This is a thread on the Romney Child Tax Credit plan. My hope is that somehow it will find its way to liberal commentators who feel an almost giddy impulse to tell their many followers that the Romney proposal is better or just as good or close enough to the Biden proposal
First, picture two people, one woman and one man, both of an age of possibly have young children. Now picture a recent visit to the grocery store, or a recent delivery, or an elderly relative being helped to shower or have lunch
Now suppose the woman your picturing makes about $15,000 a year at one of those jobs – e.g. a cashier or a home health aide -- and she’s a single mom with a toddler son and a daughter who is in second grade
President Biden – for one year -- proposes to boost her Child Tax Credit and her family’s income by about $4,700 – i.e. real money for a family who do not have lots of money
Senator Romney – on a permanent basis – proposes to increase her Child Tax Credit by about $5,300, i.e. even more (I was giddy at this point too). But then Senator Romney in turn proposes to take more than two-thirds of this amount back by cutting her EITC
This one single Mom’s family does much, much better under the Biden plan than the Romney plan
Now picture explaining to her one reason the Romney plan is “better” is that if she gets less of an income boost for kids’ clothes, to help pay rent, or maybe even for a birthday party for her daughter that, because of this denial, she will be more apt to get married. Then, duck
Now let’s turn back to the man mentioned earlier in this thread. Picture he makes about $20,000 a year at one of those jobs – maybe he prepares food for delivery – and wife recently had a baby and she is at home with the baby and their other son who is third grade
The Biden proposal increases his family’s Child Tax Credit by about $4,000 – again, real money.
The Romney plan would increase his family’s Child Tax Credit by an even higher amount, roughly $4,600. But, and for this man it’s a big but, the Romney plan in turn proposes to take back about two-thirds of this gain by cutting the family’s EITC
Starting with these two people in mind, now consider that Senator Romney proposes to cut the entire EITC by about two-thirds, i.e. affecting millions and millions of people across the country as it does this example woman and man
This means that home-health aides, grocery story cashiers, house cleaners, short-order cooks would pay for a sizable portion of the Romney plan, that these people making $15,000, $20,000 would fare far worse under the Romney plan
Now think back to the 2017 tax law where the amount wealthy trust fund kids could inherit tax-free was increased to $22 million per couple or about the new tax deduction for wealthy real estate partnerships or the massive tax cuts for corporate shareholders
As of now, the Biden proposal is for just one year. Soon hopefully, it will be a permanent proposal. It’s not clear how such a proposal would be paid for.
Please, liberal commentators, ask yourselves whether having home health aides & grocery cashiers pay for or an expanded Child Tax Credit is better than some obvious progressive alternatives (e.g. wealthy heirs, real estate partners, wealthy shareholders)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Chuck Marr

Chuck Marr Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ChuckCBPP

16 Jul 20
With the Senate GOP expected to unveil its opening proposal next week, it seems important to recall when they initially staked out their position of a scaled-back fiscal response and how much has changed since then:

Thread
In late May, Senator McConnell said that “You could anticipate the decision being made on whether to go forward in about a month. And it will be narrowly crafted, designed to help us where we are a month from now, not where we were three months ago.”
cnb.cx/2OFmLcx
The GOP was advocating a two-step approach: aggressive re-openings which would allow for a fiscal retreat. As the President Trump in early June said, “We’re opening and we’re opening with a bang.”
Read 6 tweets
9 Jul 20
New paper w/ @dashching makes 5 points:

CARES largely worked

Improvements needed to address hardship

Aggressive re-openings strategy is failing in real-time

Fiscal retreat would compound this failure

Robust fiscal package urgently needed

bit.ly/3gGUgac
Thread
The CARES Act largely worked. As the chart below highlights, policies such as the robust unemployment insurance helped offset the job-loss driven income reduction – a major policy success – providing a lifeline to millions of families across the country:
As the miles-long lines of people idling in cars in wait of food attest, however, the policy response to date has shortcomings and this hardship needs to be addressed when the Congress acts:

nyti.ms/3gHAwmJ
Read 9 tweets
13 Nov 19
@jacsamoby, Kathleen Bryant, and I put out a paper today framed by two points: much of the income of very wealthy people does not show up on their tax returns and often enjoys special tax breaks when it does bit.ly/2qKpqJ3

Thread
@jacsamoby Because of the wealth tax proposals, these issues are getting lots of attention. The piece I think is getting too little attention is how relatively little personal income tax many wealthy people pay, i.e. the current system is not working. A couple of examples:
@jacsamoby First, the man behind the Buffett Rule, which misleadingly only looks at the rate differential between Mr. Buffett and his secretary. The rule ignores most of his income.
Read 8 tweets
26 Sep 18
On Friday the House is expected to vote on the GOP’s 2.0 tax plan which doubles down on the 2017 tax law’s flaws: tilted in favor of top 1%, loses large revenue right when youngest baby boomers become SS-eligible, and invites tax games. Charts to follow.
The House GOP’s 2.0 tax plan ignores the decades’ long stagnation of working class wages and the substantial upward shift in income:
The House GOP’s 2.0 tax plan exacerbates this upward income shift as it delivers roughly double the income gain to the top 1% than it does for the bottom 60%:
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!