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
For Immediate Release
September, 28 2020, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Sam Quigley, sam@patrioticmillionaires.org
Patriotic Millionaires on Trump Tax Returns: The American People Should be Pissed Off
"This is evidence of the rot in our tax system, which is designed to allow rich people to avoid paying their fair share."
WASHINGTON
Yesterday, the New York Times released a bombshell report on President Trump's taxes, showing that he paid no federal income taxes for 10 of the last 15 years, and that in 2016 and 2017 he paid only $750 a year. While this level of tax evasion is certainly unusual, it's a symptom of a tax system that offers the rich countless loopholes to legally avoid paying taxes.
In response to this report, Morris Pearl, the Chair of the Patriotic Millionaires and a former managing director of BlackRock, Inc., issued the following statement:
"It seems obvious that Trump has committed some amount of criminal tax evasion, but that's not the biggest issue here. The real problem is a system that provides such absurd loopholes to the ultra-wealthy in the first place, and a deliberately underfunded IRS that lacks the capacity to properly prosecute rich people's criminal tax evasion. Trump's case may be particularly egregious, but he's far from unique.
This is just evidence of the rot in our tax system, which is designed to allow rich people to avoid paying their fair share. This has been the case for decades, but the tax code is even more skewed in favor of the rich and powerful after Trump was able to rewrite the entire tax code to his liking in 2017 with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
The American people should be angry about President Trump's tax evasion, but that's not all. They should be much more angry about how much of what Trump did is legal.
The American people should be more angry about how many other millionaires and billionaires are able to avoid supporting the country that made them rich in the first place.
Most of all, the American people should be pissed off about the fact that instead of offering them health care, or affordable childcare, or financial support during a pandemic, their government instead prioritizes protecting the wealth of the rich, powerful, and selfish."
For more information, email Sam Quigley at Sam@patrioticmillionaires.org.
The Patriotic Millionaires is a group of high-net worth Americans who share a profound concern about the destabilizing level of inequality in America. Our work centers on the two things that matter most in a capitalist democracy: power and money. Our goal is to ensure that the country's political economy is structured to meet the needs of regular Americans, rather than just millionaires. We focus on three "first" principles: a highly progressive tax system, a livable minimum wage, and equal political representation for all citizens.
(202) 446-0489LATEST NEWS
Trump Plan to Privatize Student Loans Denounced as ‘Giveaway to Wealthy Insiders’
"By selling parts of the federal student loan portfolio, the Trump administration may seek to unlawfully strip borrowers of their legally guaranteed protections," wrote a group of more than 40 Democratic lawmakers.
Nov 18, 2025
Dozens of Democratic lawmakers in the US House and Senate warned Monday that the Trump administration's reported push to sell off the federal government's massive student portfolio to the private market would be disastrous for borrowers and a "lucrative giveaway" to predatory corporations.
The lawmakers, led by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Senate and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) in the House, pointed with alarm to recent reports indicating that Treasury and Education Department officials have met repeatedly with finance industry executives for the purpose of valuing the federal government's student loan portfolio, which is believed to be worth around $1.7 trillion.
"By selling parts of the federal student loan portfolio, the Trump administration may seek to unlawfully strip borrowers of their legally guaranteed protections," the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. "As experts have explained, private investors' 'interest would likely be to squeeze as much profit from the repayment as they could.' Those profits would likely come at the expense of the borrower via fewer protections and less generous benefits."
Politico reported last month that the Trump administration is considering selling at least part of the federal government's student loan portfolio to private companies.
Though small relative to the federal portfolio, the private student loan market has an "outsized" impact on borrowers, the advocacy group Protect Borrowers explained earlier this year.
"While private student loans account for roughly 8% of all student loan debt, more than 40% of student-loan-related complaints submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) are about private loans," the group said. "Of these private student loan complaints, roughly one-third are from borrowers who are struggling and can’t afford their monthly payment. This is because, unlike federal student loans, private loans lack critical safeguards for students and parents."
In their letter to McMahon and Bessent, the Democratic lawmakers demanded that the Trump administration "immediately cease any efforts to privatize the federal student loan portfolio," arguing that "this sale would be a giveaway to wealthy insiders at the expense of working-class borrowers and taxpayers."
Warren echoed that sentiment in a statement, saying, "Any way you spin it, this sale would be a massive giveaway to giant companies."
"It'd be a tremendous mistake," the senator added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'This Is Our Reality': Charlotte Residents Horrified After Border Patrol Arrests Women for Honking Car Horn
"Our city has gone from a thriving city to a standstill," said one local official.
Nov 18, 2025
Residents in Charlotte, North Carolina are expressing outrage after two local women were arrested for honking their car horn to alert others that US Border Patrol was in the area.
Local news station WCNC reported on Monday that the two women, who are US citizens, were taken into custody in the city's Plaza Midwood neighborhood after Border Patrol agents pulled them over and accused them of interfering in operations by honking their horn.
Video of the incident shows masked federal agents yelling at the women and demanding that they roll down their car windows. When the women do not comply, one officer smashes through the window and then he and other officers pull them out of the vehicle.
The two women, who have not been identified, then spent several hours in an FBI facility before being released with citations.
Local resident Shea Watts, who took video of the encounter, told WCNC that he was feeling "somewhere between disbelief and just being really upset that this is our reality now" as he watched the incident unfold.
Watts also discussed his own interactions with the federal officers whom he was filming.
"I was already close to despair and feeling helpless and hopeless," he said. "But I think just the reminder that if we see something, to document it. I tried to be respectful and ask questions and knowing my own rights, and I was told to back up a couple times, which, that's fine, but at the end of the day, this all feels a little heavy handed."
Charlotte has become the latest target of the Trump administration's mass deportation operation, which has already drawn opposition from both local residents and elected officials in the North Carolina city.
NBC News reported on Monday that many Charlotte residents are living in fear of immigration operations in the city, with some local businesses closing down and some local churches reporting dramatic drops in attendance during the current operation.
Jonathan Ocampo, US citizen of Colombian descent who lives in the area, told NBC News that he's started carrying his passport with him everywhere for fear of being mistaken for an undocumented immigrant.
"I’m carrying it here right now, which is sad," he said. "It's just scary."
Charlotte city council member-elect JD Mazuera Arias told The Guardian on Monday that the immigration enforcement operations have had a chilling effect on the entire community.
"Our city has gone from a thriving city to a standstill," he said.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump EPA's Rollback of Wetlands Protections Is Latest 'Gift' to Polluters, Groups Say
"Eliminating protections from small streams and wetlands will mean more pollution downstream—in our drinking water, at our beaches, and in our rivers," said one advocate.
Nov 18, 2025
Environmental justice campaigners on Monday said the Trump administration's latest rollback of wetland protections was "a gift to developers and polluters at the expense of communities" and demanded permanent protections for waterways.
“Clean water protections shouldn’t change with each administration,” said Betsy Southerland, former director of the Office of Science and Technology in the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Water. “Every family deserves the same right to safe water, no matter where they live or who’s in office.”
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin proposed changes to the rule known as "Waters of the United States" (WOTUS), which has been the subject of debate and legal challenges in recent decades. Under the Trump administration, as in President Donald Trump's first term, the EPA will focus on regulating permanent bodies of water like oceans, lakes, rivers, and streams.
The administration would more closely follow a 2023 Supreme Court decision, Sackett v. EPA, which the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) found this year would remove federal protections from 60-95% of wetlands across the nation.
The Zeldin rule would eliminate protections for most wetlands without visible surface water, going even further than Sackett v. EPA in codifying a narrower definition of wetlands that should be protected, said the Environmental Protection Network (EPN). The rule comes after pressure from industry groups that have bristled over past requirements to protect all waterways.
Wetlands provide critical wildlife habitats, replenish groundwater, control flooding, and protect clean water by filtering pollution.
The Biden administration required the Clean Water Act to protect “traditional navigable waters, the territorial seas, interstate waters, as well as upstream water resources that significantly affect those waters," but was constrained by the Sackett ruling in 2023.
“This proposed rule is unnecessary and damaging, and ignores the scientific reality of what is happening to our nation’s water supply."
Tarah Heinzen, legal director for Food and Water Watch, said the new rule "weakens the bedrock Clean Water Act, making it easier to fill, drain, and pollute sensitive waterways from coast to coast."
“Clean water is under attack in America, as polluting profiteers plunder our waters—Trump’s EPA is openly aiding and abetting this destruction," said Heinzen. “This rule flies in the face of science and commonsense. Eliminating protections from small streams and wetlands will mean more pollution downstream—in our drinking water, at our beaches, and in our rivers."
The "critical functions" of wetlands, she added, "will only become more important as worsening climate change makes extreme weather more frequent. EPA must reverse course."
Leda Huta, vice president of government relations for American Rivers, added that the change to WOTUS will "likely make things worse for flood-prone communities and industries dependent on clean, reliable water."
“This proposed rule is unnecessary and damaging, and ignores the scientific reality of what is happening to our nation’s water supply,” said Huta. "The EPA is taking a big swipe at the Clean Water Act, our greatest tool for ensuring clean water nationwide.”
The proposal was applauded by the National Association of Manufacturers, whose president, Jay Timmins, said companies' "ability to invest and build across the country" has been "undermined" by the Obama and Biden administration's broader interpretation of WOTUS.
But Southerland said Zeldin's proposal "ignores decades of science showing that wetlands and intermittent streams are essential to maintaining the health of our rivers, lakes, and drinking water supplies."
“This is one of the most significant setbacks to clean water protections in half a century,” she said. "It’s a direct assault on the clean water Americans rely on.”
Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans at Earthjustice, said the group was evaluating the legality of the proposal and would "not hesitate to go to court to protect the cherished rivers, lakes, streams, and wetlands that all Americans need and depend on.”
"The proposal avoids specifying the exact scale of the deregulation it proposes, but it clearly would result in a serious reduction in legal protections for waters across the United States," said Caputo. "Many waters that have been protected by the Clean Water Act for over 50 years would lose those protections under this proposal."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular