Posted on 12/02/2017 1:37:52 AM PST by Kaslin
FINAL UPDATE - The votes are in, and the ayes have it. After a marathon evening of debating and considering amendments, the US Senate has approved the GOP's tax reform bill, which would simplify the tax code and cut taxes for the vast majority of American households, small businesses and corporations. Every Republican voted yes, except for Tennessee's Bob Corker. Democrats uniformly voted no. This is a big legislative victory for the GOP, which overcame a great deal of ferocious opposition -- much of it rooted in misinformation -- to pass the legislation. Up next, a conference committee with the House. But here's your summary for tonight:
FINAL: With Vice President Pence presiding, the US Senate approves a major tax cut & simplification package, 51-49. The bill will now head to a conference committee, where it will be merged with the House-passed bill.— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 2, 2017
UPDATE III - It's now looking official: Senate Republicans have the votes to pass tax reform. Arizona's Jeff Flake announced he's jumping on the bandwagon, and the finalized legislation includes a (paid for) amendment sought by Maine's Susan Collins that mirrors the House-passed SALT (state and local tax deduction) compromise. That strongly suggests that she'll be a "yes," too. Add it up, and that's 51, negating the need for Vice President Pence to break a potential tie. Depending on Bob Corker's mood in a few hours, McConnell might even get all 52 GOP votes. But all he really needs is 50-plus-one, and he says he's got 'em:
BREAKING: McConnell walks onto the floor and tells reporters: “We have the votes.”— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) December 1, 2017
ORIGINAL POST - The Republican-held House of Representatives did its part by passing a tax overhaul earlier this month, with zero Democrats supporting the effort. That bill cut taxes and boosted after-tax incomes, on average, across every income group in the country, and is projected by nonpartisan analysts to grow the US economy and create close to one million new full-time jobs. It would also lower the tax burden on job-creating small businesses (key small business advocacy groups have endorsed the Republican push), and make America's extremely high statutory and effective corporate tax rates far more competitive internationally. But we've seen this movie before. With the "resistance" in full demagogic throat, and Democrats bound in lockstep opposition, will the GOP's narrow Senate majority fumble the ball, as they did on Obamacare? We'll know soon enough, and tea leaves are mixed. A vote is expected later today. As we brace what's next, let's first note three developments from yesterday (see update) that may portend a successful outcome (see update II) for Mitch McConnell's conference:
(1) John McCain is a committed "yes." As the Senator who more or less single-handedly killed his party's "repeal and replace" efforts in July, having him clearly on board is a huge boon to Republican leadership. McCain's official statement touted the expected benefits of the bill -- acknowledging concerns about it, but ultimately determining that the legislation's upside was strong enough to secure his support:
After careful consideration, I have decided to support the Senate #TaxReform bill. Though not perfect, this bill will deliver much-needed reform to our tax code, grow the economy & provide long overdue tax relief for American families. https://t.co/BeWZAT0SjM pic.twitter.com/6qwYhmyE5p— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) November 30, 2017
He even specifically addressed and endorsed the proposal's provision that would repeal Obamacare's tent pole, the federal individual mandate tax: "I have also argued that health care reform, which is important both to the well-being of our citizens and to the vitality of our economy, should proceed by regular order. This bill does not change that. As a matter of principle, I’ve always supported individual liberty and believe the federal government should not penalize Americans who cannot afford to purchase expensive health insurance. By repealing the individual mandate, this bill would eliminate an onerous tax that especially harms those from low-income brackets. In my home state of Arizona, 80 percent of people who currently pay the individual mandate penalty earn less than $50,000 per year," he wrote.
(2) The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation released its "dynamic scoring" analysis that the Senate bill would add less than $1 trillion to deficits over a decade, as opposed to the on-paper $1.4 trillion figure reached under "static scoring." The reason for this is that JCT anticipates the tax relief package would add nearly one percentage point to GDP growth over the next ten years, resulting in new revenues. Many supporters will argue that JCT underestimates the economic benefits of tax reform, but their report still offers two positive data points:
Jt Tax Cmte forecasts tax bill will increase GDP "by about 0.8 percent on average over the 10- year budget window. That increase in income would increase revenues, relative to the conventional estimate of a loss of $1,414 billion..by $458 billion over that period."— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) November 30, 2017
(3) For what it's worth:
Just spoke w/ Senate leadership source who I'd characterize as hopeful but never quite confident on the "repeal & replace" whip count over the summer. Sounds *much* more confident on tax reform today, despite some issues still being ironed out. #fwiw— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) November 30, 2017
That was the state of play late yesterday afternoon, with my well-placed source telling me McConnell and company were in a "really good place" in terms of corralling the requisite 50-plus-one votes. The source stopped short of guaranteeing passage at the time, but described potential holdouts as playing an active and "constructive" role in shaping the bill throughout the process, carried out through regular order. Susan Collins is said to be in a decent spot, and McConnell's "substitute amendment" (effectively the bill that was formally debated on the floor) was co-sponsored by...Lisa Murkowski. The three squeakiest wheels, I was told, were outgoing Tennessee Senators Bob Corker and Jeff Flake (who want a deficit-related "backstop" to reduce the tax cuts if economic growth falls short of targets), and Wisconsin's Ron Johnson. Johnson been characterized as a "hard no" in the media, but he's a pro-business, low-tax conservative at heart. I'm not so sure he's still in the 'nay' column, considering his evolving posture (this was from Wednesday evening-- and see update below):
We still have work to do, but I have been working with the administration and Senate leadership to make progress toward a better bill. - rj #taxreform— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) November 29, 2017
The bigger challenges appear to stem from the other two Senators, who emerged at the center of some floor drama last evening, which bubbled to the surface in full view of reporters. (My source quoted above still sounds optimistic, but last evening was a setback). Relevant parties spent the overnight hours seeking to hammer out an accommodation to address Corker and Flake's deficit concerns after the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a proposed "trigger" mechanism compromise did not pass procedural muster under reconciliation rules. Might that eleventh-hour wrinkle cause the upper chamber GOP to once again face-plant? Stay tuned for the yeas and nays, which may again blow up in embarrassing fashion -- or could result in a big policy and political win for Republicans. In the meantime, the Left is shouting as loudly as possible to kill the bill. Some of their biggest claims are false. Equip yourself with the facts, and help educate others. The empirically-supportable truth is that the vast majority of taxpayers stand to benefit from tax reform. Nevertheless, every single Senate Democrat marched along to Chuck Schumer's beat and voted against even debating the proposal, some of whom defended their decision with nonsensical explanations like this:
I voted against the motion to proceed on the Republican #taxreform plan because I haven’t seen a final bill. I’m still trying to work w/ my R colleagues & @realdonaldtrump to find a bipartisan way forward.— Senator Joe Manchin (@Sen_JoeManchin) November 29, 2017
He couldn't vote to advance a debate over how the final bill would look because he...hadn't seen the final bill, or something. Got it. I'll leave you with a parting thought for Mssrs. Corker and Flake:
Think very carefully, Sens Flake & Corker.
If you jointly jeopardize tax reform, it would (a) risk defeating your own long-held policy goal, (b) reek of anti-Trump pettiness, & (c) reinforce idea that GOP should prioritize personal loyalty to Trump in primaries. Lose-lose-lose.— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 1, 2017
UPDATE - As I predicted above, Johnson is now a 'yes,' and despite last night's worrisome snag, my sources are telling me that things are again looking good. They stopped short of an airtight guarantee, but both said they expect a successful vote at some point today:
?? Sen. Ron Johnson tells Milwaukee radio WISN 1130 minutes ago he is a "yes" vote https://t.co/b0eJAzNIJL— J.D. Durkin (@jiveDurkey) December 1, 2017
"The question seems to be, how many Republican votes are they going to get? Is it going to be 50, 51, or 52? But, at this point...it would be really shocking if they didn't get to 50 which is what they need." - @guypbenson— America's Newsroom (@AmericaNewsroom) December 1, 2017
This is what I've heard within the last hour, having spoken w/ several plugged-in sources. Sounding like 49 locked-in 'yes' votes, w strong likelihood that at least 1 more comes into the fold. Leadership optimistic about a vote later today. https://t.co/59dtanMrcl— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 1, 2017
UPDATE II - It looks like this is happening (or maybe not?):
BREAKING: Second-ranking Senate Republican, John Cornyn of Texas, says GOP has the votes to pass sweeping tax overhaul.— The Associated Press (@AP) December 1, 2017
New: Sen. Bob Corker tells @siobhanehughes the bill will probably pass:
https://t.co/wspkmPMJ0H via @WSJ— Richard Rubin (@RichardRubinDC) December 1, 2017
Big potential problem for GOP leaders: Susan Collins disputes Cornyn’s claim that they have her support for the GOP tax bill. (They see her as their 50th and pivotal vote)
“I can’t imagine why Senator Cornyn is speaking for me,” she told me. “I speak for myself”— Laura Litvan (@LauraLitvan) December 1, 2017
I’m sorry I should have been more precise. It is property tax not sales tax that is deductible to 10K under both house & senate plans.
You Washington Post headline is a complete load of BS.
Trump does NOT say that he will consider raising the corporate tax, nor that he favors raising it.
“It could be 22 when it all comes out, but it could also be 20. We’ll see what ultimately comes out.” Moving the corporate tax rate up by 2 percentage points could raise $200 billion, money Trump might need to try to satisfy the concerns of Republicans frustrated that the plan does not reduce top individuals’ tax rates enough or of others such as Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.), who argued that the bill should do more for low-income families.
For folks around here who look for 3-Chess moves in Trump's tweets like they are archaeologists, but can't believe what Trump actually told reporters, your comment is hilarious.
“It could be 22 when it all comes out, but it could also be 20. We’ll see what ultimately comes out.”
What is hilarious is your inability to comprehend the written word.
Try again.
There is no advocacy of increasing the corporate tax here. He is simply stating the reality that the Bill goes to conference now and it could be used as a negotiating tool.
This is possible but not likely as both House and Senate have the tax at 20%.
What is clear for those who can read and understand English is that Trump does not state what the WashCompost headline states.
Again...try again Sky.
Basically most call themselves Christians because Grandmother and Grandfather or their parents were Christians, thus, of course, THEY MUST BE Christians!!! WRONG!!! You can call yourself a sink, but that does not mean you drain water. That would make you a bladder!!! Those here that are blasting people, who claim to be Christians, probably aren't Christian. THAT is why I don't simply identify myself as a Christian any longer. That title has been too watered down. I like to better describe myself as a BELIEVER. A BELIEVER IN CHRIST JESUA, and NO OTHER!!! Simply, I am a Believer. That way, I KNOW and all know that I believe IN HIM. I don't describe myself as something someone can claim simply because Mama and Daddy were. Well, gotta go, the Church bells are ringing up at my Church, time to leave!!! Peace be with you.
Love your charts. Stealing them
“But he is being disingenuous. He thinks it will pump up the stock market (at least in the short term). He is most likely very correct on that. At least for awhile.”
I don’t think anything of the kind. First of all no one yet knows what the final bill will really look like and therefore any prognostication about it’s effects are still largely unknown. It would be nonsense if it were not helpful to the vast majority of taxpayers, but at this juncture, more importantly, not getting it past, would probably spell the end of the GOP majorities, and thereby doom President Trump’s agenda and probably his presidency as the RATs would use up the rest of his first term with impeachment.
As for me benefitting personally from any pumping up of the stock market, that isn’t the case. I sold out of the market in 2007 and don’t own one share of stock personally. I do have a 401k that was decimated by the “crash in 2007, that I have been drawing on in retirement since about 2007 when I retired. Before the crash, there was enough money in it to carry us both to the end of the road. Now it will be gone in the next couple of years.
https://taxfoundation.org/details-analysis-2017-senate-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/
On a static basis, the plan would lead to 1.2 percent higher after-tax income on average for all taxpayers and 4.5 percent higher after-tax income on average for the top 1 percent in 2027. When accounting for the increased GDP, after-tax incomes of all taxpayers would increase by 4.4 percent in the long run.
According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, the plan would significantly lower marginal tax rates and the cost of capital, which would lead to a 3.7 percent increase in GDP over the long term, 2.9 percent higher wages, and an additional 925,000 full-time equivalent jobs.
You admitted in open thread that your unusual personal circumstances (you didn't call them that) would lead you to pay more taxes under a bill that had not yet been passed, and in subsequent pings have saddled on any status quo argument you can find. Criticizing that is legitimate, but I hadn't done that.
But I know what you mean -- I've been criticized for very specific and detailed tax cut ideas I've spitballed around here over theyears, told that I wanted to be subsidized for "poor life choices".
Seriously?
I commented that it was ‘interesting that your anti-Trump tax bill posts are being posted on DU’.
As in, don’t offer that DUmp any fodder.
Yet, you claim I ‘or one of my nasty clones’ may have posted it there.
You immediately resorted to name calling and accusations....personal attacks.
Take care, SkyPilot.
Those companies did nothing illegal or immoral. In a global economy, and yes, it is a global economy, whether you like it or not, competition is fierce.
It would be nice if they did not need to do that, but the US has the highest tax on business of any industrialized nation on earth. If you owned a company and reported to shareholders, you too, probably would have done the same thing.
cheap goods have raised our standard of living dramatically. And yes, that is a good thing for everyone. Tariffs used selectively can be helpful, but as a regular policy concept, I don't think it works too well. Ask anyone who grew up in the 30s.
Here is how it is going to work. The repatriated money will be brought back and companies will use some of the money to build things, such as new headquarters, new factories and new equipment. The people hired to build those things will be the beneficiaries of the repatriated money and those hired to work in the new factories will benefit, too. Those are good things. A good chunk will go to the government so they can waste even more money, but to force companies to use that money a certain way distorts the economy and is corrupt - a very corrupt way of using the money, in fact. Who decides who gets the money and how much. How will the federal government enforce that provision of the law? What a nightmare. I doubt it could pass legal hurdles. It would be a complete and horrible mess.
I only had you on my tax ping. If you were caught in the scuffle my sincere apologies. None of that was aimed at you.
Wow I did not know that the Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama Gulf coast region that have refineries and chemical plants were in Mexico.
I guess I better not leave out all the power plants that I think are still in the US. I damn sure hope we are not buying ALL our electricity from Mexico.
Wait, what about all the drilling rigs that get built in Texas and Louisiana?
There must be a map out there that has all of the Gulf Coast now belonging to Mehico that I have not seen. Maybe ObucketOshit gave us away when we were not looking.
I never accused you of being a DU troll. I simply lamented that your posts were being picked up, over there.
(Again...let’s not offer them fodder.) Here’s what I posted to you...
Interesting that your anti-Trump tax bill posts are being posted on DU.
You then replied with this...
....For all I know, it was you and your uncivil and nasty clones who posted it there. I don’t even go to that sewer - but apparently some of you do......
Calling me uncivil, nasty and accusing me of posting it there...was uncalled for.
I have NO IDEA who posted it there. Again, I just don’t like giving those lunkheads fodder, from here.
I don’t want, nor do I expect an apology from you.
We have ended our conversations.
Take care.
You posted this to me.
"Interesting that your anti-Trump tax bill posts are being posted on DU. What a badge of “honor”. Not."
Maybe it's just me - but I think 99.9999% of people would not take that as an compliment, but as a sarcastic smear.
I don’t want, nor do I expect an apology from you. We have ended our conversations.
As you wish.
Thanks SP.
I am not impressed with this GOP tax bill either as a retired person who already got screwed on a once promising pension. Where is the Postcard tax form? Nowhere and never going to happen either, the swamp wins again. Where is the middle class tax cut and the 3 tax brackets 10...20...25%?
I see more deductions that the rest us will have to cover with our high taxation. The GOP suck!
I want Trump to say, where are my tax campaign promises?
It looks like more money sucked from middle class for washington class and cheap labor express, tax bill.
Thankfully my shrunk pension will keep me from paying to much more. Maybe sell property now before real estate prices tank.
He likes capitalism but he doesn’t like Corporatism with big corporations, big banks and big business colluding.
They work together to shut the little business people out.
I think see that influence on this tax legislation.
...............
Nailed it!
The middle class is getting the largest tax cuts.
Tax Foundation :
” “Our results indicate a reduction in tax liability for every scenario we modeled, with some of the largest cuts accruing to moderate-income families with children.” ...
...” The majority are automatic winners, as they’re among the vast majority of all filers who take the (roughly doubled) standard deduction...
***...!!! Every household profiled in the analysis gets a tax cut and an increase in after-tax earnings. !!!...
The smallest percentage cut and income boost goes to the richest couple. Another busted narrative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.