August, 30 2017, 11:45am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Chris Fleming,Email:,chris@redhorsestrategies.com
Trump's False Claims About Taxes:
His Rhetoric Contradicts His Actual Proposals – and Reality
WASHINGTON
Today, August 30, 2017, President Trump will promote his plans to change the nation's tax code at a closed-to-the-public event in Springfield, Missouri. The speech will take place at a business owned by one of his campaign donors. While we don't know quite what the president will say, we can predict a few claims based on his past statements. And we're expecting some real whoppers.
STATEMENT FROM ATF IN ADVANCE OF TRUMP'S SPEECH: "Make no mistake, what Trump and Republican leaders in Congress are proposing is not tax reform. They simply want massive tax cuts for millionaires, billionaires, and big corporations, at the expense of everyone else. And those tax giveaways will be paid for by cuts to Social Security, healthcare, education and other programs that maintain living standards for working families. It's Trumpcare all over again, and it must be blocked." - Frank Clemente, executive director, Americans for Tax Fairness
See below for some of the claims we expect Trump to make, and for the reality based on the Trump tax plan released in April 2017.
CLAIM: Trump says he will enact "historic tax reform."
REALITY: TRUMP'S "TAX REFORM" IS NOT REFORM, IT'S SIMPLY A MASSIVE TAX GIVEAWAY TO THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS. True tax reform would close loopholes and make the system fairer for everyone. Trump's plan is a $5 trillion tax giveaway that mostly benefits the wealthy and big corporations. As proposed in Trump's budget, these tax cuts would essentially be paid for by $4.3 trillion in cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education, and other services that help working families get by and get ahead.
CLAIM: Trump claims his tax cuts will mainly help the middle class. "The truth is the people I care most about are the middle-income people in this country who have gotten screwed... And if there's upward revision [in taxes], it's going to be on high-income people."
REALITY: THE TOP 1% WILL BE THE BIG WINNERS UNDER TRUMP'S TAX PLAN. It gives half of the tax cuts to the richest 1%, who would each get an annual tax cut of $175,000 on average.
CLAIM: Trump has claimed that his tax plan will give the "biggest benefit" to the "working and middle class taxpayer"--that "it won't even be close."
REALITY: WORKING FAMILIES WILL BE THE BIG LOSERS UNDER TRUMP'S TAX PLAN. In fact, a quarter of middle-class families would actually pay higher taxes under his plan. Even worse, Trump would pay for his tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations by cutting public services working families rely on, such as Social Security, Medicaid, education, infrastructure, nutrition programs and other vital services.
CLAIM: Trump claims "small businesses will benefit the most" from his plan to cut the top tax on so-called pass-through businesses to 15%.
REALITY:TRUMP'S "SMALL BUSINESS" TAX CUTS ARE REALLY A HOAX, AND A BOON FOR THE RICH. Most small businesses already pay taxes at a 15% rate or lower, so less than 7% of business owners would get any tax cut. More than three-quarters of the tax cuts would go to the richest 1% of business owners, who would get an average tax cut of $75,000 each year. These are not Main Street shopkeepers, but hedge fund managers, Wall Street lawyers and real estate developers like Trump, who would lower his own tax rate from roughly 40% to 15%.
CLAIM: Trump claims corporate and individual tax rates need to be reduced because "we have the highest taxes in the world."
REALITY: AMERICANS ARE NOT OVERTAXED COMPARED TO OTHER COUNTRIES. As a percentage of the overall economy, Americans pay less in taxes than 30 of 35 other similarly developed countries. And although the official corporate tax rate is 35%, most corporations pay much less because of loopholes. In fact, the Government Accountability Office found that profitable U.S. corporations paid an effective tax rate of only 14% from 2008 to 2012.
CLAIM: Trump claims his plan to deeply cut the tax rate on accumulated offshore corporate profits will "bring that cash home" to be "reinvested" in the American economy.
REALITY: CUTTING TAXES ON OFFSHORE CORPORATE PROFITS WON'T SPUR THE U.S. ECONOMY. Trump's proposal to tax those offshore earnings at just 10%, instead of the 35% they currently owe, amounts to a $600 billion tax cut for tax-dodging corporations--a huge loss of revenue that could be used for economy-boosting public investments. When Congress provided a similar tax giveaway in 2004, corporations that brought home their profits cut tens of thousands of jobs and gave 90 cents of every dollar in earnings brought home to rich shareholders through stock buybacks and dividends.
CLAIM: Trump claims that big corporations need to pay just a 10% tax rate on their offshore profits because those earnings will otherwise remain "trapped" offshore, frozen out of the American economy.
REALITY: CORPORATE OFFSHORE PROFITS AREN'T REALLY "TRAPPED" OFFSHORE. In fact, many corporations bring their profits home now and simply pay the tax due. What's more, a U.S. Senate study found that much of the money is not actually offshore anyway: it's already invested in the American economy, and corporations can use it for a variety of purposes.
CLAIM: Trump's Treasury Secretary's claims that the Administration's multi-trillion-dollar tax giveaway will somehow "pay for itself."
REALITY:TAX CUTS DON'T PAY FOR THEMSELVES. No serious economist believes that's possible. Instead, the best estimates are that Trump's proposed tax cuts would reduce federal revenue by between $3.5-4.8 trillion over the next 10 years, requiring either deep cuts to public services or a big increase in public debt.
CLAIM: Trump claims that his proposed deep tax cuts for wealthy professionals and corporations will result in an "explosion of new business and new jobs."
REALITY: TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY & CORPORATIONS WON'T CREATE MANY JOBS. But recent experience and academic research both show that tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations are a poor way to stimulate the economy and create jobs. And Trump's proposed deep budget cuts to infrastructure, healthcare, medical research and education won't help create jobs, either.
CLAIM: Trump has claimed that he wants to abolish the estate tax because "American workers...should not be taxed...at death," implying that the estate tax affects average workers.
REALITY: ABOLISHING THE ESTATE TAX ONLY HELPS THE WEALTHY LIKE TRUMP. Only the richest one of every 500 estates currently pays the estate tax--the estate must be worth $5.5 million or more to be affected. The only effect abolishing the estate tax will have on American workers is to deprive them of over $20 billion in annual revenue, which pays for public services used by those who haven't inherited a fortune.
CLAIM: Trump recently tweeted "Corporations have NEVER made as much money as they are making now."
REALITY: WELL, ON THIS ONE HE'S RIGHT! CORPORATIONS ARE ALREADY EXTREMELY PROFITABLE. But what Trump failed to add is that even as corporate profits are near record highs, corporate tax payments flirt with historic lows. Sixty-five years ago, both corporate profits and corporate taxes equaled about 6% of the economy. Now, corporate profits represent 8.5% of the economy, corporate taxes only 1.9%. Big corporations don't need a tax cut--what they need is to start paying their fair share of taxes again.
Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) is a diverse campaign of more than 420 national, state and local endorsing organizations united in support of a fair tax system that works for all Americans. It has come together based on the belief that the country needs comprehensive, progressive tax reform that results in greater revenue to meet our growing needs. This requires big corporations and the wealthy to pay their fair share in taxes, not to live by their own set of rules.
(202) 506-3264LATEST NEWS
'Weasel Words': Julian Assange's Wife Slams US Assurances to UK
"The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism."
Apr 16, 2024
The wife of jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange sharply criticized "assurances" the U.S. government made as the U.K. High Court considers allowing the 52-year-old Australian's extradition to the United States, where he faces 175 years in prison.
The U.S. document states that if extradited, "Assange will have the ability to raise and seek to rely upon at trial (which includes any sentencing hearing) the rights and protections given under the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States," though it points out that "a decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. courts."
"A sentence of death will neither be sought nor imposed on Assange," the document adds, noting that he has not been charged with any offense for which that is a possible punishment. It comes after the U.K. court ruled last month that the Biden administration had until Tuesday to confirm that he wouldn't face the death penalty and if it did not, he could continue appealing his extradition.
Responding on social media, his wife, Stella Assange—who is an attorney—blasted the U.S. assurances as "weasel words."
"The United States has issued a nonassurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty," she said. "It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution's previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen."
"The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
"Instead, the U.S. has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can 'seek to raise' the First Amendment if extradited," she added. "The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family's extreme distress about his future—his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in U.S. prison for publishing award-winning journalism. The Biden administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late."
The U.K. court's next hearing is scheduled for May 20. Last week, reporters asked U.S. President Joe Biden about requests from Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and members of the country's Parliament to drop the extradition effort and charges. He said that "we're considering it."
So far, the Biden administration has ignored significant pressure from Australian and U.S. politicians as well as human rights and press freedom groups, and continued to pursue the extradition of Julian Assange, who was charged under former President Donald Trump—the Republican expected to face the Democratic president in the November election.
Assange was charged under the Espionage Act and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act for publishing classified documents including the "Collateral Murder" video and the Afghan and Iraq war logs. Since British authorities dragged Assange out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London—where he lived with political asylum for seven years—he has been jailed in the city's Belmarsh Prison.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, with whom he has two children, was not alone in condemning the U.S. assurances on Tuesday.
"This 'assurance' should make journalists even more worried about how the Assange prosecution could impact press freedom in the U.S. and globally. The U.K. should grant Assange's appeal and refuse to extradite him," said the Freedom of the Press Foundation. "The U.S. doesn't disclaim the ability to argue that the First Amendment doesn't apply to Assange because of his nationality or other reasons, or for a court to rule against a First Amendment challenge to his prosecution."
Jameel Jaffer, director of the Knight First Amendment Institute, similarly said that "no one who cares about press freedom should take any comfort at all from the United States' assurance that Assange will be permitted to 'rely upon' the First Amendment."
"If the prosecution goes forward, the U.S. government will be trying to persuade American courts that the First Amendment poses no bar to the prosecution of a publisher under the Espionage Act," Jaffer warned. "And if the government is successful, no journalist will ever again be able to publish U.S. government secrets without risking her liberty."
"So the government's First Amendment assurances aren't responsive at all to the concerns that press freedom advocates have been raising," he concluded. "This case poses essentially the same threat to press freedom today as it did yesterday."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Workers Stage Sit-Ins to Demand Google End Israeli Cloud Contract
"Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights," said Google employees in an open letter.
Apr 16, 2024
Following recent reports that Google may soon expand its tech collaboration with the Israeli government, dozens of the company's employees on Tuesday entered its offices in New York City and Sunnyvale, California and announced that they wouldn't leave until executives pull out of its $1.2 billion cloud services and data contract with the country.
The No Tech for Apartheid coalition—including the Muslim-led MPower Change and the Jewish-led Jewish Voice for Peace—organized the sit-in, which marks an escalation in Google workers' protests against Project Nimbus, the 2021 contract under which Google and Amazon provide cloud infrastructure across Israel's government.
The deal includes a stipulation that the companies cannot prevent Israel from using Project Nimbus for any government agency, including the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)—which means Google employees' work may be directly supporting the country's assault on the Gaza and its killing of at least 33,843 Palestinians since October.
"Workers will NOT allow business as usual while Google continues to profit from the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza," said MPower Change.
In Sunnyvale, workers began occupying the office of Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kurian, while employees in the company's New York office began a sit-in in a common space.
Outdoor rallies were also scheduled to take place in San Francisco and Seattle, with both Amazon and Google employees attending.
Former Google cloud software engineer Eddie Hatfield, who was fired last month for disrupting a Google Israel event, was among those who protested in New York.
The sit-ins came a week after Time magazine reported that Google has entered further negotiations with the Israeli government in recent weeks, even as international human rights experts raise alarm that Israeli officials have directly caused famine to take hold in parts of Gaza by blocking humanitarian aid.
No Tech for Apartheid released an open letter addressed to Kurian and other Google and Amazon executives, saying that as long as the companies' "tech continues to power the Israeli military and government, [they] are actively complicit in this genocide."
"Your workers do not want to be complicit in genocide," reads the letter, which has been signed by 93,000 supporters. "Just as people of conscience demanded institutions cut ties with apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, the time is now to rise up in support of Palestinian human rights, to end the Project Nimbus contract, and join calls to end the Israeli occupation and siege of Gaza. This has never been more urgent. We hope that you will take this opportunity to be on the right side of history. End the Project Nimbus contract and reestablish your companies' commitments to human rights."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AOC Rips GOP for Trying to 'Distract From Their Own Incompetence' With Anti-Iran Bills
"The country and the world need real leadership from the House of Representatives in this moment, not resolutions designed purposefully to increase the likelihood of a deadly regional war or worse."
Apr 16, 2024
Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Tuesday accused her Republican colleagues of dangerously trying to cloak their own legislative impotence in a flurry of anti-Iran bills—including a bipartisan proposal to ban Americans from traveling to the country.
"Following last weekend's unprecedented response by Iran to Israel's attack on its consulate, the Republican majority is explicitly leveraging a series of bills to further escalate tensions in the Middle East," Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. "This is a blatant attempt to distract from their own incompetence."
On Monday, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) published this week's proposed bills and resolutions, which include 15 separate measures condemning or sanctioning Iran following the retaliatory missile and drone attack launched by Tehran against Israel last weekend.
"In light of Iran's unjustified attack on Israel, the House will move from its previously announced legislative schedule next week to instead consider legislation that supports our ally Israel and holds Iran and its terrorist proxies accountable," Scalise said in a statement.
Peace advocates expressed alarm over a bipartisan resolution introduced Tuesday by Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) calling for regime change in Iran—where the United States and United Kingdom led a 1953 coup that ensured the decadeslong rule of a repressive monarch that ended just before the current Islamist regime took power 45 years ago this month.
"Decades of a tyrannical regime in Tehran—destabilizing the Middle East and intentionally spreading chaos throughout the region—has culminated in Iran's direct attack on our greatest ally, Israel," Weber said in a statement. "The rogue regime needs to be overthrown immediately."
One of the most controversial bills on the docket, introduced by Reps. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) and Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.), would urge the Biden administration to ban U.S. passport holders from traveling to Iran.
"This shameful idea that punishes people instead of governments was first proposed by [former U.S. President] Donald Trump's Iran envoy (and likely war criminal) Elliott Abrams," the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said in a statement. "Now, Rep. Wilson—who has deep ties to the [Mojahedin-e-Khalq] and other hawkish groups—is partnering with a hawkish Democrat on this proposal."
"Make no mistake: A ban as called for by this bill could have serious ramifications for anyone traveling to Iran, regardless of passport. We must make clear that this is unacceptable," NIAC continued.
"What if you could no longer travel to Iran to see relatives, visit a sick family member, attend a wedding, or claim an inheritance, out of fear of being imprisoned by the U.S. government?" the group added. "Seeing our loved ones isn't a crime, and no government, whether Iranian or American, should prevent us from doing so."
Congressional progressives say the anti-Iran bills are part of a scheme to deflect attention from what many social media users are calling the "#GOPShitShow," exemplified by yet another effort by far-right lawmakers to dethrone a Republican House speaker—less than six months after his GOP predecessor was ousted.
"The country and the world need real leadership from the House of Representatives in this moment, not resolutions designed purposefully to increase the likelihood of a deadly regional war or worse," said Ocasio-Cortez. "I will oppose any cynical effort to further inflame tensions, destroy a path to peace in the region, and further divide the American people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular