SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
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.
"Despite their rhetoric," Republicans are "failing to deliver for millions of working-class families," said one tax expert.
Since Republican leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday evening released tax-related legislative language and announced a markup for President Donald Trump's "One, Big, Beautiful Bill," economic justice advocates have sounded the alarm.
House Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) scheduled a Tuesday afternoon hearing, shared 28 pages of legislative proposals for the reconciliation package, and positively framed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) that congressional Republicans passed and Trump signed in 2017. The tax reform push comes just months away from parts of that law—which critics call the "GOP tax scam"—expiring.
"So far this costly bill appears to double down on trickle down, with huge tax cuts that will further enrich the rich and not much for the rest of us," said Amy Hanauer, executive director of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), in a Saturday statement. "What's more, many of the modest improvements for lower- and middle-income families are proposed to be temporary, whereas the benefits for the wealthiest are proposed to be permanent."
Hanauer's group specifically noted that "the 2017 changes to personal income tax rates and brackets would be made permanent," as would the deduction that individuals receive from "pass-through" businesses, which would also increase from 20% to 22%. Republicans also want to hike the estate tax exemption from $13.99 million per spouse to $15 million and have it continue to rise with inflation.
"The very generous version of a tax break for offshore profits (the GILTI deduction) would be made permanent, effectively taxing the foreign profits of American corporations half as much (at most) as their domestic profits are taxed," the think tank highlighted.
ITEP also flagged that "the 2017 change to the standard deduction would be made permanent, and a temporary four-year boost would bump it up to $16,000 for individuals, $24,000 for taxpayers filing as head of household, and $32,000 for married couples."
"The child tax credit would temporarily increase to $2,500 per child from $2,000 per child for four years, but 4.5 million citizen kids would lose access to the... CTC due to a requirement that both their parents have Social Security numbers," the group warned.
Chuck Marr, vice president of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, similarly said in a series of Friday social media posts that the emerging "bill appears highly skewed to the wealthy, [with] several regressive expansions of 2017 tax cuts and full of costly timing gimmicks, while, despite their rhetoric, failing to deliver for millions of working-class families."
Like ITEP, Marr blasted House Republicans for their "glaring failure" on the CTC as well as for continuing to push the pass-through deduction and estate tax exemption, the latter of which he called "the most skewed provision of the 2017 law."
"On Tuesday, House Republicans in one committee will be taking away people's health insurance and in another taking away food assistance, while in a third they will be permanently increasing the amount the wealthiest heirs in the country can inherit tax-free," he said, stressing that the GOP aims to pay for its tax giveaways to the rich by gutting Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
"It also looks like House Republicans are repeating a brazen pattern from 2017: Make the provisions for rich people permanent (recall the 2017 massive corporate rate cut) while making the broader provisions temporary—backwards priorities," Marr declared.
"So tonight we've learned—despite all the Trump bluster—House Republicans are proposing more tax cuts for the wealthy, increasing its already bloated costs, while harshly failing to deliver for millions of families he promised to help," he concluded.
Smith's legislative text notably does not include letting the top tax rate revert from 37% to 39.6% for taxable income greater than $5 million for married couples and $2.5 million—an idea that Trump floated this week but, as NBC News put it, "is running into a buzz saw of opposition in the Republican Party."
Trump said on his Truth Social Platform early Friday: "The problem with even a 'TINY' tax increase for the RICH, which I and all others would graciously accept in order to help the lower and middle income workers, is that the Radical Left Democrat Lunatics would go around screaming, 'Read my lips,' the fabled Quote by George Bush the Elder that is said to have cost him the Election. NO, Ross Perot cost him the Election! In any event, Republicans should probably not do it, but I'm OK if they do!!!"
While Trump's comments this week have generated headlines about the president proposing "to raise income taxes on wealthy Americans," ITEP's Steve Wamhoff and Carl Davis argued in a blog post that "nobody should be deceived: The wealthiest taxpayers got enormous tax breaks from Trump's 2017 law and are getting additional large tax breaks in what Trump and Republicans are proposing now."
"We need legislation that requires rich people to pay more taxes, not less," they added. "The Republican legislation will do the opposite, regardless of whether or not Congress includes this latest suggestion from Donald Trump."
"With economic uncertainty and the risk of recession rising, now is a particularly bad time for Congress to pursue these harmful changes," according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
As congressional Republicans mull potentially imposing stricter work requirements for adults who rely on federal nutrition aid as part of a push to pass a GOP-backed reconciliation bill, an analysis from the progressive think tank the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities released Wednesday states that such a move could take away food "from millions of people in low-income households" who are having a hard time finding steady employment or face hurdles to finding work.
The analysis is based on a proposal regarding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) from House Agriculture Committee member Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), which, if enacted, the group estimates would translate into an estimated 6 million people being at risk of losing their food assistance.
"In total, nearly 11 million people—about 1 in 4 SNAP participants, including more than 4 million children and more than half a million adults aged 65 or older and adults with disabilities—live in households that would be at risk of losing at least some of their food assistance" under Johnson's proposed rules, according to the analysis.
Per CBPP, current SNAP rules mandate that most adults ages 18-54 without children may receive food benefits for only three months in a three-year period unless they prove they are participating in a 20-hour-per-week work program or prove they have a qualifying exemption.
Under Johnson's proposal, work requirements would apply to adults ages 18-65, and they would also be expanded to adults who have children over the age of seven. Per CBPP, Johnson's proposal would also "virtually eliminate" the ability of states to waive the three-month time limit in response to local labor market conditions, like in cases where there are insufficient jobs
According to CBPP, its report is based on analysis of "the number of participants meeting the age and other characteristics of the populations that would be newly subject to the work requirement under U.S. Department of Agriculture 2022 SNAP Household Characteristics data," as well as the number of participants potentially subject to work requirements in areas that are typically subject to the waivers mentioned above.
The House Agriculture Committee, which oversees SNAP—formerly known as food stamps—has been tasked with finding $230 billion in cuts as part of a House budget reconciliation plan. To come up with that amount, the committee would need to enact steep cuts to SNAP.
According to CBPP, most SNAP recipients who can work are already working, or are temporarily in between jobs. Per the report, U.S. Department of Agriculture data undercount the SNAP households who are working because the numbers come from SNAP's "Quality Control" sample, which gives point-in-time data about a household in a given month.
This snapshot does "not indicate whether a household had earnings before or after the sample month, nor do they show how long a household participates in SNAP."
What's more, "with economic uncertainty and the risk of recession rising, now is a particularly bad time for Congress to pursue these harmful changes," according to the authors of the analysis.
A new analysis shows that already, in 35 states, more than 10% of seniors must travel over 45 miles to their closest field office.
Multiple reports out this week highlight how the Trump administration's "restructuring" of the agency that administers Social Security benefits—some of which officials may be lying about—is already negatively impacting people across the country and is expected to get much worse.
"Recent reports in the media that the Social Security Administration (SSA) is permanently closing local field offices are false," the agency said in a late March statement, noting the permanent closure of one hearing office, in White Plains, New York.
SSA identified "underutilized office space" and provided the General Services Administration (GSA) with "a list of sites for termination," the agency continued. "Most of these are small hearing rooms with no assigned employees. Since most hearings are held virtually, SSA no longer needs these underutilized rooms."
The agency echoed those claims on social media Monday. One post on X—the platform owned by billionaire Elon Musk, the apparent leader of President Donald Trump's Department of Government Efficiency—said that SSA "is NOT permanently closing field offices. Only underutilized hearing office space has been closed and without permanently closing field offices."
SSA "continues to make this information widely available. The administration remains committed to serving people where they need us," the agency added, linking to a webpage that lists vacated occupancies and GSA building disposals.
However, just hours after those posts, Government Executivereported that "a draft plan for service delivery at the Social Security Administration includes 'field office consolidation' as a goal for next year—even as the agency maintains publicly that it isn't closing field offices."
According to the outlet:
The draft plan, originally sent March 21 and obtained by Government Executive, is required by the Trump administration by April 14 as part of its push to gut the federal workforce and reorganize agencies. Asked for comment Monday, SSA spokeswoman Nicole Tiggemann wrote, "There is no validity to this claim."
[...]
SSA is also looking to shed thousands of employees. The March 21 document says that the agency plans to cut 5,500 employees by the end of the fiscal year as part of the agency’s plan to get down to 50,000 employees, as Government Executive previously reported.
The new reporting sparked outrage on social media, with one X user
calling it "very disturbing for Americans on social assistance."
Andrew Cockburn, Washington editor of Harper's Magazine, declared, "They're lying about not closing Social Security field offices."
Potential field office closures are generating concern in part because of other changes at SSA—including the Trump administration's attack on phone services and an identity verification policy set to take effect next week, after a brief delay. Beginning April 14, people who can't verify their identity online through "my Social Security" must do so in-person.
It is already difficult for many Americans to access SSA locations. A Tuesday analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) shows that in 35 states, more than 10% of seniors must travel over 45 miles to their closest field office.
"Many Social Security beneficiaries don't drive while others have mobility issues that make getting to in-person appointments difficult or burdensome, even if they do not live great distances away," noted a pair of CBPP experts. "Nationally, it's estimated that over 6 million seniors don't drive, and nearly 8 million seniors report a medical condition or disability that makes it difficult to travel outside the home."
"Distances from the nearest Social Security field office are measured in a straight line ('as the crow flies')," they explained, "so actual distances for seniors to travel will likely be significantly longer, including if they use public transportation."
Axios, which first reported on the CBPP data, obtained an internal memo in which SSA "acknowledged cutting off phone service could drive as many as 85,000 people per week to its already backlogged field offices."
The Trump administration addressed "telephone performance" in its Monday X posts,
saying that "wait times are too long, predate the current administration, and the American people deserve the truth."
The SSA social media account also blamed the previous administration for recent website "challenges."
The Washington Post reported Monday that "the website has crashed repeatedly in recent weeks, with outages lasting anywhere from 20 minutes to almost a day, according to six current and former officials with knowledge of the issues. Even when the site is back online, many customers have not been able to sign in to their accounts—or have logged in only to find information missing. For others, access to the system has been slow, requiring repeated tries to get in."
Several members of Congress are sounding the alarm about Trump and Musk's attack on SSA. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on the chamber's floor Tuesday that "we all know what game they're playing. Donald Trump and his inner circle are howling about fraud, with the hopes of discrediting Social Security entirely."
"Never mind that there is no rampant fraud in Social Security. Never mind that it's overwhelmingly popular with Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives, rural people, suburban people, urban people. Why are they doing this then?" he continued. "So Republicans can cut taxes for the rich. This is a heist."
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) weighed in on X Monday, sharing a Wall Street Journal report about hourslong lines and phone cutoffs.
"Donald Trump and Elon Musk are cutting Social Security staff, closing offices, and shutting off vital phone services. One field office worker called it a 'house of cards that's about to collapse,'" she said. "This attack is hurting Americans everywhere. We will keep fighting back."