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
Flanked by other House Democrats, House Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol January 4, 2019 in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
"Pelosi's Terrible Idea": Critics Denounce Proposal to Give Wealthy a Tax Cut in Next Stimulus Package
"This is almost unbelieveable."
Mar 31, 2020
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is reportedly set to propose rolling back a cap on tax deductions, which would benefit high-earning Americans, as part of the next step of an economic stimulus package that has already poured trillions into the U.S. economy--much of it going to the richest individuals and corporations in the country.
"This is almost unbelievable," HuffPost senior reporter Emily Peck tweeted in response to the news. "Of all the things to do to help people; she wants to... give upper middle class people a tax break."
The California Democrat's plan to retroactively undo the state and local tax (SALT) deduction limits would be a major tax break for households earning over $100,000, according to critics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers.
"Retroactive tax deductions are always a bad idea--a giveaway that gets you nothing--and this one goes almost entirely to household on at least $100,000 a year," said Wolfers of the plan.
As the New York Times reported, there is skepticism over the Pelosi proposal:
The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated last year that a full repeal of the SALT limit for 2019 alone would reduce federal revenues by about $77 billion. Americans earning $1 million a year or more would collectively reap $40 billion of those benefits. Most of the rest would go to households earning $200,000 or more.
[...]
Many liberal economic policy analysts also oppose lifting the SALT cap, calling it regressive tax policy. Seth Hanlon, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, said the same logic was also a reason not to lift the limit in the next economic rescue bill. That is particularly true because consumption data show that low- and middle-income Americans are more likely than higher earners to spend benefits from the government immediately and stimulate economic activity.
Pelosi's spokesman Henry Connelly claimed in a statement for the Times that the speaker's plan would be means-tested and "tailored to focus on middle-class earners and include limitations on the higher end."
Nonetheless, rolling back the deductions would benefit millionaires and billionaires more than those making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, as activist James Medlock showed on Twitter.
In a statement, Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl dismissed Pelosi's plan as "a huge mistake."
"The last people who need help right now are the well-off taxpayers who would be affected by this change," said Pearl. "Congress should instead be prioritizing low-income and middle-class workers most directly hurt by the economic effects of the coronavirus."
Pearl, former managing director of investment firm Blackrock, added that people in his economic bracket were most likely to weather the storm of the pandemic without much economic pain.
"If Democrats want to be the party of working people, prioritizing tax cuts for wealthy taxpayers, even in blue states, is not the right thing to do," said Pearl. "We already have too many politicians in Washington whose answer to every problem is to cut taxes for the rich."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is reportedly set to propose rolling back a cap on tax deductions, which would benefit high-earning Americans, as part of the next step of an economic stimulus package that has already poured trillions into the U.S. economy--much of it going to the richest individuals and corporations in the country.
"This is almost unbelievable," HuffPost senior reporter Emily Peck tweeted in response to the news. "Of all the things to do to help people; she wants to... give upper middle class people a tax break."
The California Democrat's plan to retroactively undo the state and local tax (SALT) deduction limits would be a major tax break for households earning over $100,000, according to critics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers.
"Retroactive tax deductions are always a bad idea--a giveaway that gets you nothing--and this one goes almost entirely to household on at least $100,000 a year," said Wolfers of the plan.
As the New York Times reported, there is skepticism over the Pelosi proposal:
The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated last year that a full repeal of the SALT limit for 2019 alone would reduce federal revenues by about $77 billion. Americans earning $1 million a year or more would collectively reap $40 billion of those benefits. Most of the rest would go to households earning $200,000 or more.
[...]
Many liberal economic policy analysts also oppose lifting the SALT cap, calling it regressive tax policy. Seth Hanlon, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, said the same logic was also a reason not to lift the limit in the next economic rescue bill. That is particularly true because consumption data show that low- and middle-income Americans are more likely than higher earners to spend benefits from the government immediately and stimulate economic activity.
Pelosi's spokesman Henry Connelly claimed in a statement for the Times that the speaker's plan would be means-tested and "tailored to focus on middle-class earners and include limitations on the higher end."
Nonetheless, rolling back the deductions would benefit millionaires and billionaires more than those making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, as activist James Medlock showed on Twitter.
In a statement, Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl dismissed Pelosi's plan as "a huge mistake."
"The last people who need help right now are the well-off taxpayers who would be affected by this change," said Pearl. "Congress should instead be prioritizing low-income and middle-class workers most directly hurt by the economic effects of the coronavirus."
Pearl, former managing director of investment firm Blackrock, added that people in his economic bracket were most likely to weather the storm of the pandemic without much economic pain.
"If Democrats want to be the party of working people, prioritizing tax cuts for wealthy taxpayers, even in blue states, is not the right thing to do," said Pearl. "We already have too many politicians in Washington whose answer to every problem is to cut taxes for the rich."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is reportedly set to propose rolling back a cap on tax deductions, which would benefit high-earning Americans, as part of the next step of an economic stimulus package that has already poured trillions into the U.S. economy--much of it going to the richest individuals and corporations in the country.
"This is almost unbelievable," HuffPost senior reporter Emily Peck tweeted in response to the news. "Of all the things to do to help people; she wants to... give upper middle class people a tax break."
The California Democrat's plan to retroactively undo the state and local tax (SALT) deduction limits would be a major tax break for households earning over $100,000, according to critics like University of Michigan professor Justin Wolfers.
"Retroactive tax deductions are always a bad idea--a giveaway that gets you nothing--and this one goes almost entirely to household on at least $100,000 a year," said Wolfers of the plan.
As the New York Times reported, there is skepticism over the Pelosi proposal:
The congressional Joint Committee on Taxation estimated last year that a full repeal of the SALT limit for 2019 alone would reduce federal revenues by about $77 billion. Americans earning $1 million a year or more would collectively reap $40 billion of those benefits. Most of the rest would go to households earning $200,000 or more.
[...]
Many liberal economic policy analysts also oppose lifting the SALT cap, calling it regressive tax policy. Seth Hanlon, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, said the same logic was also a reason not to lift the limit in the next economic rescue bill. That is particularly true because consumption data show that low- and middle-income Americans are more likely than higher earners to spend benefits from the government immediately and stimulate economic activity.
Pelosi's spokesman Henry Connelly claimed in a statement for the Times that the speaker's plan would be means-tested and "tailored to focus on middle-class earners and include limitations on the higher end."
Nonetheless, rolling back the deductions would benefit millionaires and billionaires more than those making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, as activist James Medlock showed on Twitter.
In a statement, Patriotic Millionaires chair Morris Pearl dismissed Pelosi's plan as "a huge mistake."
"The last people who need help right now are the well-off taxpayers who would be affected by this change," said Pearl. "Congress should instead be prioritizing low-income and middle-class workers most directly hurt by the economic effects of the coronavirus."
Pearl, former managing director of investment firm Blackrock, added that people in his economic bracket were most likely to weather the storm of the pandemic without much economic pain.
"If Democrats want to be the party of working people, prioritizing tax cuts for wealthy taxpayers, even in blue states, is not the right thing to do," said Pearl. "We already have too many politicians in Washington whose answer to every problem is to cut taxes for the rich."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.