

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

In a continued effort to combat rising economic inequality, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday introduced two pieces of legislation to end our rigged tax code and ensure the wealthiest people and largest corporations pay their fair share - the For the 99.5% Act and the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act.
In a continued effort to combat rising economic inequality, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Thursday introduced two pieces of legislation to end our rigged tax code and ensure the wealthiest people and largest corporations pay their fair share - the For the 99.5% Act and the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act.
Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) are joining Sen. Sanders as original cosponsors of the For the 99.5% Act in the Senate, which has garnered the support of over 50 national organizations. In the House, the companion estate tax legislation will be introduced by Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), while Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) will introduce the bill on offshore corporate tax dodging.
The For the 99.5% Act is a progressive estate tax on the fortunes of the top 0.5 percent of Americans, while the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act will eliminate tax breaks and loopholes that encourage corporations to shift jobs and profits offshore. This comes a week after the reintroduction of the Tax Excessive CEO Pay Act, and ahead of today's 11:00 a.m. Senate Budget Committee hearing on "Ending a Rigged Tax Code: The Need to Make the Wealthiest People and Largest Corporations Pay Their Fair Share of Taxes."
"Unbelievably, the United States today has more income and wealth inequality than almost any major country on Earth," said Sen. Sanders. "This inequality has only deepened with the economic crisis brought on by COVID and by a tax system that allows for billionaires to pay less in taxes than working people across the country. From a moral, economic, and political perspective our nation will not thrive when so few have so much and so many have so little. We need a tax system which demands the billionaire class pay its fair share of taxes and which reduces the obscene level of wealth inequality in America."
"As everyday New Yorkers struggle to put food on the table, and keep a steady check in their bank accounts, it's time the uber wealthy pay their fair share to get New York, and our country, on a sustainable path towards recovery," said Senator Gillibrand. "I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the For the 99.5% Act, a common-sense piece of legislation to make sure Congress is doing everything possible to assist struggling Americans across the country."
"The wealthiest Americans ought to pay their fair share when they receive big inheritances," said Sen. Whitehouse. "We need a tax system that's fair, simple, and doesn't let the ultra-rich avoid this responsibility of citizenship."
"We need an economy that works for all Americans, not just the wealthiest few," said Sen. Van Hollen. "With inequality skyrocketing and the pandemic making it harder and harder for folks to find work, it's critical that we implement policies that will put everyday people first. This legislation will ensure America's billionaire heirs contribute more to support national investments that will benefit all Americans and build a more inclusive economy with more shared prosperity."
"The tax system needs plenty of changes to restore confidence and fairness," said Sen. Reed. "This bill sends a strong signal that tax avoidance damages our democracy. It offers a simple, targeted solution that will restore fairness to the tax code by closing inheritance tax loopholes and ensuring working people aren't paying higher tax rates than the very wealthiest."
"The expansion of the estate tax represents one of our country's most effective tools in rebuilding our economy to work for all Americans," said Rep. Jimmy Gomez. "For far too long, ultra-rich families have used our tax code to acquire mass amounts of wealth as working Americans, especially those of color, have fallen further behind. The For the 99.5% Act - which I'll soon be introducing in the House of Representatives - would substantively strengthen the estate tax and help restore fairness and equity to our nation's tax code. I'd like to thank Senator Bernie Sanders for partnering with me in our joint efforts to uplift America's working class and help provide them with new opportunities to thrive and support their families."
"For decades, Americans have been told that trickle-down economics would lead to shared prosperity," said Rep. Schakowsky. "That didn't materialize, and we have seen the middle class hollowed out, and the bottom fall out on the working poor. The American Rescue Plan represented a sea change after years of misguided policies, and the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act is the next logical step towards the Federal government putting the American people ahead of billionaires and transnational corporations. I thank Senator Sanders for devoting his career to tackling income inequality, and am proud to partner with him on this important measure."
"America's estate and gift tax system is the most loophole-ridden part of our tax law," said Frank Clemente, Executive Director of Americans for Tax Fairness. "With the help of an army of highly paid advisors, America's ultra-wealthy pay tax on only a fraction of their wealth or avoid tax entirely. The billions in taxes they dodge each year costs the rest of us better schools, affordable health care, and other critical services. The For the 99.5% Act closes the gaping loopholes in current law and will check the horrific concentration of wealth in the hands of billionaires."
"Sen. Sanders' legislation drills down on a core problem in America's international tax system: the ease with which U.S. multinational companies exploit offshore tax havens to dodge taxes they would otherwise be required to pay," said Ian Gary, Executive Director of the Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency (FACT) Coalition. "There is an unprecedented momentum in the U.S. and among our international allies to advance reforms like the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act to strip tax incentives for corporations to move profits - along with real jobs and operations - overseas. This legislation would put small and wholly domestic businesses on a fairer footing to compete with U.S. multinational enterprises."
More than a century ago, Republican President Theodore Roosevelt fought for the creation of a progressive estate tax to reduce the enormous concentration of wealth that existed during the Gilded Age. Roosevelt's efforts are even more relevant in today's America where the billionaire class pays a lower effective tax rate than the working class.
The For the 99.5% Act establishes a new progressive estate tax rate structure on the top 0.5% of Americans who inherit over $3.5 million in wealth. This bill also includes ending tax breaks for dynasty trusts; closing other loopholes in the estate and gift tax; and providing protections for family farmers by allowing them to lower the value of their farmland by up to $3 million for estate tax purposes.
Ninety-nine and a half percent of Americans would not owe a penny more in taxes under this bill, but the families of all 657 billionaires in America - who have a combined net worth of over $4.2 trillion - would owe up to $2.7 trillion in estate tax. Specifically, this legislation would impose a 45% tax rate on estates worth $3.5 million and a 65% tax rate on the value of an estate worth over $1 billion.
This is not a radical idea. In fact, from 1941-1976, the top estate tax rate was 77% on estates worth more than $50 million. According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, this bill would raise $430 billion through 2031.
Under this bill:
The Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act would raise over $2.3 trillion in revenue by preventing corporations from shifting their profits offshore to avoid paying U.S. taxes. It would also restore the top corporate tax rate to 35% - where it was before Trump became president.
Today, corporations are paying as little as nothing on profits they claimed to make overseas. The situation has become so absurd that one five-story office building in the Cayman Islands is the "home" to about 20,000 corporations.
A year after Trump's Republican tax bill was signed into law, over 90 Fortune 500 companies not only paid nothing in federal income taxes, they actually received billions of dollars in tax rebate checks from the IRS. For example, in 2018:
This would change under the Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act as it stops corporations from sheltering profits in tax havens like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, and would end rewards for companies that ship jobs and factories overseas with tax breaks. Additionally, this bill would reform the tax code by:
According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, just the offshore loophole closing portions of this bill would raise over $1 trillion billion through 2031.
The For the 99.5% Act
* Read the bill, here.
* Read the bill summary, here.
* Read the JCT score of the bill, here.
* Read the letter of support of over 50 national organizations, here.
The Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act
* Read the bill, here.
* Read the bill summary, here.
* Read JCT score of the offshore portion of the bill, here.
"The truth is, there are not enough factories, or skilled workers, or materials to effectively spend such a huge increase," said one expert. "It will be a recipe for waste, fraud, and abuse."
The budget document that President Donald Trump's White House is set to release Friday calls for $1.5 trillion in military spending for the coming fiscal year, an unprecedented sum that—if approved by Congress—would add nearly $7 trillion to the US national debt over the next decade.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, which got an early look at the president's fiscal year 2027 budget, reported that the plan includes roughly $1.15 trillion in baseline US military spending as well as $350 billion in supplemental funding "that Republicans could pass in a party-line budget reconciliation bill." The Journal doesn't specify the purpose of the proposed supplemental funding, but the Pentagon has asked Congress for at least $200 billion for the Iran war.
The budget, which would boost total US military spending by more than 40% compared to the current fiscal year, also reportedly calls for investments in Trump's so-called Golden Dome missile defense system, a project that critics have derided as an absurd boondoggle.
Earlier this week, Trump suggested the US federal government can't afford to fund childcare and other domestic social programs because it is "fighting wars."
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote in an analysis of the budget proposal ahead of its official release that "whatever vehicles the administration chooses to promote this huge increase, it will be doubling down on a failed budgetary and national security strategy."
"If passed as requested, $1.5 trillion in Pentagon spending—in a single year–will make America weaker by underwriting a misguided strategy, funding outmoded weapons programs, and crowding out other essential public investments," Hartung argued. "The Pentagon doesn’t need more spending, it needs more spending discipline. Spending billions of dollars on a Golden Dome system that can never achieve the President’s dream of a leak-proof missile defense system is sheer waste, as is continuing to lavish funds on overpriced, underperforming combat aircraft like the F-35, or multi-billion dollar aircraft carriers that are vulnerable to modern high-speed missiles."
"The truth is, there are not enough factories, or skilled workers, or materials to effectively spend such a huge increase," he added. "It will be a recipe for waste, fraud, and abuse."
In anticipation of the White House proposal, a broad coalition of nearly 300 advocacy organizations sent a letter to members of Congress on Thursday demanding that they reject Trump's request and any other proposed budget increases for the Pentagon, which recently failed its eighth consecutive audit.
"We must invest in critical human needs programs in our communities. Instead, we have cut those programs massively," the groups wrote, pointing to the record Medicaid and nutrition assistance cuts that Trump and congressional Republicans approved last year.
"The Pentagon is unaccountable to American taxpayers, having never passed an audit, while more than half of its budget (54 percent) is paid to corporate military contractors, whose profits are rising. Further gigantic increases would be grossly irresponsible," the groups continued. "Funding an unaccountable Pentagon by more than $1 trillion while underfunding human needs programs undermines our security by preventing us from investing in the shared prosperity that comes from more housing, health care, climate and public health protections, ending hunger, and providing quality public education."
"Just pointless forever war, death and destruction—a flailing, furious, rapidly declining superpower," one analyst wrote of the Trump administration's assault.
US President Donald Trump late Thursday threatened more illegal attacks on Iranian civilian infrastructure, including bridges and power plants, as Iran's military said it shot down an American fighter jet over Tehran, with state-affiliated media publishing apparent photos from the scene.
An Iranian official told Drop Site's Jeremy Scahill that Iran's forces hit an F-15 warplane, causing the jet to crash and sparking "an intense fire." The unnamed Iranian official said the pilot could not have evacuated due to the "nature of the strike," but "no remains have yet been found."
The US Central Command had not commented on the purported downing of an American fighter jet as of this writing. Last month, a US F-35 was forced to make an emergency landing at an air base in the Middle East after reportedly being struck by Iranian fire.
🚨 BREAKING | An Iranian official told Drop Site News that a U.S. F-15 warplane struck by Iranian forces went down over southern Tehran Province, with intense fire reported at the crash site.
The official said the nature of the strike prevented the pilot[s] from ejecting before… https://t.co/iUKD0AqRQQ pic.twitter.com/BI4TzolmZY
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) April 3, 2026
Iran's claim on Friday came as Trump issued more belligerent threats on his social media platform, declaring that the US military "hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran."
"Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants!" the president wrote, shortly after bragging about the US military's destruction of an Iranian highway bridge. "New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done, FAST!"
Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, characterized Trump's message as "more threats of war crimes as POTUS flails and seeks to coerce an exit to his own self-inflicted, unnecessary, and ill-conceived war."
Trump's renewed threats came amid reports of US-Israeli attacks on a century-old Iranian medical research center, pharmaceutical facilities, residential buildings, and other civilian infrastructure—and on emergency responders aiding those wounded by the attacks.
"War crime after war crime after war crime," US Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), the lone Iranian American member of Congress, wrote early Friday. "Now’s the time to speak up if you’re against this reckless war of choice. The consequences will be vast and catastrophic."
Ben Rhodes, a political analyst who worked in the Obama administration, wrote that the US military's recent actions have "nothing to do with nuclear or helping Iranians."
"Just pointless forever war, death and destruction—a flailing, furious, rapidly declining superpower," Rhodes added.
One campaigner urged the administration to "focus on real solutions to support more transparent and diverse supply sources and make targeted investments for the supply of key medicines."
On Thursday, the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day, US advocacy groups sounded the alarm about his new tariffs targeting "patented pharmaceuticals and their ingredients under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to bolster American national security and public health."
The administration announced a year ago that the US Department of Commerce would conduct a related investigation under that law. The resulting report was recently sent to the president, and although the findings have not been made public, Trump's executive order summarizes key takeaways and Secretary Howard Lutnick's recommended actions.
According to the order, the secretary's recommendations included "continuing to negotiate onshoring agreements related to most favored nation (MFN) pharmaceutical pricing agreements; imposing significant tariffs on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security of the United States; and granting preferential treatment to those companies that commit to onshore production of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients."
Citing an unnamed Trump administration official, The Washington Post reported Thursday that "the White House has reached agreements with 13 drugmakers and expects to soon conclude an additional four." As part of these deals, companies are planning to invest at least $400 billion in new US plants.
The Post also pointed out that "some imported drugs will face much lower tariffs under trade deals Trump negotiated with five US trading partners. Goods from the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Switzerland will face 15% levies, while drugs from the United Kingdom, which was the first to sign a deal with Trump, will be hit with a 10% tariff."
Thanks to Trump's new order, brand-name pharmaceuticals made in other countries could be hit with tariffs as high as 100%.
Merith Basey, CEO of Patients for Affordable Drugs, warned in a statement that "while these tariffs aim to pressure pharmaceutical corporations into US manufacturing and most favored nation agreements, the current MFN deals remain opaque and voluntary, and have not delivered meaningful savings for the vast majority of American patients. There's a real risk these tariffs will drive up costs and create more uncertainty for millions of patients already struggling to afford their medications."
Experts at Public Citizen, another advocacy group that has sued to expose the secretive MFN agreements, were similarly critical.
"By announcing these tariffs without even producing the evidence from the investigation that supposedly justifies them, Trump is continuing his pattern of grabbing headlines by using the word 'tariff' while engaging in secretive ongoing negotiations and opaque exemptions processes that are ripe for corporate corruption," said Public Citizen Global Trade Watch director Melinda St. Louis—who also wrote a broader takedown of Trump's trade policy published Thursday by Common Dreams.
"While strategic tariffs can be used to support domestic manufacturing and good jobs, they must be paired with real public investments and support for workers' rights, which Trump has systematically undermined," she said. "Instead, he's bullying other countries like the UK into paying more for medicines, which will lead to windfall profits for Big Pharma and do nothing to reduce US prices."
Peter Maybarduk, director of Access to Medicines at Public Citizen, stressed that "Trump's tariffs will be either ineffective or harmful for what people need, which is a reliable, plentiful, affordable supply of medicine."
Also taking aim at the "secretive arrangements that allow Trump to claim specious victories on manufacturing and high drug prices," Maybarduk explained that "in reality, many manufacturing commitments claimed under the deals were part of previously planned projects and the drug pricing commitments appear designed to largely spare drug company profits rather than earnestly address affordability concerns."
"Meanwhile the administration has given drugmakers perks like lucrative vouchers to accelerate FDA review of their medicines and a promise from the Trump administration that it will bully other countries into adopting higher prescription drug prices, using tariffs as leverage," he continued, referring to the Food and Drug administration.
"If the administration wants to fix problems like medicines shortages and fragile supply chains," he argued, "it should focus on real solutions to support more transparent and diverse supply sources and make targeted investments for the supply of key medicines."