments, offered to turn over certain emails to the committee that he alleged would undermine the contention that collusion with Russia had occurred. But he said he refused to comply with the committee’s subpoena for documents in part because of a distrust in law enforcement that he said was stoked during the 2016 campaign.

GOP platform: Page told the committee that he recalled emailing with members of the Trump campaign and other advisers about a last-minute change to the GOP platform at least year’s Republican National Convention that softened some language regarding the party’s support for Ukraine. Page had emailed other campaign advisers, including Gordon, on July 14 to say “excellent work” on the Ukraine amendment.

What the committee wanted to know: House Intelligence Committee members rarely reveal the inner workings of their closed-door interviews, so the decision to provide a transcript — a condition that Page demanded — provided a rare glimpse into their lines of inquiry in this sensitive investigation. Here’s a rough list of their avenues of inquiry:

— Details about Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow to deliver a speech to the New Economic School, and the Russian officials he interacted while he was there.

— Page’s relationship with senior Trump campaign officials and whether he had colluded, coordinated or conspired with Russians to influence the election in any way.

— His trip to Budapest after the Republican National Convention.

— Page’s communications with Trump campaign officials about a change in the GOP platform regarding Ukraine.

— His decision to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights to avoid turning over documents.

— His interactions with the FBI and special counsel’s office.

— Page’s distrust in the intelligence community’s belief that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

— His interactions with fellow campaign adviser George Papadopoulos.

— How Page came to advise the Trump campaign.

— Page’s energy industry business relationships.

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS