Support Our Work in 2023 With a New Year's Gift
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.
#
For Immediate Release
January, 30 2018, 09:45am EDT
Contact:
Chris Fleming,Email:,chris@redhorsestrategies.com
New Report: Corporations Not Being So Generous With Tax Cuts After All
ATF examined tax cuts, bonuses and other employee benefits from Fortune 500 and other big-name corporations since passage of Trump tax cuts.
WASHINGTON
Widespread publicity about corporations sharing a big slice of their huge Trump tax cuts with their workers through bonuses and wage hikes is mostly hype, an Americans for Tax Fairness analysis of the numbers reveals. Even though America's biggest corporations are poised to reap hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, only 18 corporations in the Fortune 100 have announced any sort of employee benefits tied to those cuts, as of today. Only 46 of the Fortune 500--just 9%--have announced any plans to share the tax-cut wealth.
These counts come from the list of corporations sharing tax-cut benefits that's being maintained by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) that ATF analyzed here. ATR is a principal backer of the GOP's tax giveaway to Corporate America that presumably has compiled as much good news about the tax cuts as it can find.
Thirteen of the Fortune 100 corporations on the ATR list are there because they plan to offer one-time bonuses to employees--a far cry from the permanently higher wages promoters of the GOP plan claimed would flow from massive corporate tax cuts. Only 6 Fortune 100 corporations are offering wage increases. Twenty-nine of the Fortune 500 are on the ATR list for offering one-time bonuses and 17 are offering pay increases.
Not only are few big corporations sharing any portion of their tax-cut bounty, but the amounts going to workers pale when compared to how much the companies are getting in tax cuts and to how much they're returning to shareholders through stock buybacks and dividends (where those figures are available).
"The idea that tax cuts for corporations and millionaires will trickle down to workers has been debunked over and over," said Frank Clemente, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness. "Even many CEOs have acknowledged that the benefits will flow to shareholders, not to employees. Corporations should be honest with the public about where their fat tax cuts are going instead of doing Donald Trump's dirty work with marketing spin."
Highlights of ATF's findings from the report are below. The complete report that profiles the response of 42 corporations to the Trump tax cut is available here:
Findings of Fortune 100 corporations:
- Only 18 (18%) of them appear on the ATR list for having given some benefit to employees due to their tax cuts.
- Only 13 (13%) of them are on the list for one-time bonuses and just 6 (6%) are on the list for wage increases.
- Nine (9%) are on the list for other types of benefits being provided to employees.
Findings of Fortune 500 corporations:
- Only 46 (9%) of them appear on the ATR list for having given some benefit to employees, customers, or charitable organizations due to their tax cuts.
- Only 29 (5.8%) of them are on the ATR list for one-time bonuses and just 17 (3.4%) are on the list for wage increases.
- 26 (5.2%) are on the ATR list for other types of benefits being provided to employees or for charitable contributions or consumer benefits, such as lower electricity rates.
$100 billion in stock buybacks: 20 corporations have announced new stock buybacks since the Senate tax bill was passed in early December, which total $100 billion. Stock buybacks put money in the pockets of already wealthy shareholders and divert precious resources from making new investments or raising workers' pay.
27,000 jobs cut: This is the number of jobs being cut in 2018 by eight of the 42 corporations profiled by ATF.
The 82 blue chip corporations in the Fortune 100 (and the 454 in the Fortune 500) that have not yet announced they will share the benefits of the tax cuts with their employees is available here.
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
Progressive Senators Sound Alarm Over Rise of 'Predatory' Medical Credit Cards
"Banks have identified medical credit cards as a lucrative opportunity to profit off of the worsening crisis of patients who are unable to afford their medical care," warned Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Ed Markey, Bernie Sanders, and others.
Jan 05, 2023
A group of progressive senators raised alarm this week over a pernicious outgrowth of the United States' for-profit healthcare system: medical credit cards.
In a letter to the chief executives of Wells Fargo and Synchrony Financial—two large issuers of medical credit cards—Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) expressed concern that "given the circumstances in which these cards are used, medical credit cards could be predatory to patients seeking medical care and leave patients stuck paying higher costs with 'hefty, high-interest debt.'"
"The concern here is the current structure of our healthcare system often requires that patients enter into medical debt in order to access services they need," reads the letter, which was made public this week. "Within that context, patients—often under duress because of concerns about their medical care—are being pushed into and then locked into medical credit cards despite the availability of alternative payment options that might be more beneficial and offer lower interest rates."
By contrast, medical credit cards often come with high interest rates following so-called "no interest" periods that banks deceptively use to lure in customers who are desperate to pay for costly medical treatments. In 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ordered CareCredit—Synchrony Financial's medical credit business—to refund up to $34.1 million to "consumers who were victims of deceptive credit card enrollment tactics."
Last month, the CFPB hit Wells Fargo—which offers a medical credit card named Health Advantage—with $3.7 billion in penalties for a slew of abuses and called the institution "one of the most problematic repeat offenders of the banks and credit unions."
Crain's Chicago Business recently reported that "as healthcare costs and insurance deductibles rise, more hospitals in Chicago and around the country are teaming up with banks to market medical credit cards and other loans to patients who lack the insurance or funds to pay for care."
"Hospitals that convince patients to take medical credit cards get paid upfront by banks at a time when unpaid bills are straining their budgets. Lenders, for their part, see an opportunity to capitalize on the growing gap between the cost of medical care and what many Americans can afford," the newspaper continued. "Patients who take the card get money to pay for care, solving a short-term dilemma. But a quick decision made in a high-stress situation can create long-term financial problems. Patients who can't drum up the cash to pay off the initial balance within an introductory period end up with hefty credit card debt that carries some of the highest interest rates in the industry."
More than 100 million people are saddled with medical debt in the United States, collectively owing upwards of $200 billion.
Last year, Kaiser Health Newsspotlighted the story of Cheyenne Dantona, whose situation is appalling but increasingly common in the United States, where obtaining lifesaving treatment often entails financial ruin:
Dantona, 31, was diagnosed with blood cancer while in college. The cancer went into remission, but when Dantona changed health plans, she was hit with thousands of dollars of medical bills because one of her primary providers was out of network.
She enrolled in a medical credit card, only to get stuck paying even more in interest. Other bills went to collections, dragging down her credit score. Dantona still dreams of working with injured and orphaned wild animals, but she's been forced to move back in with her mother outside Minneapolis.
"She's been trapped," said Dantona's sister, Desiree. "Her life is on pause."
In their letter, the senators pointed to several "disturbing" features of medical credit cards, including that "the available credit is typically set to the cost of the service, 'meaning the card is maxed out immediately, damaging card holders' credit scores.'"
"The cards may also adversely impact consumers' credit reports because of the way they are treated by credit reporting agencies: the agencies recently agreed to remove 70% of medical debt from credit reports, but these changes will not benefit medical credit card holders because their debt is considered credit card debt and as such is 'viewed less favorably by the bureaus,'" the lawmakers wrote.
"Banks have identified medical credit cards as a lucrative opportunity to profit off of the worsening crisis of patients who are unable to afford their medical care," the lawmakers continued, demanding that the bank executives provide information about their medical credit card businesses such as how many accounts are in collections and how many healthcare providers they have partnered with.
"As we work to reform our healthcare system so no individual faces medical debt," the senators added, "we remain concerned about circumstances that serve only to exacerbate financial harm of unaffordable healthcare."
Sanders, a letter signatory and the incoming chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, has decried the "very concept" of medical debt, arguing it "should not exist."
During his 2020 presidential campaign, Sanders offered a proposal to wipe out existing medical debt in the United States.
"In the wealthiest country in the history of the world," the senator said at the time, "one illness or disease should not ruin a family's financial life and future."
Keep ReadingShow Less
GOP House Speaker Drama Sparks Fears About Debt Ceiling Fight
"If House Republicans can't even get it together to choose their leader, they can't be trusted with the debt ceiling, fighting inflation, or helping families make ends meet," said Democratic Rep. Sara Jacobs.
Jan 04, 2023
The refusal by U.S. House Republicans to collectively get behind a speaker candidate in six rounds of voting so far this week has renewed concerns about the coming fight over raising the debt ceiling to prevent an unprecedented government default.
After the GOP won a narrow House majority in the November midterm elections, economists and progressives in Congress called for raising the federal borrowing limit during the lame-duck session. However, Democrats failed to pass standalone legislation or include a provision in the omnibus package President Joe Biden signed last week, setting up the battle for this year.
The arbitrary cap was last increased by $2.5 trillion to $31.381 trillion in December 2021 and is expected to be reached no sooner than the summer. Although that means lawmakers likely have months to act, some Republicans have signaled that they intend to use the threat of a potential default—which could cause a global economic crisis—to force concessions.
Specifically, GOP lawmakers have set their sights on cuts to Medicare and Social Security. While Biden vowed in November that "under no circumstances" would he go along with GOP attacks on such programs, the political theater in the House on Tuesday and Wednesday has fueled fears that some Republicans would be willing to force the first-ever default.
\u201cI wonder how a certain handful of senators are feeling about not addressing the debt ceiling in the 117th\u201d— Daniel Schuman | @danielschuman@mastodon.social (@Daniel Schuman | @danielschuman@mastodon.social) 1672869543
The House adjourned Wednesday afternoon until 8:00 pm ET, after a trio of votes in which far-right House Republicans repeatedly denied Congressman Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) the speakership—events that followed three similar voting rounds on Tuesday. Members briefly returned to the chamber as planned Wednesday night and narrowly voted to adjourn until noon on Thursday. The chamber can't move forward with any legislative business until the leadership position is filled.
"The 20 opposed to McCarthy want all-out war against Democrats and Biden," Institute for Policy Studies fellow Sanho Tree said of the Republicans blocking his path to speaker. "They think that by taking the debt ceiling hostage this year, the House can force the Senate and [White House] to agree to slashing spending, a border wall, and cuts to Medicare and Social Security."
\u201cAfter watching this, just wait until:\n\n1) The Rules package, which will have to pass before the House gets down to biz. \n\n2) Debt limit. \n\n3) Spending bills.\n\n4) Anything else.\u201d— Jake Sherman (@Jake Sherman) 1672865789
Rep. Andy Barr (R-Ky.) suggested to Punchbowl News' Brendan Pedersen that the speaker fight doesn't "necessarily portend a problem with the debt limit," adding that "I think there will be a way forward," but some Democrats aren't convinced.
"If House Republicans can't even get it together to choose their leader, they can't be trusted with the debt ceiling, fighting inflation, or helping families make ends meet," Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) tweeted Wednesday evening. "They've proven they can't lead."
One of the House Freedom Caucus members who has repeatedly voted against McCarthy for speaker, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), discussed the debt limit with journalists on Wednesday, reportedly saying: "Is he willing to shut the government down rather than raise the debt ceiling? That's a non-negotiable item."
\u201cDon't want to say I told you so, but this could have been taken care of in the lame duck.\nhttps://t.co/StXEosSJH1\u201d— David Dayen (@David Dayen) 1672862864
According toThe Intercept's Ryan Grim:
A reporter asked Norman if he meant default on the debt, as the debt ceiling and a government shutdown are not directly linked. "That's why you need to be planning now what agencies—what path you're gonna take now to trim government. Tell the programs you're going to get to this number. And you do that before chairs are picked," he said, referring to the process of choosing and installing House committee chairs.
A quirk of parliamentary procedure requires Congress to authorize spending, then appropriate money for those authorized expenditures, and then to authorize the Treasury Department to issue debt in order to pay for that appropriated money. Some constitutional scholars argue that the debt ceiling is unconstitutional, but currently both parties recognize it as a legal and valid restriction on the government's ability to issue debt.
Appearing on a Bloomberg Radio program Wednesday, Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) floated the possibility of trading Democratic voters in favor of McCarthy for a debt limit deal.
"Eventually, he's going to have to cut a deal with Democrats, because it's going to be easier to get a deal with us than with his 20-headed monster he has over there," Sherman said. "He's going to have to agree with Democrats to not hold hostage the full faith and credit of the United States, to not put us in a position where we're going to shut down the government. And eventually, I think Americans will benefit from this ugly picture of chaos."
\u201cAfter another reporter interjected suggesting the debt limit, @AOC responded, \u201cYeah. A combination of things, really.\u201d\u201d— Ursula Perano (@Ursula Perano) 1672847419
The New York Daily Newsreported Wednesday that though Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) "emphatically ruled out supporting embattled" McCarthy, the progressive congresswoman suggested to journalists that there was potential for a compromise speaker who agreed to raise the debt ceiling along with "a combination of" other concessions.
Meanwhile, some critics of the Republican Party used the ongoing speakership drama to remind Americans that no matter who ultimately ends up at the helm, "they all want to cut your Social Security" and protect wealthy tax dodgers.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House GOP's Top Priority If They Ever Get a Speaker? Protect Wealthy Tax Dodgers
"In their first legislative vote, Republicans will vote to repeal $9 out of every $10 in new IRS funding," said Americans for Tax Fairness. "All to protect their rich tax cheat friends from paying taxes they owe."
Jan 04, 2023
Republicans began their control of the 118th Congress Tuesday with a narrow majority that failed six times to elect a speaker but had in hand "hit-the-ground-running" plans to pass legislation that critics say will "protect wealthy and corporate tax cheats" by rescinding tens of billions of dollars in new Internal Revenue Service funding in the Inflation Reduction Act.
On Monday, Steve Scalise (R-La.), a party leader, said that the lower chamber's first order of business after electing a speaker will be taking up the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Protection Act.
"This Republican bill is ill-named because what it actually does is protect tax cheaters by repealing most of the new IRS funding set forth in last year's Inflation Reduction Act," Mother Jones senior editor Michael Mechanic wrote.
\u201cDemocrats secured new funding for the IRS to restore funding slashed by Republicans in 2010.\n\nIn their first legislative vote, Republicans will vote to repeal $9 out of every $10 in new IRS funding.\n\nAll to protect their rich tax cheat friends from paying taxes they owe.\u201d— Americans For Tax Fairness (@Americans For Tax Fairness) 1672772471
In a December 30 letter to House Republicans, Scalise said the legislation—along with 10 other bills and resolutions he proposed—would let GOP lawmakers "hit the ground running in our first weeks in the majority."
Scalise said in the letter that the Family and Small Business Taxpayer Act "rescinds tens of billions of dollars allocated to the IRS for 87,000 new IRS agents in the Inflation Reduction Act."
Although the "87,000 new IRS agents" claim has been widely debunked, it has nevertheless become a GOP talking point.
Writing for The American Independent, Josh Israel noted: "It has appeared in ads run by the campaigns of Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and North Carolina Republican Senate nominee Rep. Ted Budd; it has been used in Senate Leadership Fund attack ads in Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Ohio; and the right-wing Club for Growth Action and Congressional Leadership Fund have run spots lying about the number of new IRS agents. The Senate Republican conference's official Twitter account and those of dozens of other House and Senate Republicans have also tweeted the bogus 87,000 number."
\u201cAs the new, narrow GOP majority tries to elect a House speaker, their initial priorities include:\n- weakening congressional ethics \n- a bill to protect wealthy & corporate tax cheats & make taxpayers keep enduring long waits to contact the IRS. \n\nI oppose the #TaxCheatAct!\u201d— Congressman Dwight Evans (@Congressman Dwight Evans) 1672772546
As Mechanic pointed out, "From 2010 to 2018, even as the IRS received 9% more tax returns, its annual budget was slashed by $2.9 billion—a 20% reduction that cost the agency more than one-fifth of its workforce."
"Virtually no partnerships were audited in 2018," he continued. "By then, with [former President] Donald Trump in the Oval Office, the kneecapped IRS was scrutinizing the individual returns of just 0.03% of those $10 million—plus taxpayers, down from a peak of 23% in 2010. Audits of the $5 million—to—$10 million filers fell from just under 15% to a scant 0.04%."
Mechanic added:
A fair subset of superwealthy Americans doesn't even bother filing. The Treasury Department's Inspector General for Tax Administration reported in 2020 that nearly 880,000 "high income" non-filers from 2014 through 2016 still owed $46 billion, and the IRS was in no condition, resource-wise, to collect. The 300 biggest delinquents owed about $33 million per head, on average. Fifteen percent of their cases had been closed without examination by IRS staffers, and another one-third weren't even in line to be "worked."
"The recently enacted IRS funding—$80 billion over 10 years—was meant to remedy this shameful state of affairs," he wrote.
Despite the disunity evident in the speaker struggle, House Republicans appear united when it comes to
slashing Social Security, gutting ethics safeguards, and pursuing policies like the IRS defunding measure that exacerbate inequality in one of the most unequal societies in the developed world.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.