Since the media seems more focused on other topics, I'm launching a new recurring feature: Biden v. Trump on the actual issues -- what they did as president and what they would try to do in a second term.
First up: taxes. 1/
One of the few pieces of legislation Trump passed as president was the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). The centerpiece of that bill was a massive, permanent reduction in the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%. 2/
Trump’s chief economist claimed that the corporate tax cut would increase wages for the typical household by as much as $9000. That became one of the central GOP talking points as they tried to push the bill through Congress. 3/
That claim turned out to be completely false. A new study from nonpartisan experts found that almost all the corporate tax cut benefits went to high-income executives and shareholders, and the bottom 90% of workers got almost no benefit. 4/ equitablegrowth.org/six-years-late…
The bill also didn’t generate a promised surge in business investment. Recent research found minimal impact on corporate investment. 5/
In addition to the corporate tax cut, the Trump tax bill made a variety of changes to individual taxes that delivered huge cuts to rich households. The richest 1% got a $50,000 annual tax cut, while most of the poorest households got nothing. 6/ taxpolicycenter.org/publications/e…
The Trump tax bill also increased the deficit – hugely. By nearly $2 trillion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. 6/ taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/…
Biden took the took the opposite approach. He pushed for tax increases on the rich and large corporations to help offset the cost of investments in housing, child care affordability, clean energy production, and more. 7/ nytimes.com/2021/05/28/us/…
Despite narrow majorities in Congress, Biden succeeded in getting more revenue from large corporations. He enacted a new minimum tax on big corporations to ensure that no profitable corporation pays zero federal income taxes. 8/ cnbc.com/2022/08/16/wat…
Biden also passed a new tax on corporate stock buybacks, bringing in new corporate tax revenue and also potentially encouraging companies to dedicate earnings to investment rather than buybacks. 9/ apnews.com/article/biden-…
So what would a second term tax agenda look like for Trump and Biden? Trump is exploring even more corporate tax cuts, dropping the rate from 21% to 15%. 10/ washingtonpost.com/business/2023/…
Trump and his allies in Congress are also looking to extend a variety of individual tax cuts from the 2017 tax bill, which would deliver an average tax cut of $70,000 a year to a family making $3.7 million annually. 11/ taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/permane…
While Trump would seek to extend and expand tax cuts that overwhelmingly benefit large corporations and the wealthy, Biden is looking to raise even more revenue from those groups, including with a new minimum tax on billionaires. 12/ vox.com/money/23634085…
Meanwhile, Biden has been clear that he will not support any tax increase on anyone making under $400,000 and has sought to extend and expand tax cuts for middle-class parents with younger kids. 13/ reuters.com/markets/us/bid…
Those are the concrete stakes of the 2024 election on tax policy. The election results will likely mean trillions of dollars in difference in tax policy alone. The candidates have been clear about their intentions.
Up next week on Biden v. Trump on the issues: higher education.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One idea I think Dems should rally around and make a central party goal is Medicare buy in at age 50. It's simple, it targets the demographic the party is weakest with (ages 50-64), it strengthens Medicare, and it addresses a real weakness in the current healthcare marketplace.
Healthcare is always a strong issue for Dems. In recent elections, they have focused on protecting the ACA--which is important but not a forward-looking agenda. Medicare at 50 is a clear goal and something that already has broad support in the party.
And if your goal is Medicare for All or some other similar universal program, expanding the program to 50-64 year olds is a good first step and chance for proof of concept for further expansions.
As people try to critique Biden’s economic agenda, they should keep this graphic in mind. Incumbents everywhere suffered because of a global inflation surge. Democrats held up better than any of them in part because economic performance here was better than anywhere else.
That said, I wish we had enacted the housing, care, and child tax credit elements in Build Back Better so we would have had concrete cost-of-living benefits to run on. People should reflect on which part of the Democratic Party denied us those agenda items.
As a Party, we also have to start prioritizing speed and tangibility in our agenda. In 2022, we passed a hard cap on Medicare out of pocket spending, which benefits millions of seniors. It’s wildly popular. Yet it goes into effect only in 2025. Malpractice.
When Biden came into office, experts were projecting a long, sluggish recovery. Instead, we've had the fastest and most equitable recovery since WW2. Why?
In a new piece, I argue it's because Biden and Democrats passed the American Rescue Plan. 1/
Consider the hole America was in when Biden took office -- and all the uncertainty we were facing as a country. That was the backdrop against which the President and his team had to design a recovery bill. 2/
Given that uncertainty, the President decided he wanted to make absolutely sure that people had what they needed to get through any ups and downs that might come. That's because the consequences of leaving them behind were so severe. 3/
So much wrong with this it’s hard to know where to start.
Two sets of student loan borrowers are currently getting relief. The first: public servants, like members of the military. Under a law signed by President Bush, they get loans cancelled after ten years of service. 1/
For a long time, that law wasn’t administered properly. People did their ten years, submitted the paperwork, and didn’t get relief. The Biden Administration went back and fixed it, giving public servants the debt relief they’re entitled to under the law. 2/
The second set of borrowers getting relief are people enrolled in income-based repayment plans. These plans, by law, cap monthly payments for low- and middle-income borrowers, and after 20 years of payments, cancel the remaining balance. 3/
Federal Pell Grants help address the cost of attending college. The typical student receiving a Pell Grant comes from a family making under $30,000 a year.
Pell Grants used to cover ~80% of public college costs. Over time, it dropped to only ~25%. 2/
As President, Trump repeatedly tried to slash funding from the Pell Grant program.
That included a proposal to take $1.9 billion in Pell Grant funding and send it to NASA to fund trips to the moon (seriously). 3/
The common idea that declining purchasing power is what’s producing economic dissatisfaction seems quite clearly wrong. The analysis below doesn’t even account for large government transfers in 2021 (checks and tax cuts) that further aided the median household. 1/
As a result, people should consider alternative explanations. The large disparity between people’s satisfaction with their own financial condition (fairly high) and the broader state of the economy (fairly low) suggests that media narrative plays at least some role. 2/
My view is that the modern media is set up to deliver a very negative view of tight labor markets. Tight labor markets are great for workers but not for employers and (to a lesser extent) investors. Guess whose voices drive most economic coverage? Employers and investors. 3/