GOP Drops Tax Cuts for Big Earners in Revised Health Bill, Sources Say

[brooklynite]

Source: Bloomberg

Senate Republican leaders dropped provisions that would repeal two taxes on high earners in a revised draft of their health-care bill sent to the Congressional Budget Office, according to GOP senators.

Republican leaders are now planning to retain Obamacare’s 3.8 percent tax on net investment income for people who earn more than $200,000 and couples with incomes over $250,000, as well as a 0.9 percent Medicare surtax on the same incomes.

Those two tax increases generate nearly $231 billion in revenue over a decade, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. Leaving them in place could create a way to cover the costs of expanded Medicaid coverage for the poor or other programs demanded by holdout moderate Republicans.

“Obviously that’s a direction I think that a lot of our members want to move, to keep some of those in place and use the revenues to put into other places in the bill where it can make a difference,” John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 Senate Republican, said Tuesday. The decision to explore changes was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-11/gop-said-to-drop-tax-cuts-for-big-earners-in-revised-health-bill

[wryter2000]

1. Will they lose the Teabaggers if they do this?

Sure doesn't sound like a repeal.

[paleotn]

15. Yep....

They'll probably lose a handful of the most repugnant Senators and It only takes 3 intransigents to gum up the works. Even if they get 50, this version stands absolutely zero chance in the House.

[wryter2000]

27. Of course!

I forgot it has to go back to the House. No chance in hell it'll pass there.

[cstanleytech]

2. My bet is on them to split it first with a healthcare bill that screws over millions then once that

passes they will go with the tax cuts to screw over millions more.

[asiliveandbreathe]

5. So right...split..and then spit in the eye of all Americans....

Thune - LOL...what a trip....

[hibbing]

7. Agree

For the last 50? years, that is all the party has stood for, tax cuts for the ruling class. I am curious as to how many Democrats will vote for the tax cuts.


Peace

[no_hypocrisy]

26. Yup, Parte Deux!

[n2doc]

3. Cant see the t-baggers in the house or the Senate going along with this

No way they support more medicare coverage.

[iluvtennis]

4. What about Medicaid...not specifically indicated they would keep it AS IS

[B Stieg]

6. And this has what to do with HEALTH INSURANCE, exactly?

You know, the subject of the alleged bill?

For example, are folks like me with pre-existing conditions going to be able to get--let alone afford--health insurance?

Hello?

Hello?

Screw you, Mitch.

[unblock]

10. in fairness, these 2 taxes were introduced in the aca as a way to fund the whole thing.

so they are certainly *relevant* to any repeal/replace/modify aca discussion.


i'm glad they're so dysfunctional they couldn't even agree among themselves to cut these taxes, though. our taxes generally have lost so much progressivity and it's good to have somethings that only hit high earners.

[B Stieg]

18. That's not what I wrote...

The GOP focus here is on redistributing wealth, not on making a workable, sustainable HEALTH care plan. Yet the "plan" is called the BCRA, where the "C" stands for "Care." As a former member of OFA I know how the ACA was funded and why. As you imply, these guys have little idea what the costs of what they're trying to fund may actually be, because they view the plan as a way to cut taxes, not as a way to deliver care. I really wasn't trying to assess the entire process.

This sort of needless, linguistic nit-picking is one reason that visiting or commenting on DU is often an unpleasant experience, even when the only thing that's intended is agreement. From now on, please respond to what's actually written rather than looking for opportunities to make yourself look clever. They might just piss somebody off.

[unblock]

8. i predicted this years ago.

i've always said that the push to repeal the aca was purely political theater, as this largely is the heritage foundation. conservative, market-based solution. had a republican, e.g., mitt rmoney, proposed it instead, republicans would have lined up behind it (admittedly, though, it would have had a more regressive tax structure supporting it).


anyway, my view has long been that if their only "plan" would be to change the name and get rid of the "mandate" and replace it with largely equivalent "incentives".

so they'll repeal obamacare and replace it with trumpcare, which looks remarkably similar, but no mandate/penalty. instead there will be a tax deduction (or maybe credit) if you do buy qualifying insurance.

inevitably, they'll make it worse in subtler ways, because that's what republicans do, but at a high level, it'll largely be the same as obamacare.


they get a "win" out of this and can move on to their next dastardly plot.

[gfwzig]

9. It takes only a vote later to cut the taxes once the ACA is destroyed the budget deal is next

[onenote]

20. That vote could be filibustered.

[beachbum bob]

11. Anything that splinters republicans is good

They are still far away from passing anything

[greymattermom]

12. What is the rule about only needing 50 votes?

I thought that the tax cut was part of that.

[turbinetree]

13. Lets put this in complete perspective to this BS

Notice the term "net investment income", not fucking "earned income", but "investment income", that is an entirely different tax ( net investment income)

Net Investment tax break:

A tax break is a savings on a taxpayer's liability. A tax break provides a savings through tax deductions, tax credits, tax exemptions and other incentives.

An amount that businesses are allowed by law to deduct from their taxes, reflecting an amount they reinvest in themselves.

Note : Investment tax credits are structured to reward and encourage economic growth.



Earned Income Tax Break:

The United States federal earned income tax credit or earned income credit (EITC or EIC) is a refundable tax credit for low- to moderate-income working individuals and couples, particularly those with children. The amount of EITC benefit depends on a recipient's income and number of children.

[Honeycombe8]

14. I am not impressed. It's still a tax cut bill, not a healthcare bill. nt

[keithbvadu2]

16. "GOP Drops Tax Cuts for Big Earners" - for now to make it look good.

[forgotmylogin]

17. Pictures scene in a couple months...

The Republicans all gather in a room to witness the new AHCA.

They whip off the dropcloth.

"But it's shaped like the ACA."

"Yeah, see, we moved the C and the A apart and added an H."

"Brilliant, Paul."

"And see, it's not Obamacare!"

:peals of applause:

[Casprings]

19. If they get the right to bite off..

Gives them more money to actually make something work. I just don't think in the end you can count on Cruz and others to stop this.

[Skittles]

23. they are not interested in making healthcare "work"

they DO.NOT.CARE.

[Casprings]

24. Work as in..

Get something passed. Not actually get a healthcare bill

[Skittles]

25. YOU KNOW IT CASPRINGS

WELCOME TO DU

[Sunlei]

21. don't plagiarize, steal & rewrite ACA Republicans, that costs to much!! KEEP ACA and improve it!

[Turbineguy]

22. Damn! Now that they've done that

they'll have to come up with an actual plan. What were they thinking?