{"id":1501,"date":"2019-07-03T15:21:24","date_gmt":"2019-07-03T22:21:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/feusa\/from-the-president-7-28-weekly-update\/"},"modified":"2019-07-03T15:21:24","modified_gmt":"2019-07-03T22:21:24","slug":"from-the-president-7-28-weekly-update","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/estate-taxes\/from-the-president-7-28-weekly-update\/","title":{"rendered":"From the President \u2013 7-28 \u2013 Weekly Update"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

Call it the dueling letters.\u00a0<\/p>\n

On the eve of the first set of debates by the Democrat candidates for president, a group calling themselves the \u201cPatriotic Millionaires\u201d penned an open letter calling on the candidates to \u201ctax them more.\u201d\u00a0While neither the group nor their call for higher taxes on the rich are new, they seem to find ways to help the press insert calls for higher taxes on a consistent basis.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In\u00a0an\u00a0open letter\u00a0the group<\/a>\u00a0outlines their\u00a0support for proposals that would address the nation\u2019s staggering wealth inequality through taxation, such as an existing plan put forth by Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).<\/p>\n

What was different this time was a couple of critics took the issue straight on and turned the moral tables around on them.\u00a0The first was an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal (An Open Letter to Patriotic Billionaires<\/strong><\/a>)\u00a0<\/u><\/strong>that ask\u2019s \u201cwhat\u2019s stopping them?\u201d If billionaires see themselves as a threat to \u201cthe stability and integrity of our republic,\u201d they could cease being billionaires any day.<\/p>\n

If retiring student debt is vital, they could put out a call to graduates and start paying off loans. If the climate is a priority, they could fund a green Manhattan Project.\u00a0\u00a0Maybe they\u2019re intent on routing their largess through the government, since it already does such a bang-up job of setting priorities and spending prudently. Again, though, why wait for legislation?<\/p>\n

They could start contributing more today.<\/p>\n

This was followed by an Op-Ed by Ken Fisher.\u00a0He\u2019s got a better idea\u00a0than a wealth tax<\/a>.\u00a0His solution?\u00a0The government isn\u2019t the most efficient organization and certainly doesn\u2019t know how to solve problems and create jobs like the successful entrepreneurs and business elite.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n

\n\u201cIf the billionaires calling for a wealth tax can\u2019t figure out how to put people in high-paying jobs, Uncle Sam sure isn\u2019t going to know how to do it.\u201d\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

So far these rebuttals have gone unanswered \u2014 and likely won\u2019t.\u00a0We know the real reason for this group is to socialize the concept that even the rich see the inequities and the only solution is higher taxes.\u00a0It\u2019s also a great moral fig-leaf for all of these \u201cpatriots\u201d to feel good about doing something.\u00a0<\/p>\n

What\u2019s clear from the opposing Op-Eds however, shows that the emperor has no clothes!<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
COURTS<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n

The US Supreme Court issued a decision on a major trust case on June 21.\u00a0Here are the facts<\/a>\u00a0of\u00a0North Carolina Department of Revenue v. The Kimberley Rice\u00a0Kaestner\u00a01992 Family Trust<\/em>, via Kelly Phillips\u00a0Erb\u00a0of Forbes: Joseph Rice, a New York resident, set up a trust about a quarter-century ago, to also be run by a New York resident. His daughter,\u00a0Kaestner, moved to North Carolina five years later, and one of three\u00a0sub trusts\u00a0was then formed in her name.<\/p>\n

The trust then paid North Carolina some $1.3 million over several years, under a state law that allowed for the taxing of any trust income benefiting a resident.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But a unanimous court ruled that residence alone was\u00a0too flimsy of a reason<\/a>\u00a0to allow for trust income to be taxed, as Pro Tax\u2019s Aaron Lorenzo reported. Some members of the legal community said the decision could pave the way for simpler estate planning, as Aaron also noted. But critics said the Court\u2019s ruling might have just given wealthy people the road map to yet another tax dodge.<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you\u2019re a rich person in a high-tax state,\u00a0the path forward is quite clear,<\/a>\u201d wrote Daniel\u00a0Hemel, a law professor at the University of Chicago. \u201cTransfer income-generating assets to an irrevocable trust in a state that does not tax trust income on the basis of trustee residence or place of administration.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
CAPITOL HILL HAPPENINGS<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n

PATG had a very active June advocating for Legislative Estate Tax Repeal in the House and Senate, as well as meeting with most of the House Ways and Means members to seek a lead sponsor for our Rate Reduction bill.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Senate bill garnered the support of Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), bringing total Senate support to 34 of the 100 members.\u00a0In the House, we have identified several members that we are working with who may introduce our rate reduction bill.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Our repeal efforts however have gained 15 additional co-sponsors, bringing the total up to 108!\u00a0A list of the new supporters follows below.\u00a0Feel free to send them a thanks!<\/p>\n

Rep. Wright, Ron [R-TX-6]<\/a>\u00a006\/03\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Ferguson, A. Drew, IV [R-GA-3]<\/a>\u00a006\/03\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1]<\/a>\u00a006\/10\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Simpson, Michael K. [R-ID-2]<\/a>\u00a006\/10\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Rose, John W. [R-TN-6]<\/a>\u00a006\/10\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Curtis, John R. [R-UT-3]<\/a>\u00a006\/13\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep.\u00a0Riggleman, Denver [R-VA-5]<\/a>\u00a006\/13\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep.\u00a0Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]<\/a>\u00a006\/13\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Norman, Ralph [R-SC-5]<\/a>\u00a006\/13\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Miller, Carol D. [R-WV-3]<\/a>\u00a006\/13\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Guest, Michael [R-MS-3]<\/a>\u00a006\/24\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Armstrong, Kelly [R-ND-At Large]<\/a>\u00a006\/24\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep.\u00a0Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]<\/a>\u00a006\/24\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Taylor, Van [R-TX-3]<\/a>\u00a006\/24\/2019<\/p>\n

Rep. Gianforte, Greg [R-MT-At Large]<\/a>\u00a006\/24\/2019<\/p>\n

Today\u2019s\u00a0Ways and Means subcommittee<\/strong>\u00a0hearings on the SALT cap will undoubtedly feature testimony about how that $10,000 limit harms both state and local governments\u2019 ability to offer quality services and puts the squeeze on average workers.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s unlikely to come through today is any consensus on the Democratic side about how to at least offer some relief from the SALT cap. A bipartisan group of lawmakers has released a bill to totally kill the limit, and there are also proposals to both lift the cap and give higher exemptions for married couples.<\/p>\n

But as with many tax policy matters among Democrats these days, one big question hanging over the debate is whether to offset the cost of potential SALT changes \u2014 and, if so, how? \u201cThere\u2019s a number of pay-fors, all the likely suspects are out there, and we\u2019re looking at all of them.<\/p>\n

We want to make sure that what we do is fair and we don\u2019t want to hurt the same people we\u2019re trying to help,\u201d said Rep.\u00a0Mike\u00a0Thompson<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/a>(D-Calif.), whose home state is among those most affected by the cap and is the chairman of the Ways and Means Select Revenue Measures Subcommittee, which is hosting separate hearings today to hear from local leaders and lawmakers about the limits.<\/p>\n

Rep.\u00a0<\/strong>Tom Suozzi<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0(D-N.Y.), another member of that subcommittee,\u00a0has floated the idea\u00a0<\/a>of raising the corporate rate from 21 percent to 25 percent, and the top individual rate back to 39.6 percent from 37 percent, to replace the revenue raised by the SALT limits over a decade, as Newsday reported.<\/p>\n

(That still might not be quite enough to replace all of the cap\u2019s more than $600 billion in revenue, though it\u2019s also not an idea likely to be embraced by Republicans \u2014 plus, other Democrats have their own ideas about how to spend a couple points of corporate tax rate revenue.)<\/p>\n

The other big issue here: It\u2019s hinted at in that statement from Thompson \u2014 eliminating the SALT cap would disproportionately help rich people, even as Democrats\u00a0cast their efforts\u00a0as aimed at the middle class.<\/a><\/p>\n

The Joint Committee on Taxation reported ahead of today\u2019s hearings that households earning seven figures a year would\u00a0reap the majority of the benefits\u00a0<\/a>\u2014 some $40 billion in 2019 alone \u2014 if the cap was eliminated, as Pro Tax\u2019s Brian\u00a0Faler\u00a0noted.<\/p>\n

Tlaib\u00a0rolls out bill to create tax credit for low- and middle-class people. Rep. Rashida\u00a0Tlaib\u00a0<\/strong>(D-Mich.) on Wednesday rolled out legislation to create a new tax credit to help low-and middle-income people,\u00a0Tlaib\u2019s\u00a0bill makes her the latest Democratic lawmaker to offer a tax-credit proposal in an effort to counter the GOP tax law and address the rising cost of living.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The refundable credit amount under the bill would be up to $3,000 for individuals making less than $50,000 and $6,000 for married couples making less than $100,000, with the amount phasing out as incomes increase.\u00a0Unlike similar proposals from Democrats,\u00a0Tlaib\u2019s\u00a0proposed credit would be available to people even if they are not working.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy estimated that\u00a0Tlaib\u2019s\u00a0credit would provide most of its benefits to those in the bottom 60 percent of income, and would cost $380 billion in 2020.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
CAMPAIGN TRAIL<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
\n

Democrats lead with their left, most liberal stance since \u201970s.\u00a0<\/a>This is a party eager to go on the ideological offensive not just against Donald Trump (whose name did not dominate the evening even as he was invoked plenty) but against an economic and political power structure that candidates argued is deeply corrupt. Liberals must be empowered to bring bad actors to heel through robust intervention of government.<\/p>\n

Over the course of two hours, people who are inarguably some of the party\u2019s most consequential and ascendant figures endorsed the mandatory abolition of private health insurance, sharply higher taxes on the wealthy, the decriminalization of illegal border crossings.<\/p>\n

They spoke with contempt about the alleged profiteering, manipulation, and cruelty of corporations. They argued that ordinary Americans are right to feel screwed, and multiple candidates boasted that they are tough enough to turn the screws on the victimizers, for a change.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cDEMOCRATS SPLIT ON HOW FAR LEFT TO NUDGE NATION \u2026 THEME OF FIRST DEBATE \u2026 Progressive Solutions vs. Caution on Economy and Immigration\u201d<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n

Pollster Frank Luntz summed it up this way on \u201cThe Ingraham Angle\u201d on Thursday:\u00a0\u201cThis is not your parents\u2019 Democratic Party.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n

Bernie Sanders:\u00a0<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cTrump is the worst kind of socialist,\u201d\u00a0Bernie Sanders writes in an op-ed for today\u2019s\u00a0Wall Street Journal:\u00a0<\/strong><\/a>\u201cThe time is long overdue for the U.S. to end corporate socialism for Mr. Trump and the rest of the billionaire class.<\/p>\n

Instead, those resources should be put to work to ensure shared prosperity by enhancing Social Security and Medicare and investing in roads and bridges, public schools, clean water and clean air. Mr. Trump believes in corporate socialism to protect the wealth and power of the rich. I believe the U.S. must end corporate socialism and instead fulfill President Franklin D. Roosevelt\u2019s vision of enshrining basic economic rights for all Americans.<\/p>\n

These include the rights to health care, a living wage, a decent job, a quality education, a secure retirement, affordable housing and a clean environment. We can make this 21st Century Economic Bill of Rights a reality with initiatives like Medicare for All, a $15 minimum wage, a Green New Deal, student-debt cancellation and legislation to expand Social Security.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sanders to propose eliminating all $1.6T student debt in US.<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

Bernie Sanders, the 2020 hopeful, announced a policy proposal that would eliminate all $1.6 trillion of American student debt.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Democratic presidential candidate\u2019s new proposal calls for the federal government to wipe clean the student debt held by 45 million Americans, including all private and graduate school debt.\u00a0The proposal package also includes making public universities, community colleges and trade schools tuition-free. Sanders reportedly plans to pay for the lofty proposal with a tax on Wall Street, which his campaign says will generate more than $2 trillion over 10 years.<\/p>\n

Beto O\u2019Rourke:\u00a0<\/strong>Former Rep.\u00a0Beto\u00a0O\u2019Rourke of Texas endorsed a 28 percent corporate rate<\/a>\u00a0and taxing capital gains and income at the same levels, while ducking a question about a potential 70 percent top income tax rate.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Elizabeth Warren:\u00a0<\/strong>Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has proposed $640 billion in student debt forgiveness, and former housing secretary Juli\u00e1n Castro introducing a more modest debt forgiveness plan.\u00a0All these proposals have raised strong objections, including from moderate Democrats, for giving taxpayer subsidies to educated Americans who, on average, have higher earnings than those with only a high school degree.<\/p>\n

Associated Press:\u00a0Experts question\u00a0<\/a>whether the math adds up on Sen.\u00a0Elizabeth Warren<\/a>\u2018s wealth tax.<\/p>\n

\n

\n\u201c\u2018We need to make structural change in our government,\u00a0in our economy and in our country,\u2019<\/a>\u00a0Ms. Warren said, setting the tone for the handful of populists in the debate.\u201d\n<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

POLITICO\u2019s 2020: The Issues<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>is the most comprehensive guide anywhere to the issues shaping the Democratic presidential primary, driven by dozens of expert journalists in the nation\u2019s most robust newsroom covering policy and politics.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The post From the President \u2013 7-28 \u2013 Weekly Update<\/a> appeared first on Policy and Taxation Group<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Call it the dueling letters.\u00a0 On the eve of the first set of debates by the Democrat candidates for president, a group calling themselves the \u201cPatriotic Millionaires\u201d penned an open letter calling on the candidates to \u201ctax them more.\u201d\u00a0While neither the group nor their call for higher taxes on the rich are new, they seem […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[50,11,5],"class_list":["post-1501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-estate-taxes","tag-death-tax","tag-estate-tax","tag-family-business"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1501","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1501"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1501\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1501"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1501"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1501"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}